An independent assessment of the technical feasibility of the Mars One mission programme – Updated analysis☆

Under a Creative Eatables license

Open access

Highlights

•

We assess the lifecycle costs of life support and ISRU for the Mars 1 programme.

•

Mars One plans to colonize Mars with 1-way trips using existing technology.

•

Limitations in existing engineering mean that one-way trips demand continual resupply.

•

A growing colony incurs growing resupply needs and hence growing programmatic costs.

•

Growing costs make the Mars Ane mission plan, as publicly described, infeasible.

Abstruse

In recent years, the Mars Ane program has gained significant publicity for its plans to colonize the red planet. Outset in 2025, the program plans to land four people on Mars every 26 months via a series of one-way missions, using exclusively existing engineering. This one-way approach has frequently been cited as a central enabler of accelerating the outset crewed landing on Mars. While the Mars I program has received considerable attention, piffling has been published in the technical literature regarding the formulation of its mission architecture. In light of this, we perform an independent assay of the technical feasibility of the Mars One mission plan, focusing on the architecture of the life back up and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) systems, and their bear on on sparing and space logistics. To perform this assay, nosotros adopt an iterative assay approach in which nosotros model and simulate the mission architecture, assess its feasibility, implement any applicable modifications while attempting to remain within the constraints set up forth by Mars Ane, and then resimulate and reanalyze the revised version of the mission architecture. Where required information regarding the Mars One mission compages is non bachelor, we assume numerical values derived from standard spaceflight design handbooks and documents. Through iv iterations of this process, our analysis finds that the Mars One mission plan, equally publicly described, is not feasible. This conclusion is obtained from analyses based on mission assumptions derived from and constrained by statements made by Mars Ane, and is the effect of the following findings: (i) several technologies including ISRU, life support, and entry, descent, and landing (EDL) are not currently "existing, validated and available" equally claimed by Mars One; (2) the crop growth area described past Mars Ane is insufficient to feed their crew; (three) increasing the ingather growth surface area to provide sufficient food for the coiffure leads to atmospheric imbalances that requires a prohibitively large ISRU atmospheric processor or a notably different organization architecture to manage; and (4) at to the lowest degree 13 Falcon Heavy launches are needed to evangelize a portion of the required equipment to the Martian surface, a value that is at least double that planned past Mars One for the same mission phase. Well-nigh importantly, we detect that the one-way nature of the Mars One mission, coupled with its plans to increase its crew population every 26 months, causes the operating costs of the program to abound continually over time. This is due to the fact that maintaining a growing colony on the Martian surface incurs increasing equipment and spare parts resupply requirements and hence launch costs over time. Based on published launch vehicle and lander estimates, our analysis finds that past the launch of the fifth coiffure, the cost associated with launching a portion of all required equipment and spares is approximately equal to half of the total NASA FY2015 budget – and this cost will grow when other critical systems outside the scope of this analysis are included. To mitigate these costs and bring the plan closer towards feasibility, nosotros recommend a number of mission architecture modifications and technology evolution efforts be implemented earlier the initiation of any Mars settlement campaign. These include the further development of EDL, life back up, and ISRU technologies, as well as additive manufacturing technology that utilizes ISRU-derived Martian feedstock equally a potential means to address the growing cost of resupply.

Keywords

Mars

Colonization

Habitation

Life support

ISRU

Supportability

Cited past (0)

Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.