SpaceX will start launching Starships to Mars in 2026, Elon Musk says

[Admin]

SpaceX plans to start launching uncrewed Mars missions with its Starship megarocket in 2026 and crewed flights to the Red Planet two years after that, Elon Musk said.

SpaceX will start launching Starships to Mars in 2026, Elon Musk says : Read more

 

[Gibsense]

Wow, amazing. To me, this project by Musk justifies the existence of Billionaires. Well done Elon Musk America should be proud of you (I am sure they are). Imagination, ambition, execution and results - on our behalf (even us in the UK to celebrate a successful colony: The USA, lol) Like a reverse takeover how about adding a new state: UK (please, lol, anyone?)

 

[SDelMonte]

Shouldn't SpaceX's priority be building the moon lander it was contracted to build?

 

[Gibsense]

Shouldn't SpaceX's priority be building the moon lander it was contracted to build?

Prioritisation is the biggest excuse. Linear development. If the resources are available do both, do it all. get the cross-benefits.

 

[BulldogPunch]

Shouldn't SpaceX's priority be building the moon lander it was contracted to build?

Right? I would bet everything I own this man doesn't launch anything to Mars in 2026. He's well known to break his promises. He's been promising "Full Self Driving" is "coming next year" every single year since 2017. Adam Something on youtube has a fantastic vid on why his hyperfocus on a Mars colony makes zero sense. Our focus should be on actually getting humans to set foot on the moon again, which is a hard enough challenge as it is.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

I am not expecting a successful StarShip landing on Mars by a launch in 2026! Maybe he could get a StarShip there in that time frame, but how does he intend to slow it down and land it? Mars' atmosphere is not nearly as dense as Earths, so braking by atmospheric drag is not going to be anything like an Earth reentry for StarShip.

I agree with others that I want the SpaceX priority to be to land on the Moon and start developing off-Earth habitats to be successful there, first. I think SpaceX transportation to the Moon could even be profitable for the company, given the scientific interest and the potential for commercial exploration, even if there is little actual commercial development.

But, going to Mars is much harder and much less profitable. How many billionaires does he think will sign up to spend the rest of their days stuck in a small habitat on a distant, cold, desert planet, rather than spend their leisure time cruising the world in their megayachts and private jets? And, if the rich are not signing up in large numbers, how is a Mars colony going to be profitable in anything like the medium term, before it can become self-sustaining and produce profitable exports?

I expect any real trip to Mars with humans aboard is going to need a return strategy with demonstrated infrastructure before there will be a psychologically acceptable crew for the mission.

 

[orsobubu]

No way there are going to make it

Wow, amazing. To me, this project by Musk justifies the existence of Billionaires. Well done Elon Musk America should be proud of you (I am sure they are). Imagination, ambition, execution and results - on our behalf (even us in the UK to celebrate a successful colony: The USA, lol) Like a reverse takeover how about adding a new state: UK (please, lol, anyone?)

No way they are going to make it, and this failure (like many other by musk, in the past and in the future) will justify the damage of the capitalistic system at this advanced stage of human development.

 

[Classical Motion]

It’s truly amazing how new measurements and data can change our previous concepts we have believed in. We went thru a big change 15-20 years ago with DNA. We reclassified lifeforms with DNA.

Forgive me if I use the wrong terms. Then they found environmental DNA. And this doubled the biomass of earth overnight, and much more has been added since. Whole families of unknown unseen life. It’s a big deal. Don’t hear about it to much.

I saw and watched some new research on insect colonies a while back. Like bees, ants and termites. With closer and much longer observation they have found that these societies are not cooperative at all. They are super class and bullying and rationing, even leg amputation are used to keep classes in line.

It was quite an eye opener. Pheromones were very selectively used collective commands not common house hold commands. Intimidation was needed for that. Gang leaders. Bully leaders.

Has any others heard of this?

And what about the new dinosaur theory? Have you heard of that cluster?

They say A.I. might filter all this new data, plus any old data that hasn’t been looked at yet. We have decades of that. Anyway some are hoping A.I. might thin this down on some of these theories.

IF we ever get it and if we can power it.

It might even help explain what all the extra unknown functions of DNA. We see a lot un-used.

 

[billweberx]

Shouldn't SpaceX's priority be building the moon lander it was contracted to build?

SpaceX can walk and chew gum at the same time. Mars has always been Musk's priority. He's only helping Artemis to help NASA. This is a side project and will not distract from the Mars mission.

 

[billweberx]

Right? I would bet everything I own this man doesn't launch anything to Mars in 2026. He's well known to break his promises. He's been promising "Full Self Driving" is "coming next year" every single year since 2017. Adam Something on youtube has a fantastic vid on why his hyperfocus on a Mars colony makes zero sense. Our focus should be on actually getting humans to set foot on the moon again, which is a hard enough challenge as it is.

Musk has never broken a promise because he's never made one. Show me one time that Musk used the words "I promise". Never. He makes predictions and shares them on X. They're usually way too optimistic but he always delivers in the end, al bet late. FSD has been his worst prediction but he has not given up and will eventually deliver while no one else can. Waymo can never be better than level 4 autonomy as it requires geofencing. Tesla is the only company in the world that has a chance at Level 5 autonomy because of the their massive amount of real world data and one of the largest AI training computers in the world. They are late in delivering but they'll get there eventually and no one else will.

 

[billweberx]

I am not expecting a successful StarShip landing on Mars by a launch in 2026! Maybe he could get a StarShip there in that time frame, but how does he intend to slow it down and land it? Mars' atmosphere is not nearly as dense as Earths, so braking by atmospheric drag is not going to be anything like an Earth reentry for StarShip.

I agree with others that I want the SpaceX priority to be to land on the Moon and start developing off-Earth habitats to be successful there, first. I think SpaceX transportation to the Moon could even be profitable for the company, given the scientific interest and the potential for commercial exploration, even if there is little actual commercial development.

But, going to Mars is much harder and much less profitable. How many billionaires does he think will sign up to spend the rest of their days stuck in a small habitat on a distant, cold, desert planet, rather than spend their leisure time cruising the world in their megayachts and private jets? And, if the rich are not signing up in large numbers, how is a Mars colony going to be profitable in anything like the medium term, before it can become self-sustaining and produce profitable exports?

I expect any real trip to Mars with humans aboard is going to need a return strategy with demonstrated infrastructure before there will be a psychologically acceptable crew for the mission.

Pretty sure SpaceX has considered how to slow down the Starship for landing on Mars. They are rocket scientists after all.

You may want SpaceX's priority to be the moon, but that will never happen. Musk's number 1 priority in life is building a self sustaining city on mars. Nothing will detract from that. The moon lander is just a side project to help out NASA.

You don't need billionaires to put people on mars. Every major country on earth want's a mars presence and SpaceX will be their taxi cab. Governments have lots of money to spend on space projects. There will be no shortage of business for SpaceX. Also, the cost to send people to mars will be in the neighborhood of $100K each because of the 100% rapidly reusable starships. Most of the cost is the fuel, just like an airline. Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people on earth could afford the trip and I personally know people who want to move to mars today.

The first people to go, will likely be a one way trip until the infrastructure for returning rockets is implemented. That's likely to take a very long time.

 

[billweberx]

No way there are going to make it

No way they are going to make it, and this failure (like many other by musk, in the past and in the future) will justify the damage of the capitalistic system at this advanced stage of human development.

Musk has never failed at anything. He's only late at doing the impossible.

 

[MikeMc]

Shouldn't SpaceX's priority be building the moon lander it was contracted to build?

They are doing that. They're not allowed to do multiple things at the same time? Sounds like you don't want them going to Mars no matter what. As you know, the Moon lander and the Mars lander are just modified versions of the exact same ship.

 

[MikeMc]

Right? I would bet everything I own this man doesn't launch anything to Mars in 2026. He's well known to break his promises. He's been promising "Full Self Driving" is "coming next year" every single year since 2017. Adam Something on youtube has a fantastic vid on why his hyperfocus on a Mars colony makes zero sense. Our focus should be on actually getting humans to set foot on the moon again, which is a hard enough challenge as it is.

They will likely have Actual Full Self Driving by the end of 2026. If you are watching the videos, they are really getting close. Back in 2017, he didn't mean full autonomy. He meant that the car will be able to do what it actually does today. It drives by itself. Stops at stop signs & stop lights, stops for pedestrians, follows basic rules of the road. He never promised fully autonomous vehicles by 2017. People just assumed that's what he meant. A Mars colony doesn't have to make sense. He is a billionaire, and if he wants to go to Mars or send willing people to Mars, he should have the right to do that. He is not doing it to make money. He is doing it because he wants to and he can. Buying Twitter also didn't make sense, but he did it anyway.

 

[MikeMc]

I am not expecting a successful StarShip landing on Mars by a launch in 2026! Maybe he could get a StarShip there in that time frame, but how does he intend to slow it down and land it? Mars' atmosphere is not nearly as dense as Earths, so braking by atmospheric drag is not going to be anything like an Earth reentry for StarShip.

I agree with others that I want the SpaceX priority to be to land on the Moon and start developing off-Earth habitats to be successful there, first. I think SpaceX transportation to the Moon could even be profitable for the company, given the scientific interest and the potential for commercial exploration, even if there is little actual commercial development.

But, going to Mars is much harder and much less profitable. How many billionaires does he think will sign up to spend the rest of their days stuck in a small habitat on a distant, cold, desert planet, rather than spend their leisure time cruising the world in their megayachts and private jets? And, if the rich are not signing up in large numbers, how is a Mars colony going to be profitable in anything like the medium term, before it can become self-sustaining and produce profitable exports?

I expect any real trip to Mars with humans aboard is going to need a return strategy with demonstrated infrastructure before there will be a psychologically acceptable crew for the mission.

Elon Musk is also not expecting a successful Mars landing, just like he was not expecting IFT-1 to be successful. It took 4 test flights to be successful on Earth and there will likely be at least 4 test flights to Mars where they will likely have crash landings. Because you are not a rocket scientist and can't figure out how to slow it down means that it's impossible? Are you saying that there is a zero possibility that he will ever get one to land? That's interesting. He is not going to Mars to make money. Going to Mars is how he wants to spend his money. He doesn't want a yacht, he wants to send people to Mars. That has been his #1 priority since 2001. That is the reason why he started SpaceX in the first place. One of the main reasons why he took over Tesla was for transportation on Mars. One of the reasons for starting The Boring Company was for Mars infrastructure. The only reason for Starlink's existence was for generating Mars funding. Starlink was the idea he came up with on how they could fund their Mars plans. Sending Starship to Mars in 2026 is very doable. Sending humans to Mars in 2028 is highly unlikely. I would say the early 2030s is more likely.

 

[Gibsense]

All Musk said was - if all goes well then 2026.

The idea that Governments would do this is a fantasy. 'The Woke' would ask why allow homelessness; spend the money there instead. The greedy would resist the expenditure and the technological advance that could have been generated to home the poor and enrich the greedy would not happen.

The Musk initiatives will advance technology in unexpected ways - assuming the human race survives the next 20 years

 

[AndyTake2]

I would say this is pie in the sky thinking, but we are way beyond the sky here!
Two years to launch a rocket AT mars, well that's do-able, but to land on mars? That's a different story.
NASA has shown that landing on mars is best done with a disposable sky-crane, as the atmosphere is so thin, and even then, the place on which the spacecraft is put down had better be pretty flat.

So ignoring the propellant needed to slow down such a large ship, he'll need to configure the ship to have the same sort of guidance as the reusable parts of his current system on some pretty unforgiving terrain.
People on mars 4 years later? The ship would then have to include sufficient fuel and reliable system to send the ship or part of it back to earth-at speed. There's no point taking the leisurely route that can be worked out for sending a few samples back, because the people on board may be a little tetchy when they return.

Then he'll have to supply at least 2 years years of food and water, as that's the time it takes for the journey to be anywhere near viable, and in reality 4 years worth (in case of problems in year 2) would be required.

Then it's just a case of getting someone to go. It's no good saying that they will do it in one season, they must be prepared for the full 2 years. as it's going to take a fair time just to get there.

I admire the idea of getting to mars, but this is unrealistic.

 

[stormreforger]

Right? I would bet everything I own this man doesn't launch anything to Mars in 2026. He's well known to break his promises. He's been promising "Full Self Driving" is "coming next year" every single year since 2017. Adam Something on youtube has a fantastic vid on why his hyperfocus on a Mars colony makes zero sense. Our focus should be on actually getting humans to set foot on the moon again, which is a hard enough challenge as it is.

I agree..

 

[stormreforger]

Musk has never failed at anything. He's only late at doing the impossible.

True and at least gets things done regardless of anyones opinion and idealogy nonsense..

 

[George²]

So, in the end, at least the first Starship flight to Mars will be with Raptor 3.0 engines. Because there is no time for 3.1 or 3.2.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Because you are not a rocket scientist and can't figure out how to slow it down means that it's impossible?

First, I did not say that it is impossible. I am just expecting a crash landing if he sends a StarShip to Mars in that time frame. As others have already demonstrated, soft landings on Mars are more probably failures than successes, even with spacecraft that are specially designed just for that mission. With Musk's "fail soon and fix the problems found" development strategy, I expect him to build a pretty big pile of litter on the Martian surface before there is a reliable lander for that mission.

And, actually, I do have a couple of degrees in "rocket science", so I am thinking that a Mars colony will probably need a variety of vehicles for the interplanetary trip. There will probably be "StarShips" that are used for ferrying people and supplies between Earth orbit and Mars orbit that are not designed to descend to the surface of either planet. And there will probably be orbiting rendezvous points in orbit around both planets for transfer between the interplanetary vehicles and the planet-specific landing-capable vehicles. With Musk's philosophy that "the best part is no part", it seems unlikely that he would design his system so that a single ship would go from planetary surface to planetary surface, dragging the necessary landing hardware back and forth between the planets on every trip.

For landings of people using craft that can relaunch into orbit, I don't think "disposable sky hook" type landers are an attractive option. So, the landers that carry crew between Mars orbit and the Martian surface are going to require some innovative thinking - and I agree that Musk and SpaceX are really good at that. For one-way deliveries of supplies from Earth to a Martian colony, I would not be surprised if the initial solution is disposable equipment between Mars orbit and the surface. Again, optimizing that, starting from Earth and figuring costs in fuel from planet surface to planet surface would be something for innovative thinking.

 

[George²]

Remember that some of the first Starships may not return at all, but are used initially as habitats, storage facilities, and eventually as a source of metals and other useful materials that will not initially be mined in locally mineral deposits. Shuttles Mars - orbit, Mars - surface, not even designed yet.

 

[ChrisA]

He has one very hard problem with launching people to Mars. There is no way for them to return to Earth. After Starships lands on Mars, its fuel tanks will be empty. He will need (1) a fuel factory and storage depot on Mars so as to be able to refuel Starship and (2) a launch pad. We know that the Starship can not launch from bare dirt because rocks and debris will bounce off the ground and damage the engines. This happed in Texax on Test Flight #1.

So with no fuel factory and no launch pad, yes he can send humans to Mars but it would be a one-way trip.

Assuming he accepts the idea of sending humans on a one-way trip and is committed to sending resupply trip "forever" it could work. In fact the first test landing would be cargo ships full of food and oxygen and water.

But even a billionaire like Musk is going to run out of money. Those people will need resupply for decades until the last one dies of old age.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

That is why I am thinking that any really acceptable plan calls for a Mars orbiter where interplanetary StarShips can dock and transfer people to Mars lander vehicles that are carrying enough fuel to launch from the surface back to the orbiter. If nothing else, that orbiter would need to be a huge refueling station to be able to supply fuel to both the Mars landers and probably to StarShips for the return flight to Earth.

With current technology, that is going to take a lot of fuel ferrying trips to Mars orbit to keep everything going. That is why NASA is looking at nuclear thermal propulsion for the interplanetary legs. I don't now if Musk will think about using nuclear rockets - that seems outside his box, for the moment, at least.

 

[MikeMc]

First, I did not say that it is impossible. I am just expecting a crash landing if he sends a StarShip to Mars in that time frame. As others have already demonstrated, soft landings on Mars are more probably failures than successes, even with spacecraft that are specially designed just for that mission. With Musk's "fail soon and fix the problems found" development strategy, I expect him to build a pretty big pile of litter on the Martian surface before there is a reliable lander for that mission.

And, actually, I do have a couple of degrees in "rocket science", so I am thinking that a Mars colony will probably need a variety of vehicles for the interplanetary trip. There will probably be "StarShips" that are used for ferrying people and supplies between Earth orbit and Mars orbit that are not designed to descend to the surface of either planet. And there will probably be orbiting rendezvous points in orbit around both planets for transfer between the interplanetary vehicles and the planet-specific landing-capable vehicles. With Musk's philosophy that "the best part is no part", it seems unlikely that he would design his system so that a single ship would go from planetary surface to planetary surface, dragging the necessary landing hardware back and forth between the planets on every trip.

For landings of people using craft that can relaunch into orbit, I don't think "disposable sky hook" type landers are an attractive option. So, the landers that carry crew between Mars orbit and the Martian surface are going to require some innovative thinking - and I agree that Musk and SpaceX are really good at that. For one-way deliveries of supplies from Earth to a Martian colony, I would not be surprised if the initial solution is disposable equipment between Mars orbit and the surface. Again, optimizing that, starting from Earth and figuring costs in fuel from planet surface to planet surface would be something for innovative thinking.

I agree that they will crash land. ITF-1, ITF-2, and ITF-3 were all failed attempts on Earth. That is the quickest way to learn. You crash it, study the data, improve the design or procedures. I'm pretty sure that they know what they are doing. I also had a hard time believing that the Sky Crane idea would work until they actually did it. People talking about how Mars has less atmosphere than Earth; no kidding! I'm sure that the SpaceX engineers are already aware of that.