Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday October 07 2016, @10:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the protecting-your-meal-ticket dept.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/5/13178056/boeing-ceo-mars-colony-rocket-spacex-elon-musk

Boeing's CEO says his company will be the first to put a man on Mars:

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is aiming to start a Martian colony within the next decade, but another rival CEO says his company will actually be the one to put humans on the Red Planet first. Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg recently answered questions at the "Whats Next" tech conference in Chicago, and when asked about the future of his company, he focused on breakthroughs in space travel. "I'm convinced that the first person to step foot on Mars will arrive there riding on a Boeing rocket," said Muilenburg, according to Bloomberg.

[...] Currently, Boeing is designing and developing the Space Launch System, the massive rocket that NASA wants to use to send people to Mars. So when Muilenburg says the first people will get to the planet with a Boeing rocket, he's most likely referring to the SLS.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by zeigerpuppy on Friday October 07 2016, @11:39PM

    by zeigerpuppy (1298) on Friday October 07 2016, @11:39PM (#411643)

    While the idea of going to Mars is appealing, am I the only one who feels it may be premature?
    We have huge environmental challenges on this planet that could use the expertise and funds currently being expended on the Mars missions.
    I also think there may be a bit of defeatist thinking going on, we've fucked earth so move on to planet no.2.
    The biodiversity and climate stability we've enjoyed on earth is the greatest asset we have for future exploration. After all, producing anything like the earth on another planet is a 100 000 year exercise (at least).
    The current era is the best time to mitigate climate change and ensure that we stabilise our platform here on earth. We can think about Mars again in another century or two. Better to spend the money on transition from coal to renewables, new electricity grids, improvement in soil maintenence programs and addressing overfishing. This is our spaceship and our planet and it needs some serious work at the moment.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by takyon on Saturday October 08 2016, @12:21AM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Saturday October 08 2016, @12:21AM (#411648) Journal

    On Mars, there's very little margin for waste or inefficiency. Designing a functioning Moon/Mars/Ceres/Europa habitat that doesn't need periodic resupply could teach valuable lessons that can be applied to Earth.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @01:37AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @01:37AM (#411664)

    Humanity has always pushed boundaries and explored new areas. So its just in our nature to go to Mars. The thing I don't understand is why not get a base on the moon first?

    Getting a functioning colony has big advantages, and could actually shift a lot of industry into space stations while reducing the need for a highly consumer based economy.

    • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Saturday October 08 2016, @04:06PM

      by isostatic (365) on Saturday October 08 2016, @04:06PM (#411772) Journal

      Musk wants to go to mars, not the moon. When you put your billions into a company with the goal of building your own lunar base (with hookers and blackjack) then I'm sure "we" will go there too.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jelizondo on Saturday October 08 2016, @05:36AM

    by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 08 2016, @05:36AM (#411697) Journal

    I do hope that you are willing to hear arguments for the other side.

    I agree with you, Earth needs a lot of attention right now but, but, but there are a lot of interests (oil industry, car industry, armament industry, banks, etc.) which are perfectly happy to let Earth die, so long as it happens after the next quarters’ report is filed.

    Going to Mars does not confront such a big obstacle and might be the only way to actually save Earth by developing the necessary understanding and techniques to keep humans alive both during flight and on site, we will learn a lot about managing Earth.

    Now consider the numbers. I’m sure no one is spending close to $604.5 billion [usgovernmentspending.com] the U.S. budgeted for military spending just this year. (This number excludes military aid to foreign governments and veteran spending.)

    However, anytime anyone suggests cutting the official budget, they are anti-American, they are pinko communists who ought to be shot!

    Consider just the expenses on the Iraq war [reuters.com] “The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said.”

    Please, oppose war, it is pointless. Iraq. Afghanistan, Libya and now Syria. What do we get from those wars? How much do they cost, really cost in terms of money, lives lost and resentment against America?

    The way things are going in Syria, there could be a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia over what? Getting rid of Bashar al-Assad? How about getting rid of the House of Saudi, who is bombing the shit out of Yemen [nytimes.com] and might have been directly involved on 9/11?

    Please let us go to Mars. Keep your fucking wars.