@@Admiralty86made from the atmosphere, using the sabatier process. It will just sit there and create the fuel out of thin air (literally 😂) over a long time.
So they going over there and start mining, what if the mining equipment becomes faulty, or the elements and compounds calculated to be present where erroneous, they would just get stuck in mars
@lordstraplife5853 it has no atmosphere so all gass escapes, no water or anything. Mars still has some atmosphere and frozen water which makes it plausible.
@@MaxGucciardi but to be honest we can use the moon as a Station to refurbish and refuel so they don't have to travel back to Earth. it's probably easier to land on the Moon since there's no Gravity maybe
@@MaxGucciardi Even if we didn’t colonize the moon wouldn’t it be wise to use it as a strategic operation area? They could like maybe set up a base or a few to make refueling easier to achieve, maybe all this has already been thought about by spacex though it’s probably a lot more that goes into it.
The NPC programming demands that you believe elon is a bad person. And true to programming you are hating the man that is pushing world's space expiration to become viable
The magic is in the missing numbers. Without any form of support (by numbers for example) CGI is just fantasy. Basically those CGI fantasies are a form of gish gallop - put in a lot of reasonable looking technology (that does not exist in the displayed form) and overwhelm the viewer with 'it's easy, we only need (lots of) money to further develop existing knowledge'. It takes ages to debunk the rubbish and it is easy to blow any critique away with 'the wright brothers' and similar examples from the past. "I can jump over one meter, there's no technical reason why I couldn't jump over six meter..."
@Freedom Family even jupiter? You know that planet has no surface and the pressure would kill you before you're crushed by its core right? 🤣 I wouldn't teleport into that.
@@J040PL7You do realise that teleportation is copying and deleting the person then printing a copy of him with his memories at a different location? Your clone who will be living your life not you. It's nothing like in movies, reality is often dissapointing. I don't think anyone would like teleportation if they knew how it works. 😂
@@ummerfarooq5383 no. They would have to match speed and trajectory. And there aren't any helping it back either from Mars to Earth. The ship will have enough propellant to accelerate and then use Mars atmosphere to slow down.
This is how the early flights will go. In the long run sun orbiting space stations will be used. These will be timed to connect Earth to Mars and Mars to Earth. Ships will dock passengers and payloads to an outgoing station. Ship will undock near Mars. Return flights will do the same probably using ships on a different orbit to avoid a very long return journey.
Totally agree hell everybody should know that the governments have done engineered the spaceships they have confiscated over the years they have technology that we can’t even comprehend but they going to keep it to thereselves for another 100 years SMDH
@pharkasj It will take train loads of ships to build the infrastructure needed to successfully colonize Mars, which will co$t trillion$ of dollars. Science fiction and science fantasy will never complete this nonsense.
@@Top10soon no, he is on point, the amount of planning that actually needs to be done for a successful Mars mission and the amount of planning that Musk has done are not even in the same ballpark. The video makes it seem so simple, but it is not, hence the very appropriate Mike Tyson quote
@@vanbogan3712 SpaceX is a private profit-seeking company, not a government agency - they simply don't have the capacity to do anything on that scale, nor will they until taxpayer dollars have paid for all the hard lessons and paved the way to profitability. You can send a bunch of NASA engineers over to the private (profiteering) sector, but that does not put SpaceX on the same level as NASA, and it certainly doesn't make the daydreams of a demented billionaire into a sturdy foundation for the next generation of space programs. If the West wants to pretend that private companies can drive space exploration then they will only succeed at throwing money into the black hole of billionaires' pockets while BRICS+ countries win the actual space race.
@corbynite2004 @corbynite2004 I really can't take anything you say seriously sorry when you lay your biases out so clearly. I'm more inclined to trust the company that has been wildy successful since it's inception (yes even more so then NASA. There is a reason they pumped so much money into spacex) then some random internet person who's main problem clearly lies with a certain someone with lots of money. Privatisation of space has clearly worked really well and if you can't see that writing on the wall then that's a you problem bud.
He conceptualised the hyperloop idea and then put out a white paper for other entrepreneurs and businesses to develop it. That's why Virgin is working on hyperloop you clowns spam anything without any research
One thing is certain, sooner or later its gonna happen still people like you will exist who postponed their next target lol and still lost... Ignorance is bliss
@@zod8015 He didn't conceptualize it, the idea has already existed for over 100 years but people decided to throw it away because it was such a dumb idea. Elon just made someone draw it again in CGI, went on interviews to promote it. And now somehow people are actually stupid enough to believe this concept works without a good working model even having been made in all those years. It's already been shown that Elon has tried to promote stupid sci-fi concepts in order to take away funding for other modes of transport and redirect them towards him like he did in Vegas. This is just another one of those.
@@airstrike9002yes I understand Adam something fans that Elon musks public transportation ideas are usually bad but when it comes to space travel he does know what he is talking about. Look at the falcon 9 for example it has already transformed the aerospace industry by lowers launch costs far lower than the expendable rockets that we have today and now many aerospace companies are now focusing on reusability to catch up. The spacex starship is climbing out of the development phrase further every launch and when it can reliably get to orbit then everything ramps up and elon can send his starlink in mass,send Artemis to the moon and go to mars while commercial companies see the reliability and low cost so those companies attempt space ventures that were previously hindered by cost and vehicle launch size. Edit it doesn’t matter if you got these talking points from Adam something ,common sense skeptic or whoever else my point stands and btw it’s usually Adam something fans that repeat this.
@@ianvanessen2166 I *think* you're being sarcastic but just in case, the starship has to use most of its own fuel in order to reach orbit. The booster only gets it started but the ship provides most of the delta V. By the time is reaches orbit it will only have maybe 1/5th of its propellant left in the tanks, some of which is needed for re-entry and landing. If they manage to get it down to 5 refilling trips that would be impressive. More likely it will be even more than that.
A fast mission of 245 days (8 mos.) round-trip could be possible with on-orbit staging. A round-trip to Mars can take about 21 months, including a three-month wait on Mars for the planets to be in a suitable position for the return trip.
The gravity on Mars is just under 40% that of Earth, so it definitely is a gravity well. There’s also the issue of the change in velocity needed to drop from Mars’ orbit to that of Earth.
@@PatsRule1224 Why dont you attack their argument instead of their character... Oh that is right, thinking is hard, but I believe you'll be able to do it someday.
@@4Lucy_ Musk has already identified and addressed these issues. His plans very specifically take them into account. The issue here isn’t the SpaceX plane for going to Mars, it is the poorly written script for this video. Maybe you should check such facts before criticizing someone else.
@@dinamiteurdinamiteur2324 Yeah, great argumentation, they "can work". Just like the hyperloop theoretically "could work" but doesn't even after years and years. It is the usual money laundering from the worlds #1 con artist.
What does this even mean. Please your phone and your remaining brain cells to search on this same platform “SpaceX launch” and you will see they’ve done 100’s maybe 1000’s of earth orbiting payload launches
It's a waste of time. The moon is a far better choice for a base. The gravity of mars is only 38 percent of earth, it doesn't have a magnetosphere, and a round trip takes at least 21 months, whereas a round trip to the moon takes about 6 to 8 days. The effects of low gravity make it impossible for long term stays on both the Moon and Mars. And besides, we haven't even figured out how to get a biosphere to work here on earth yet. We'll be lucky to see a base anywhere in our lifetimes.
@@jasonjackson8111 Are you serious? Get back to me in a decade and it will still be many more decades before anyone sets foot on Mars. And there will never be a permanent colony there. It's not suitable for humans.
There is a transfer window every two years. If at some point they include nuclear/ion propulsion on board it would allow other/longer launch windows too.
Mars orbit is longer and slower, we catch up to Mars every 2 years roughly. However looking at the simulations, I wonder if there is a nice window to travel back. Because Mars' orbit is farther from ours on one side of the sun and Earth seems to catch up to Mars on that side every time, this means that as Mars approaches the closer side of its orbit, Earth is already wizzing by. Making it easy to just drop off our orbit and be caught up my Mars, but not the other way round really. Except possibly during a 3-5 month window just before Earth catches up ,which I dont think is sufficient for the 7 month ride. Could be they will have to take some insane trajectory
@@albertofoti4152 , no... that is to fuel up to go to Mars, like I said. It will need fuel launches for our moon as well. Apollo missions put less than 5% of its mass on our moon. Starship is so much heavier. SpaceX essentially has to launch the craft empty. A lot of loaded fighter jets have to take off and immediately refuel air-to-air, because they wouldn't get off the ground with ordinance and a full tank. I hope this was helpful.
@@baekkistyle SpaceX said 14. What is the difference between Mars and our moon in regards to Starship? I'll answer that for you. One has the materials to make fuel for a return trip and the other does not. You tell me which needs more fuel. Before you answer, just know that a rocket doesn't use it's thrust for the whole trip. They get up to speed and cruise until it's time to slow down.
@@TheDwightMamba the one who needs to reach escape velocity to leave earth needs more fuel, basic physics mate, the fuel needed to get back from the moon is negligible. And the making enough fuel on Mars to go back is another hyperloop.
Even the apollo missions didn't have all the failures starshit has gone through,not even during development and test. It's an embarrassment. suck it up, elon fsnboys.
@@ernestosiguenza629ion like elon but thats a moot point homie, this is kinda an entirely different thing than trying to land on the moon. im sure his giant ego is causing a lot of issues for his techs, i mean they pretty much told us that it does, but the Apollo program and this have some pretty different objectives and difficulties to overcome.
Kingduff where did you study, community college for 7 years. Video clearly says no deep gravity well to escape from. Maybe learning to read is an issue for you
Wow. The announcer sounds like a real expert and with dat muzak playing, I so exited. I'll just bust open me piggy bank and get me a ticket then I go to Mars too wit a ham sammich, can o soda, and an extra pair o underwear's.🤪
Yes they do. Its two different processes (The Sabatier and Reverse something i cant recall off the top of my head) with a few steps each that converts CO2, H2O, a little extra H2 and a lot of energy into pure CH4 and O2. Its not too complicated and mostly just uses different heating techniques to both break down the said starting molecules and recombine them into the desired ones.
@@spuriouseffect To combat both the nay says here, They sent a roadster (built by Elons other main company), to Mars' orbital plane on their first attempt during a test flight... Anyone who nays these guys are simpletons.
It will actually take six to eight flights to refuel an interplanetary Starship in orbit. Cryogenic liquid fuels are heavier than water, and although the payload capacity of Starship is huge only a very small portion could actually be used for hauling fuel due simply to a limit on mass deliverable to LEO. Alternatively what could happen is SpaceX sends up fueling missions more or less constantly, refiling an orbital depot, and it's this depot that the outbound Starships mate with.
NASAs own estimates for a flight to the Moon, is 11-15 refuelling launches, for 1 landing on the Moon. Mars, sure, you can do some aerobreaking, etc. But also has significantly higher gravity for a propulsive landing. All this, and Starship hasn't even made it to orbit yet...
Good luck doing that with a spaceship that hasn't seen space even once and prefers to blow up on launch. It is absolutely pathetic that SpaceX is still struggling, in 2024, with technology the USSR perfected half a century ago.
@@jonesrichardmr NASA is working off Starship V1 and Jeff Bezos estimates. Spacex says 6-8. They are basing the estimate off the Starship V3 with massively greater fuel capacity.
@@gownerjones So. Everything you said is wrong... allow me: Spacex is profitable and will soon be Very, very profitable with Starlink adding the new e-band (already supported on 2k satellites to add backbone services to their network. Starship will allow a 10x rate of satellite capacity insertion within 12-24 months to add to this. In short, their budget will eclipse NASA in 2-3 years. Musk likes to blow up rockets in test to push the limits and find out as much as possible while perfecting Mass production of the rockets. That said. Missions 3 and 4 showed a successful insertion into a 200km orbit. Making a stable orbit from there wasn't helpful but would have been very, very easy. You're referring to much less capable USSR tech that they couldn't get to work (neither methane engines or the N-1 rocket). Nor was that reusable. Also: Spacex launched 98 times successfully other than early rocket tests of Starship. They put up more mass to orbit than the entire rest of the world combined in 2023. They are putting up 20% more this year Before Starship allows them to 5x that record in the next 2-3 years. Spacex owns most of the world's satellites and is highly profitable. So. You really need to read up before coming out with provably wrong statements.
It’s such an awesome thing to think about and I believe we can and will put American boots on Mars soon. To see pictures and videos in 4K of people walking on Mars is incredible to think about.
Probably a dozen or so to refuel one Starship in LEO before heading for Mars _on its first interplanetary test flight._ And presumably there will be a dozen or so unmanned flights before it's human rated. Lot of money. Some would call it brute force, but if that's what it takes that's what it takes. Because Elon wants to be the man who made humanity interplanetary. 😊
I dont know if i call a bunch of single launches a "fleet" but yes there will be several launches to refuel it. It could be done with a single vehicle. So fleet might be inaccurate. Your wink makes it clear that you are suggesting they are hiding something here. Its inaccurate in its simplicity of the process sure, but its a simple concept video and its accurate as such.
What if we managed to get a settlement on the moon? If we did that we could launch the mission to Mars from the moon which would require FAR less fuel. @@reiniermoreno1653
I dont know about a "key thing". Its just part of the plan.. Its necessary sure, so is every other step in the process. But its not one of the hard parts of the plan. It will just become a routine thing like the starlink launches that happen up to three times in a day.
For everyone complaining about the starship already on mars: it’s because time goes in reverse on mars. The ship leaves at the same time it arrives because it landed then went back in time a little.
Forgot the part where you need about 100 launches to refuel the one actually going to Mars. Ideally they want to get a Starship launch to $10 million a pop. For reference, the 2020 Perseverance rover cost $242 million just for launch.
I don't think either of you understand how docking in space work. The iss have done this over a dozen times. They have huge distances to make adjustments until meeting up.
The part you got wrong is- The crewed starship has to meet up (in orbit) To top off the fuel tanks with *EIGHT STARSHIP TANKERS* once eight fuel transfers have been completed the crewed starship can start its journey to Mars. Elon makes it sound trivial in regards to creating rocket fuel from the Mars resources. If creating rocket fuel from the Martian atmosphere and regolith (AKA dirt) is viable. Then why hasn't he created his own jet fuel on Earth?
I did think they put up one tanker starship that gets refueled by many other tankers until full, after that launch the crew starship and transfer all the fuel they need from the tanker in orbit. Starship doesn't use "jet fuel" as a propellant...
@@pada443 My Dear Pa da you should watch the experiment if a feather and fan in a vacuum chamber! Newton has been proved wrong on many occasions. Maybe you should keep up with science of today not yesterdays?
So much hate coming from the comments, but this is actually a pretty accurate (simplified) depiction of SpaceX's plan to go to Mars. A less simplified version with more accurate minor details can be found in resources such as SpaceX's website.
BS! With the load capacity to get into orbit, it would need at least 10 filling trips. Please guys do your math instead of believing a commercial homepage!
Its only beyond belief for those that have no idea what it takes... Its not that difficult and only takes two processes to do so. Using CO2, water and a little supplemental hydrogen. And a lot of energy... But when its going to be done by a company that can take hundreds of tons per vehicle and just happens to be run by a person that also started a solar company and another that makes more batteries then almost anyone, its not even a problem, its just part of the plan.
I'm so happy someone actually did this because it will help people who have a hard time understanding by hearing and more of a visual I can't say that word😂
Well nobody knows the number its gunna take to refuel but that is irrelevant. And to be clear going to Mars takes hardly any more fuel than going to the moon. Escaping Earths influence takes 90+% of that fuel and you have to do so in both cases.
@Vatsyayana87 NASA said up to 20 refuels for starship. Nasa made it to the moon in 1 launch, and Blue origin will only do it 1. Not a spacex hater but don't underestimate the difficulty of this
Also when nasa went to the moon, they only put a lander on the moon. The ship stayed in orbit. And they hard landed back on earthy sacrificing the landing vehicle to dissipate heat. 2 refuels might make sense. 1 to get to the moon and land, the second on the way back to have enough fuel to land safely. I’d guess there is a good chance that maybe required for mars as well. One refuel on mars, a second in earth orbit before landing. Still beats what NASA or blue Origin plan.
What’s cool about this all is that once’s transportation becomes common, there will be a point where you look out the window mid way through the journey and see the other one coming back. I mean most likely you won’t see it as they would be too far away but maybe they decide to make the paths closer just for that novelty
It takes about 3 to 22 minutes to send a command to Mars depending where Earth and Mars are aligned...so that Rocket better be able to do for the most part it's own calculations and alignments to keep from crashing.
*What year do you think humans will go to Mars for the first time?*
2040
2060
2026
2025
2370
"Locally produced methane" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there
Also thats gone. Forever in vacuum of space. Its gonna run out.. eventually
Are they confident they can liberate the methane from wherever it is?
@@Admiralty86made from the atmosphere, using the sabatier process. It will just sit there and create the fuel out of thin air (literally 😂) over a long time.
@@subwarpspeed where are they getting the hydrogen from?
Non tested water reserves on mars?
So they going over there and start mining, what if the mining equipment becomes faulty, or the elements and compounds calculated to be present where erroneous, they would just get stuck in mars
"Locally produced methane"
Houston, we're down to our last fart to get us home. Wish us luck.
Not exactly what they mean
Mars atmosphere is filled with methane 🐥
@@slliks4 I am aware that they are likely referring to methane produce during the breakdown of organic matter.
I came here to make a very similar joke.
@@keithpryor411 WHAT ORGANIC MATTER? there is no life on mars. Yet you dont realize youve been lied to your entire life.
Mars is red
I never knew Mars was so close to earth
I never knew that starship was so big
no
I never knew there were massive platforms orbiting the earth
dad's joke?
@@redbitch3362 Nah, r/shittyaskscience type of joke
Space X should build a Space Gas Station
So where will gas come from..your ass?
i.e. the moon
which honestly I’m not sure why didn’t decide to colonize it first
@lordstraplife5853 it has no atmosphere so all gass escapes, no water or anything. Mars still has some atmosphere and frozen water which makes it plausible.
@@MaxGucciardi but to be honest we can use the moon as a Station to refurbish and refuel so they don't have to travel back to Earth. it's probably easier to land on the Moon since there's no Gravity maybe
@@MaxGucciardi Even if we didn’t colonize the moon wouldn’t it be wise to use it as a strategic operation area? They could like maybe set up a base or a few to make refueling easier to achieve, maybe all this has already been thought about by spacex though it’s probably a lot more that goes into it.
If there is ANYTHING I have learned from watching science content on TH-cam over the years, it's that you never EVER trust a CGI presentation.
It's amazing how they will just repeat anything some techno-entrepreneur will say without the tiniest bit if critical thinking...😢
The NPC programming demands that you believe elon is a bad person.
And true to programming you are hating the man that is pushing world's space expiration to become viable
Don't know if Powerpoint counts as CGI
The magic is in the missing numbers. Without any form of support (by numbers for example) CGI is just fantasy.
Basically those CGI fantasies are a form of gish gallop - put in a lot of reasonable looking technology (that does not exist in the displayed form) and overwhelm the viewer with 'it's easy, we only need (lots of) money to further develop existing knowledge'.
It takes ages to debunk the rubbish and it is easy to blow any critique away with 'the wright brothers' and similar examples from the past.
"I can jump over one meter, there's no technical reason why I couldn't jump over six meter..."
This is a PowerPoint
I never knew there was already a star ship on mars waiting for other star ships from earth
We'll invent teleportation by then 🤣
@Freedom Family you're never too late when you can teleport 😅
@Freedom Family even jupiter? You know that planet has no surface and the pressure would kill you before you're crushed by its core right? 🤣
I wouldn't teleport into that.
@Freedom Family damn, they're too good.
@@J040PL7You do realise that teleportation is copying and deleting the person then printing a copy of him with his memories at a different location? Your clone who will be living your life not you. It's nothing like in movies, reality is often dissapointing.
I don't think anyone would like teleportation if they knew how it works. 😂
I don't understand, it worked perfectly in the cartoon.
Space is FAKE and CGI.
Elon brain runs on farts (methane)
she/he made effort to explain the process in layman's terms and your response is to mock them ?!
Those research Films not cartoons - Great Dictator of Wadiya Allauddin
"It's not CGI! Can you believe it!!!?"
I think there is a million steps and developments in between to make this whole thing work. It’s not as easy as this short makes it.
Minor thing: The tanking/refueling happens in orbit of earth. The animation makes it seem like this happens in transition to Mars.
It's still pretty obvious that's not the case if you listen to the man talking
If it could happen in transits to mars, the refueling tanks already waiting in specific orbital path points, wouldn't that reduce time to get to mars?
The animation isn’t accurate. Oh no
@@ummerfarooq5383 no. They would have to match speed and trajectory.
And there aren't any helping it back either from Mars to Earth. The ship will have enough propellant to accelerate and then use Mars atmosphere to slow down.
@@subwarpspeed it's all Fake. We live under a Firmament that is impossible to pass through it
This is the most overly simplified description of space travel ever
Except it’s not overly simplified. It fits its purpose.
This is how the early flights will go. In the long run sun orbiting space stations will be used. These will be timed to connect Earth to Mars and Mars to Earth. Ships will dock passengers and payloads to an outgoing station. Ship will undock near Mars. Return flights will do the same probably using ships on a different orbit to avoid a very long return journey.
Totally agree hell everybody should know that the governments have done engineered the spaceships they have confiscated over the years they have technology that we can’t even comprehend but they going to keep it to thereselves for another 100 years SMDH
@davidelliott5843 I mean, only if Musk doesn't single-handedly come up with teleportationt by then.
Yeah hey, let's just "fly over there" 😂
I think realistically the best option would be to take off from a moon base so you could build a much bigger ship
Логично🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Mars is a fools errand.
a small ship for the humans, and a bigger one (with no life support) for the carriage.
@pharkasj
It will take train loads of ships to build the infrastructure needed to successfully colonize Mars, which will co$t trillion$ of dollars.
Science fiction and science fantasy will never complete this nonsense.
Taking off to moon itself is already a big problem
This animation proves it no need to argue anymore. Just hop in and fly right into mars guys.
Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth.
- Mike Tyson -
We're you on the wrong short?
@@Top10soon no, he is on point, the amount of planning that actually needs to be done for a successful Mars mission and the amount of planning that Musk has done are not even in the same ballpark. The video makes it seem so simple, but it is not, hence the very appropriate Mike Tyson quote
@corbynite2004 I don't think you can comment on how much planning has been done unless you work at Spacex lol.
@@vanbogan3712 SpaceX is a private profit-seeking company, not a government agency - they simply don't have the capacity to do anything on that scale, nor will they until taxpayer dollars have paid for all the hard lessons and paved the way to profitability. You can send a bunch of NASA engineers over to the private (profiteering) sector, but that does not put SpaceX on the same level as NASA, and it certainly doesn't make the daydreams of a demented billionaire into a sturdy foundation for the next generation of space programs. If the West wants to pretend that private companies can drive space exploration then they will only succeed at throwing money into the black hole of billionaires' pockets while BRICS+ countries win the actual space race.
@corbynite2004 @corbynite2004 I really can't take anything you say seriously sorry when you lay your biases out so clearly. I'm more inclined to trust the company that has been wildy successful since it's inception (yes even more so then NASA. There is a reason they pumped so much money into spacex) then some random internet person who's main problem clearly lies with a certain someone with lots of money. Privatisation of space has clearly worked really well and if you can't see that writing on the wall then that's a you problem bud.
Yeah, just like hyperloop, this will also revolutionize conartistry.
they already changed the name to Hypersleep.
He conceptualised the hyperloop idea and then put out a white paper for other entrepreneurs and businesses to develop it. That's why Virgin is working on hyperloop you clowns spam anything without any research
One thing is certain, sooner or later its gonna happen still people like you will exist who postponed their next target lol and still lost... Ignorance is bliss
@@zod8015 He didn't conceptualize it, the idea has already existed for over 100 years but people decided to throw it away because it was such a dumb idea.
Elon just made someone draw it again in CGI, went on interviews to promote it. And now somehow people are actually stupid enough to believe this concept works without a good working model even having been made in all those years.
It's already been shown that Elon has tried to promote stupid sci-fi concepts in order to take away funding for other modes of transport and redirect them towards him like he did in Vegas. This is just another one of those.
@@airstrike9002yes I understand Adam something fans that Elon musks public transportation ideas are usually bad but when it comes to space travel he does know what he is talking about. Look at the falcon 9 for example it has already transformed the aerospace industry by lowers launch costs far lower than the expendable rockets that we have today and now many aerospace companies are now focusing on reusability to catch up. The spacex starship is climbing out of the development phrase further every launch and when it can reliably get to orbit then everything ramps up and elon can send his starlink in mass,send Artemis to the moon and go to mars while commercial companies see the reliability and low cost so those companies attempt space ventures that were previously hindered by cost and vehicle launch size.
Edit it doesn’t matter if you got these talking points from Adam something ,common sense skeptic or whoever else my point stands and btw it’s usually Adam something fans that repeat this.
Ah man I can hardly wait for this to happen....
You'll be waiting for a very very very long time.
@monesjones8431 Wrong. 2026 for Starship landing on Mars and 2028/2029 for human landing
@PassportGaming you probably already have Leon your money for an iRobot 😂
@@PassportGamingI highly doubt that. 2040s or late 2030s is more realistic
@@MrEight8190 Can you set a reminder to come back to this comment in 2 years? I have a feeling you will be proven wrong😏
We landin on Mars before GTA 6 🗣️🗣️🗣️
Not giving spoilers but you are way off. It's going to be about 7 years after GTA V
It takes A LOT of tankers to refuel the Starship in orbit.
It's a Lie
Why? According to the diagram the starship in orbit hasn’t used any of its fuel. It should be at capacity
Current estimate says 5. Definitely more than 1 but not quite enough to justify the caps....
@@ianvanessen2166 I *think* you're being sarcastic but just in case, the starship has to use most of its own fuel in order to reach orbit. The booster only gets it started but the ship provides most of the delta V. By the time is reaches orbit it will only have maybe 1/5th of its propellant left in the tanks, some of which is needed for re-entry and landing. If they manage to get it down to 5 refilling trips that would be impressive. More likely it will be even more than that.
@@disgruntledwookie369 yes I was more so just mocking the animation. Still, I know little about rockets and found your reply informative.
“Fueled by locally produced methane”
Like there will be a service station when they get there
They’ll have everything setup now don’t worry sit down and be quiet and learn
The ship will collect methane from the atmosphere
Awesome plan! So few things could go wrong🥳
@@universeslap that's how you improve bud, now keep sitting there working the same job till you retire
@@ilikeanimals5015 I would rather Improve Earth's ecosystem, than fuel some billionaire's wet dream.
" Get your ass to Mahz ."
- Quaid
😂
- You are not you: you're me.
- No shit...
😂
😂 Lol
A fast mission of 245 days (8 mos.) round-trip could be possible with on-orbit staging. A round-trip to Mars can take about 21 months, including a three-month wait on Mars for the planets to be in a suitable position for the return trip.
This is like that rowboat problem where you can't put the dog and sheep on the same boat
No it isn't. There doesn't need to be a second starship already on Mars, they just did it for illustrative purposes.
Use a sheepdog
This made me laugh way more than it should’ve
Except not at all
@@Frustrasted shhhhh
The gravity on Mars is just under 40% that of Earth, so it definitely is a gravity well. There’s also the issue of the change in velocity needed to drop from Mars’ orbit to that of Earth.
Shhhh- dont tell the elon fans
Oh shit everyone, annasdad8008 thought of something the scientists forgot! The whole plan is shot now
@@PatsRule1224 Why dont you attack their argument instead of their character... Oh that is right, thinking is hard, but I believe you'll be able to do it someday.
@@fomori2 what argument? Lmao
@@4Lucy_ Musk has already identified and addressed these issues. His plans very specifically take them into account. The issue here isn’t the SpaceX plane for going to Mars, it is the poorly written script for this video. Maybe you should check such facts before criticizing someone else.
I'll just pay the Guild of Navigators to fold space and time.
Out of spice.
@@TucsonDude nahhh out of spice is crazy, get those desert mines going
This reminds me of my dad talking about winning a Marathon race when he hasn't gone past his mailbox in 52 years
This reminds me. Many years ago
..
"I lost my heart to a Starship Trooper"
Me too. Man, she is gorgeous 😍
This must be a solid plan and totally legit - just look, they got an ANIMATION!
They obviously can work what's the problem
@@dinamiteurdinamiteur2324 Yeah, great argumentation, they "can work". Just like the hyperloop theoretically "could work" but doesn't even after years and years. It is the usual money laundering from the worlds #1 con artist.
@@dinamiteurdinamiteur2324 bruh. Starship is a joke
@@PWATR you are a joke, and as smart as a dead seagul.
Keep it quiet
NASA only ever has animations and artist renderings. NASA is BS.
Everything is possible when u know how to maneuver the mouse 😂😂
*_?!_*
@@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ keep up
What does this even mean. Please your phone and your remaining brain cells to search on this same platform “SpaceX launch” and you will see they’ve done 100’s maybe 1000’s of earth orbiting payload launches
if over simplification was an olympic sport, you’d get a gold
I'm fine with this Mars plan, we should always push forward.
It's a waste of time. The moon is a far better choice for a base. The gravity of mars is only 38 percent of earth, it doesn't have a magnetosphere, and a round trip takes at least 21 months, whereas a round trip to the moon takes about 6 to 8 days. The effects of low gravity make it impossible for long term stays on both the Moon and Mars. And besides, we haven't even figured out how to get a biosphere to work here on earth yet. We'll be lucky to see a base anywhere in our lifetimes.
@@spuriouseffect6 months since your comment and it looks like it’s going pretty will for the project to me
@@jasonjackson8111 Are you serious? Get back to me in a decade and it will still be many more decades before anyone sets foot on Mars. And there will never be a permanent colony there. It's not suitable for humans.
@@spuriouseffectI'll beg to differ 🤷♂️
if you miss your flight, you gonna have to wait for the next one,about 15 years
There is a transfer window every two years. If at some point they include nuclear/ion propulsion on board it would allow other/longer launch windows too.
Mars orbit is longer and slower, we catch up to Mars every 2 years roughly. However looking at the simulations, I wonder if there is a nice window to travel back. Because Mars' orbit is farther from ours on one side of the sun and Earth seems to catch up to Mars on that side every time, this means that as Mars approaches the closer side of its orbit, Earth is already wizzing by. Making it easy to just drop off our orbit and be caught up my Mars, but not the other way round really. Except possibly during a 3-5 month window just before Earth catches up ,which I dont think is sufficient for the 7 month ride. Could be they will have to take some insane trajectory
Also Mars is 20 000 kmh slower than Earth so you have less speed relative to both orbits.
@@blanco7726there is a window. I think it’s every 2.5 years on mars (if a year is a full rotation of the sun)
If memory serves me correctly, SpaceX estimates up to 14 launches required to fuel up for the Earth to Mars leg.
that's for the moon.
For Mars you just can't, you need propellant production there, otherwise you're screwed
@@albertofoti4152 , no... that is to fuel up to go to Mars, like I said.
It will need fuel launches for our moon as well. Apollo missions put less than 5% of its mass on our moon. Starship is so much heavier. SpaceX essentially has to launch the craft empty. A lot of loaded fighter jets have to take off and immediately refuel air-to-air, because they wouldn't get off the ground with ordinance and a full tank.
I hope this was helpful.
NASA estimates at least 15 starships to go to the moon and you think 14 will get it to Mars?😂
@@baekkistyle SpaceX said 14.
What is the difference between Mars and our moon in regards to Starship? I'll answer that for you. One has the materials to make fuel for a return trip and the other does not.
You tell me which needs more fuel. Before you answer, just know that a rocket doesn't use it's thrust for the whole trip. They get up to speed and cruise until it's time to slow down.
@@TheDwightMamba the one who needs to reach escape velocity to leave earth needs more fuel, basic physics mate, the fuel needed to get back from the moon is negligible.
And the making enough fuel on Mars to go back is another hyperloop.
Humans went to mars during the 1940s, but officially; before 2040 I think.
"How Starship will get us to Mars."
Step 1: don't explode.
Keyword: testflight
Landing in one piece is tricky too
Even the apollo missions didn't have all the failures starshit has gone through,not even during development and test. It's an embarrassment. suck it up, elon fsnboys.
@@ernestosiguenza629 Cant compare the 2 lol
@@ernestosiguenza629ion like elon but thats a moot point homie, this is kinda an entirely different thing than trying to land on the moon. im sure his giant ego is causing a lot of issues for his techs, i mean they pretty much told us that it does, but the Apollo program and this have some pretty different objectives and difficulties to overcome.
In my 7 years of studying aeronautical and space engineering, i never heard that mars does not have gravity 😅
She didn’t say no gravity. She said no large gravity well. The energy required to escape mars is much smaller than that of earth
Maybe you should get a refund
Kingduff where did you study, community college for 7 years. Video clearly says no deep gravity well to escape from.
Maybe learning to read is an issue for you
Yes, it’s all downhill from there. (Ahahahahahaha) 😂
You didn't learn how to read comprehensively though I see.
Wow. The announcer sounds like a real expert and with dat muzak playing, I so exited. I'll just bust open me piggy bank and get me a ticket then I go to Mars too wit a ham sammich, can o soda, and an extra pair o underwear's.🤪
Boomer energy
Elon wants to play the baddie on Red Faction.
So for this to work, you have to build a methane fuel factory and refuling facility on Mars. Does SpaceX have a plan for that yet?
Yes they do.
Its two different processes (The Sabatier and Reverse something i cant recall off the top of my head) with a few steps each that converts CO2, H2O, a little extra H2 and a lot of energy into pure CH4 and O2.
Its not too complicated and mostly just uses different heating techniques to both break down the said starting molecules and recombine them into the desired ones.
They never made a single roadster doubt they can pull off a facility on another planet
@@98frenchfryyou know that space x doenst produce cars right? And tesla doesnt fly to mars.
@@m2c_f87_ Neither does SpaceX. There are so many problems to work out that we'll be lucky to see a base on the Moon in our lifetimes, let alone Mars.
@@spuriouseffect To combat both the nay says here, They sent a roadster (built by Elons other main company), to Mars' orbital plane on their first attempt during a test flight...
Anyone who nays these guys are simpletons.
It will actually take six to eight flights to refuel an interplanetary Starship in orbit. Cryogenic liquid fuels are heavier than water, and although the payload capacity of Starship is huge only a very small portion could actually be used for hauling fuel due simply to a limit on mass deliverable to LEO. Alternatively what could happen is SpaceX sends up fueling missions more or less constantly, refiling an orbital depot, and it's this depot that the outbound Starships mate with.
NASAs own estimates for a flight to the Moon, is 11-15 refuelling launches, for 1 landing on the Moon.
Mars, sure, you can do some aerobreaking, etc. But also has significantly higher gravity for a propulsive landing.
All this, and Starship hasn't even made it to orbit yet...
Good luck doing that with a spaceship that hasn't seen space even once and prefers to blow up on launch. It is absolutely pathetic that SpaceX is still struggling, in 2024, with technology the USSR perfected half a century ago.
@@jonesrichardmr NASA is working off Starship V1 and Jeff Bezos estimates. Spacex says 6-8. They are basing the estimate off the Starship V3 with massively greater fuel capacity.
@@gownerjones So. Everything you said is wrong... allow me:
Spacex is profitable and will soon be Very, very profitable with Starlink adding the new e-band (already supported on 2k satellites to add backbone services to their network. Starship will allow a 10x rate of satellite capacity insertion within 12-24 months to add to this. In short, their budget will eclipse NASA in 2-3 years.
Musk likes to blow up rockets in test to push the limits and find out as much as possible while perfecting Mass production of the rockets.
That said. Missions 3 and 4 showed a successful insertion into a 200km orbit. Making a stable orbit from there wasn't helpful but would have been very, very easy.
You're referring to much less capable USSR tech that they couldn't get to work (neither methane engines or the N-1 rocket). Nor was that reusable.
Also: Spacex launched 98 times successfully other than early rocket tests of Starship. They put up more mass to orbit than the entire rest of the world combined in 2023. They are putting up 20% more this year Before Starship allows them to 5x that record in the next 2-3 years.
Spacex owns most of the world's satellites and is highly profitable.
So. You really need to read up before coming out with provably wrong statements.
@@gownerjones8 months since your comment and they doing great
That meets up is wild af
All the naysayers: Yeah, and the chopsticks will never work, either. Bwahahahaha!!!!!
Refueling in space looks like a big deal.
“Is it in?”
“Nah push more”
“Is it in now?”
“U got the right hole”
Huston, we have a pregnancy
That's what she said 😂
It’s such an awesome thing to think about and I believe we can and will put American boots on Mars soon. To see pictures and videos in 4K of people walking on Mars is incredible to think about.
Such a waste of resources and time. I sure wouldn't want to be the first one 😂
"Soon" 😂 bro we're at least 20 years out and those people we send will die.
Dont hold your breath. This is orders of magnitude more complicated than it should be.
@@SuperUAPwhen ww3 happens I bet you’ll take this comment back 😂
@@SuperUAPthe moon landing was for prestige who cares
They just fogot to mention that instead of a single starship tanker, there will be a fleet of them 😉
It is called process, in more simplified explanation, it means step by step...
Probably a dozen or so to refuel one Starship in LEO before heading for Mars _on its first interplanetary test flight._ And presumably there will be a dozen or so unmanned flights before it's human rated. Lot of money. Some would call it brute force, but if that's what it takes that's what it takes. Because Elon wants to be the man who made humanity interplanetary. 😊
@@nagualdesignI've heard it's like 10000 starships.
Elon va a terminar en bancarrota antes de tener una flota de naves@@nagualdesign
I dont know if i call a bunch of single launches a "fleet" but yes there will be several launches to refuel it. It could be done with a single vehicle. So fleet might be inaccurate.
Your wink makes it clear that you are suggesting they are hiding something here. Its inaccurate in its simplicity of the process sure, but its a simple concept video and its accurate as such.
Halting at moon base for refueling will be challenging but safe option for Mars colonization.
Why go to mars if we can’t go to the moon?
@@enolopanr9820can't go to moon?
What
@@nicco6818 we cant go to the moon. We lost that capability in 1972
its like waiting on a bus..in the rain, thunder and lightening ....waiting on Starship
I'm ready to move to Mars if everything happens just like shown in this video.
Just as long as it took in this video.
Bruh if it only takes 18 seconds to go to Mars, I'd rather go there than commute to work
So, for one unit of rocket on Mars you need 4 units of rockets on Earth 🧐
That's how gravity works
@@reiniermoreno1653dude put in a thinking emoji as if he just “unearthed” something… 😂
What if we managed to get a settlement on the moon? If we did that we could launch the mission to Mars from the moon which would require FAR less fuel. @@reiniermoreno1653
See also: rocket equation (you need fuel to lift the fuel)
Guessing Elon will be using Martian Farts to power the Starship...LOL
A moon base comes first. ;)
That would be a much better launch point than Earth.
It’s already there bro.
The key thing is, it will take MANY flights to get enough fuel to the tanker starship. I've heard 6 or more
How many tons of fuel are in Starship? 100 to 150 ton cargo capacity. I thought it was 3 to 5 to refuel.
I dont know about a "key thing". Its just part of the plan..
Its necessary sure, so is every other step in the process. But its not one of the hard parts of the plan.
It will just become a routine thing like the starlink launches that happen up to three times in a day.
The plan for Starship Artemis mission to the moon already requires 9+ refueling missions, because of fuel boil-off between tanker launches
Approx 24 tankers per 1 moon mission. 😂😂😂. Reusable...Sure!!!!!!
thats just to get it to the moon and not mars, and its over 10, and yes, the whole mission idea is stupid
For everyone complaining about the starship already on mars: it’s because time goes in reverse on mars. The ship leaves at the same time it arrives because it landed then went back in time a little.
What the stupidity are you blabbing about
Beans must be their main source of protein for the return trip.
how about cow farts ? they will bring some i heard
Bon voyage to whoever want's to go there, I love the earth and will stay here.
LOL 😂, the launch from the flat line is hilarious.....
Return trip? We'll figure that out when you get there 😉🙊
The crew that sets up the methane plant won’t be coming home.
@@sid35gbcrew? We've got robots that can flip switches.
We don't need a crew to make methane on Mars.
This made me feel as if it happen daily.
it's 2022 and we still don't have a proper space station and a fuel station.
What are they needed for here?
@@mdcclxxviepluribusunum1066 pizza and beer
Because humanity has only one Elon Musk.
@@zod8015which humanity
"Then a miracle occured" Camouflaged in a sneaky manner .
What the hell!!! I cannot get over how close Mars is to us!!
Thats Besides the point, but many in this comment section dont get that
When the time to travel to mars comes it won't look this prehistoric to future humanity .
Well done camera man
I never knew that both planets weren't moving through space.
Must be really real. This animation proves it.
What are you implying?
@@c0rtikoZteroids1what do you think they’re implying? It’s pretty obvious
@@c0rtikoZteroids1 They aren't smart enough to know how to imply anything
Forgot the part where you need about 100 launches to refuel the one actually going to Mars. Ideally they want to get a Starship launch to $10 million a pop. For reference, the 2020 Perseverance rover cost $242 million just for launch.
It's an oversimplification of the plan, but yes. This is basically it.
That will be cool to see a starship in a museum one day that has sat on Mars.
Good thing Mars is so close like the picture shows.
if refueling stage fails, that’s REALLLYYY bad
Well if any stage fails it's really bad...
Not really. It's done in low Earth Orbit. If refueling fails, they just return.
sometimes you get fuel. Sometimes fuel misses you and you have to drift away in space
Or one tiny thing goes wrong and it bumps into you and bounces off, now you all get sucked out into the voids of space.
I don't think either of you understand how docking in space work. The iss have done this over a dozen times. They have huge distances to make adjustments until meeting up.
@@TaylorWillis-f6w Blown, not sucked
The part you got wrong is- The crewed starship has to meet up (in orbit) To top off the fuel tanks with *EIGHT STARSHIP TANKERS* once eight fuel transfers have been completed the crewed starship can start its journey to Mars. Elon makes it sound trivial in regards to creating rocket fuel from the Mars resources.
If creating rocket fuel from the Martian atmosphere and regolith (AKA dirt) is viable. Then why hasn't he created his own jet fuel on Earth?
The whole thing is BS! Rockets cannot produce forward momentum in a vacuum!
Because on Earth you can just order a delivery... That is, making it yourself is not necessarily the fastest nor cheapest way.
@Dave Wow are confidently incorrect. You should go back to gradeschool and learn about Newton's laws of motion.
I did think they put up one tanker starship that gets refueled by many other tankers until full, after that launch the crew starship and transfer all the fuel they need from the tanker in orbit.
Starship doesn't use "jet fuel" as a propellant...
@@pada443 My Dear Pa da you should watch the experiment if a feather and fan in a vacuum chamber! Newton has been proved wrong on many occasions. Maybe you should keep up with science of today not yesterdays?
That was a quick demo. Knowing in reality it'll take 4 years.
So much hate coming from the comments, but this is actually a pretty accurate (simplified) depiction of SpaceX's plan to go to Mars. A less simplified version with more accurate minor details can be found in resources such as SpaceX's website.
BS! With the load capacity to get into orbit, it would need at least 10 filling trips. Please guys do your math instead of believing a commercial homepage!
Not hate, realism... this isn't going to happen anytime soon and probably not at all under Musks leadership. Just the truth.
As an orbital dynamics engineer, I can tell you that this is not an accurate planetary transfer plan
In short it's a one-way trip to Mars.
Sheets, Wawa and Buc-ee's need to start making space refilling stations. 😂😂
Accurate but requires something like 14 refuelings in orbit, right?
Upper stage have 1200tons of propellent capacity and 140tons of payload, so like 8-9 to full capacity
@alfonsomarrero9742 I think you are not taking burn off into account
@@CSryand2m and that's just to get to the moon, not Mars
"The moment we step out of this Earth, we are no longer Homo Sapiens (Humans)"
-Wise student Spartan
the quantity of resources and industrial infrastructure necessary to create "locally produced methane" is staggering beyond belief...
if you had me on board the ship it would be no problem at all.
Its only beyond belief for those that have no idea what it takes...
Its not that difficult and only takes two processes to do so. Using CO2, water and a little supplemental hydrogen.
And a lot of energy... But when its going to be done by a company that can take hundreds of tons per vehicle and just happens to be run by a person that also started a solar company and another that makes more batteries then almost anyone, its not even a problem, its just part of the plan.
I'm so happy someone actually did this because it will help people who have a hard time understanding by hearing and more of a visual I can't say that word😂
This is complicated one mistake and the entire mission fails along with millions
Why do you think we haven't done it yet
Better fail and done then not doing
Nice mindset buddy
You meant billions of dollars?
"Locally produced methane" might be the easy part, reentry and landing is very hard and just going to land on the moon will take over 16 refuelings.
In fact it is not that easy and trivial at all
Well nobody knows the number its gunna take to refuel but that is irrelevant. And to be clear going to Mars takes hardly any more fuel than going to the moon.
Escaping Earths influence takes 90+% of that fuel and you have to do so in both cases.
@Vatsyayana87 NASA said up to 20 refuels for starship. Nasa made it to the moon in 1 launch, and Blue origin will only do it 1. Not a spacex hater but don't underestimate the difficulty of this
@@michaelvernon9459lol what? 20 to the moon? That doesn’t add up at all. Blue origin hasn’t even gone to high orbit so I don’t trust their claims.
Also when nasa went to the moon, they only put a lander on the moon. The ship stayed in orbit. And they hard landed back on earthy sacrificing the landing vehicle to dissipate heat. 2 refuels might make sense. 1 to get to the moon and land, the second on the way back to have enough fuel to land safely. I’d guess there is a good chance that maybe required for mars as well. One refuel on mars, a second in earth orbit before landing. Still beats what NASA or blue Origin plan.
Go ElON!
@@spanishflea634 we will go to Mars and Venus at first.
What’s cool about this all is that once’s transportation becomes common, there will be a point where you look out the window mid way through the journey and see the other one coming back. I mean most likely you won’t see it as they would be too far away but maybe they decide to make the paths closer just for that novelty
It lands on the dislike button 🤣
Yes 😂
Imagine just watching mars slowly get bigger and bigger as you fly twords it in space for 6 months
I wish planets were this close and we’d have vacation on them regularly 😊
SpaceX be giving out "fart tanks" so that everyone can contribute methane for their rockets.
pretty confident this takes way more than 2 launches to achieve
Propulsion in a vacuum is like being in quicksand. They haven't explained this hurdle.
I think it might suprise us all how fast it is here
It takes about 3 to 22 minutes to send a command to Mars depending where Earth and Mars are aligned...so that Rocket better be able to do for the most part it's own calculations and alignments to keep from crashing.
Illustrations makes everything looks simple but the design and implementation is not that simple
I would send a tank of Methane to Mars, as a backup. Kind far away to be stuck with no fuel for the return trip.
They’re bringing Taco Bell as a reserve source of fuel
I don't wanna hear about mars until the moon gets landed on first,,
I booked my ticket to mars ! A first clas seat !
Mom after taco bell: "We have locally produced methane at home"
we need rico with his air bending power 😂
ah, just need to refuel at the local mars station