Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
You may be able to move to Mars
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6109848" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>You realize that sending several payloads to Mars before you put people on board is part of the Mars One plan, right? And that NASA is planning to use the Falcon Heavy for the same purpose before Mars One intends to launch any people, right? And that it is still three years before Mars One intends to send any payloads to Mars, right?</p><p></p><p>Is there risk? Of course! If this weren't risky, it wouldn't be interesting! There is no way in heck that the very first manned mission to Mars is going to be anything other than risky. If you want risk-free, yes, this isn't for you. You may take your personal efforts and interest into something nice and safe - like bread-baking. That's nice and safe. Until you need to get into a car and go out and buy more flour and yeast, 'cause the roads aint' exactly safe, you know...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, but then again, it looks like Space X is on track for being able to lift things into orbit about 10% of what it costs NASA to do the same - the Falcon Heavy is expected to bring the cost down to under $1000 per pound, from NASA's $10K per pound.</p><p></p><p>NASA is a great organization, and they have some of the most brilliant minds on the planet. But they are hampered by governmental bureaucracy, governmental media-paranoia, and governmental risk-aversion, and that drives their costs up a great deal.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I find it credible because, as previously noted, <strong><em>this is not 1969</em></strong>, and is not the Apollo mission. It is a new century, with decades of experience, understanding, and technological development under our belts. In Apollo's time time, we were just stepping into space. Now, we've had decades of developing needs to reach near Earth orbit and geostationary orbit that simply didn't exist back then - enough need to drive an industry. So, basically, Mars One is able to piggyback on that other industry, and take advantage of economies of scale that Apollo did not. And that makes a huge difference in the price tag.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6109848, member: 177"] You realize that sending several payloads to Mars before you put people on board is part of the Mars One plan, right? And that NASA is planning to use the Falcon Heavy for the same purpose before Mars One intends to launch any people, right? And that it is still three years before Mars One intends to send any payloads to Mars, right? Is there risk? Of course! If this weren't risky, it wouldn't be interesting! There is no way in heck that the very first manned mission to Mars is going to be anything other than risky. If you want risk-free, yes, this isn't for you. You may take your personal efforts and interest into something nice and safe - like bread-baking. That's nice and safe. Until you need to get into a car and go out and buy more flour and yeast, 'cause the roads aint' exactly safe, you know... Yes, but then again, it looks like Space X is on track for being able to lift things into orbit about 10% of what it costs NASA to do the same - the Falcon Heavy is expected to bring the cost down to under $1000 per pound, from NASA's $10K per pound. NASA is a great organization, and they have some of the most brilliant minds on the planet. But they are hampered by governmental bureaucracy, governmental media-paranoia, and governmental risk-aversion, and that drives their costs up a great deal. I find it credible because, as previously noted, [B][I]this is not 1969[/I][/B], and is not the Apollo mission. It is a new century, with decades of experience, understanding, and technological development under our belts. In Apollo's time time, we were just stepping into space. Now, we've had decades of developing needs to reach near Earth orbit and geostationary orbit that simply didn't exist back then - enough need to drive an industry. So, basically, Mars One is able to piggyback on that other industry, and take advantage of economies of scale that Apollo did not. And that makes a huge difference in the price tag. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
You may be able to move to Mars
Top