Hi everybody and welcome back to another episode of Space News Pod. Today will journey through the captivating saga of Mars 1, the ambitious venture that aimed to make humans and interplanetary species by establishing a permanent settlement on Mars. In the glow of this plan, the Dutch Notforprofit foundation launched by Boz Landsdorp and Arna Wielders shone brightly. When it first took to the world stage in 2011, their vision was nothing short of bold.
A Oneway mission to Mars, sidestepping the complexities of a return voyage focusing on establishing A sustainable human colony on our neighboring planet. However, the path to Mars was strewn with obstacles. From an overwhelming financial goal of $6 billion to technological challenges and ethically charged decisions. Mars One face significant headwinds and despite their groundbreaking approach to space exploration, their mission, much like a Martian dust storm, eventually settled.
In 2019, Mars One declared bankruptcy, leaving the dream of a permanent human settlement on Mars unfulfilled. But every story, every venture, every dream, regardless of its outcome, leaves behind a legacy. So today we dive into the rise and fall of Mars One, exploring the lessons learned and discussing how these experiences might influence the future. Of our multiplanetary aspirations, we'll hear from our sponsors. Then we'll get right into the
story. It's a pretty juicy one, so I think you're going to enjoy it. Mars One was cofounded by two Dutch entrepreneurs, Boss Land Store and Arna Wielders, both bringing unique experiences and skills to this venture. Boss is an entrepreneur with a background in mechanical engineering. And before Mars One, he cofounded Ampics Power, a company specializing in the development of wind energy technology.
Landsdorp left Ampics Power to start Mars One when he realized the potential and feasibility of a one way mission to Mars. As a CEO and cofounder of Mars One, Landsdorp became the face of the project, frequently speaking at conferences and in media interviews about the mission. Our nose wielder is a physicist and engineer with experience in space systems. And before cofounding Mars One, Wielders worked for various space organizations.
He worked at the European Space Research and Technology Center, part of the European Space Agency, or ESA, or ESA, and was involved in several ESA projects. He also cofounded Space Horizon, a company dedicated to space tourism. As the chief technical officer of Mars One, Wielders was responsible for the overall technical design and implementation of the Mars 1 mission. And despite their passion and commitment to Mars One project, they have some hurdles to
overcome. The venture was criticized and overly optimistic timelines, technology assumptions, and lack of adequate funding. Mars One was an ambitious project that sought to establish a permanent human settlement on Mars, a bold and audacious goal that pushed the boundaries of human possibility. And at the heart of the initiative was a vision to go where no human has gone before.
To tread new ground in space exploration and to define what humanity could achieve in terms of interplanetary colonization. We'll explore the origins, the successes and challenges, and the legacy of Mars One will provide insights into the intricate nature of the space exploration venture. Mars One was a Dutch notforprofit foundation established in 2011 by Boslandsdorp and Arno Wielders. The company sought to revolutionize space exploration by pursuing A1 Way mission to Mars.
They plan to select, train and send 4 astronauts on their pioneering journey every two years starting in the twenty 20s and the missions cost was estimated to be $6 billion. The founders aimed to source this funding from sponsors and media rights sales. Now, the underlying belief of the Mars 1 mission was that humanity needed to become a multiplanetary species like Elon, Musk says, both for our survival and to satisfy our innate curiosity and desire to
explore. Mars, due to its proximity and its similarity to Earth in terms of day length and surface area, was chosen as the ideal destination for this ambitious undertaking. Mars One had a unique approach to this endeavor, though. They sought to simplify the mission by making it a one way trip, eliminating the need for complex return journey technology.
By using existing technology and adopting an incremental approach, Mars 1 aimed to gradually build up the necessary infrastructure of Mars for long term human habitation. The project strategy consisted of sending initial unmanned missions, deploying living units, life support units and supply units to Mars. These units would then be set up by robots to create a habitable settlement before the arrival of
the first crew. The crew would be self-sufficient, relying on in situ resource utilization or I SRU, particularly extracting water from Martian soil and producing oxygen for breathing. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? That's exactly what Elon Musk wants to do with SpaceX and Starship. Now Mars One adopted an open call for volunteers. Willing to embark on a one way mission to Mars? You would leave Earth.
You would fly to Mars. You would spend the rest of your days on Mars. You would never see anybody from Earth again. This unprecedented selection process attracted applicants from diverse backgrounds from around the world. After rigorous selection process, Mars One aim to train these individuals extensively in the simulated Martian environment right here on Earth. They prepare them for the harsh conditions and isolation. They would experience on Mars now.
Despite its innovative approach and vision, Mars want to face significant challenges and criticisms. The foremost concern was the mission's feasibility given the technological, financial and logistical hurdles. Critics questioned whether the mission could be accomplished with the proposed budget and the reliance on unproven technologies like insitu resource utilization, making
water out of Martian soil. Moreover, the ethical implications of sending humans on a one way mission raised concerns considering the psychological impact of permanent isolation at the potential of death on the Red Planet. The open call selection process and the proposal to televise the mission also face criticism for potentially exploiting the participants of reducing a complex science venture to just a reality show now despite these challenges and criticisms though.
Mars One sparked a global conversation about space exploration and interplanetary colonization. It inspired individuals worldwide to dream about the possibilities of space travel and prompted serious discussions about the feasibility and ethics of colonizing other planets.
When Mars One opened the application process for astronaut selection in April of 2013, they received a significant number of applications from aspiring Mars settlers around the globe by the end of the application process in August of 2013. Mars One reported having received over 200,000 applications, although this number was highly disputed and some sources suggest the actual number was quite lower. The application process was part of Mars One's fundraising strategy.
Applicants were charged an application fee which varied by country, and the fee was intended to be inversely proportional to the gross domestic product of the applicants country, ranging from $5 to $75. The total amount of money raised from the application process isn't quite clear. Even if one took the lowest application fee of $5, if 200,000 applicants were indeed received, this would amount to at least $1,000,000 USD.
However, due to the uncertainty about the actual number of applications and the variable application fee, it's difficult to provide a precise figure for the total funds raised through this process. These applications came from a wide variety of backgrounds and places, showcasing the global interest in space exploration in the appeal of the Mars 1 mission Now Sue and PN. An American applicant, Sue was
one of the 100 finalists. She works as a software engineer and had a keen interest in space exploration. PN's motivation to apply for Mars One came from her dream to explore the unknown and to contribute to humanity's understanding of the universe. Ryan McDonald, The British physicist. McDonald was also among the 100
finalists. He was studying physics at the University of Oxford at the time of his application and was fascinated by the prospect of contributing to human knowledge about Mars. He saw Mars One as an opportunity to be a part of the groundbreaking mission that can change how we understand our place in the universe. Diana Masani Patel, British pharmacist and scuba diving instructor, was another of the 100 finalists. She was motivated by a sense of adventure.
And the desire to inspire the next generation of explorers. Now it's important to know that while these applicants were willing to leave their lives on Earth for a one way ticket to Mars, the Mars 1 mission faced significant criticism and skepticism over its feasibility, the ethics and lack of a clear plan for the safety and wellbeing of the crew. A glaring obstacle to Mars One's plans was the substantial financial requirements. The missions cost was estimated
at a whopping $6 billion. And Mars won in to raise these funds through a mix of sponsorship, media rights, crowdfunding and private investments. However, is the mission progressed, it became evident that the organization was struggling to generate the necessary capital. The idea to fund a significant part of the mission through the sale of media rights, turning the astronaut selection process and subsequent life on Mars into a reality show, received a mixed reactions.
But critics argued it trivialized the serious nature of space exploration and carried ethical implications. Meanwhile, potential sponsors and investors were hesitant. Aware of the high risks associated with the mission. The Mars 1 mission proposed to use rockets and spacecraft available commercially from established aerospace companies. This meant they didn't have to develop and build their own. Which would have been an immensely complex and expensive
undertaking. In their initial plan, they proposed using the Falcon Heavy rocket manufactured by SpaceX to launch their payloads to Mars. Falcon Heavy is one of the most powerful operation rockets are in the world, capable of lifting significant payloads to Mars. For the actual spacecraft, they proposed using a modified version of Spacex's Dragon capsule. The Dragon capsule had already been used successfully to ferry cargo at this point.
To and from the International Space Station, but there's been no cruise to the International Space Station when Mars One was in play. Now, it's important to note that while Mars One stated their intention to use these vehicles at the time of the missions cancellations, no contracts had been signed with NASA or SpaceX or any other aerospace
companies. And for the missions, Lander and Rover Mars One partnered with Lockheed Martin, which had extensive experience in building and operating spacecraft. Or NASA's Mars missions. What are the more ambitious elements of the Mars One plant was a use of life support system to manufacture fuel on Mars for the use of vehicles and machinery which would have required an advanced level of in situ resource utilization technology.
At the time of the missions proposal, such a system was still in the development phases and not yet proven. Now Mars 1 proposed to use existing technology in vehicles wherever possible. It also relied on several unproven technologies. Systems at the time, and its inability to fully address these technological challenges was a significant factor in the missions ultimate failure. Mars One hinged on the belief that it could only use existing technology to create a livable outpost on Mars.
However, this overlooked the significant technological advances still required for such a mission, the dependency on as yet unproven technologies for longterm life support and radiation protection. Was a major concern. The timeline proposed by Mars One was also criticized as overly optimistic. The plan involves sending multiple uncrewed missions to set up a habitable environment and life support systems, all before humans sent foot on Mars.
Now, this timeline, given the complexity of the tasks, seemed very farfetched, and sending humans on a oneway journey to Mars raised significant psychological and ethical issues. Mars One applicants were volunteering not just for an exploration mission, but for a lifetime on an alien planet. The potential psychological stress and the ethical implications of sending individuals on a journey with such high risks and no return raise serious concerns about the mission's moral standing.
Human spaceflight to Mars presents unique psychological challenges. An interplanetary journey to Mars, as proposed by Mars One, would entail an isolation and confinement period of up to nine months during the voyage, followed by a potentially permanent state on an alien planet millions of miles away from Earth. These conditions can give rise to a host of psychological issues, including but not limit to loneliness, depression, anxiety, and interpersonal conflicts.
The isolation from friends, family, and familiar surroundings can intensify feelings of loneliness. And can lead to depression, the confinement of the spacecraft with limited room to move and lack of privacy and create tension and conflict among the crew. Prolonged periods of monotony, broken only by high stress situations, can cause cognitive and behavioral issues.
Furthermore, communication delays with Earth ranging up to 24 minutes round trip, can create feelings of isolation and frustration and can challenge the crew's problem solving abilities. Because immediate support or advice won't be available to them in a pod arrival on Mars, the astronauts will be faced with a bearing and harsh environment drastically different from Earth.
This alien landscape, combined with the realization of a permanent stay, may further exacerbate feelings of isolation, homesickness and stress. Astronauts on a mission to Mars will require a unique blend of skills to cope with these challenges though, including technical and scientific expertise, excellent problem solving skills. And robust psychological resilience, the selection, the training and support of these pioneers would be paramount to the success of the mission and
the wellbeing of the crew. This all culminates in the bankruptcy in the end of Mars 1. Mars One went bankrupt in 2019 and it was because Boss Lansrup did a debate against MIT researchers. So. US, The cofounder of Mars One and MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology researchers had an event. There was a debate. It revolved around a critical study by MIT graduate students which analyzed the feasibility
of the Mars 1 mission plan. They use publicly available information about Mars One and the life support requirements of a crude mission to Mars. They found out that with the current technology, sustaining life on Mars would be
challenging due to issues. Like the overproduction of oxygen from plants in the habitat and the need for a significant number of spare parts for the life support system in every spots to the study, Boz Landsdorp claimed that Mars One had solutions to these issues and the criticism was based on assumptions that did not apply to the missions plans. Landsdorp did not, however, provide detailed explanations of counter arguments to all the
points raised by the MIT team. And Landsdorp invited the researchers for a public debate to discuss these findings. The debate took place at the 2015 Mars Society Convention, where the MIT team and Landsdorp presented their points of view. The debate further highlighted the questions and challenges around the Mars 1 mission, and the criticism from the MIT team was a part of broader skepticism that the Mars 1 mission faced with various scientists, engineers, and space
enthusiasts. The mission was seen as underestimating the complexity. And cost of a human Mars mission. These criticisms and challenges, along with financial difficulties, eventually led to the demise of the Mars One endeavor.