Want To Explore Mars? Send Humans To The Moons Of Mars First: Phobos And Deimos

humans to Mars that’s the plan right the
problem is that sending humans down to the surface of Mars is one of the most
complicated and ambitious goals that we can attempt it’s a huge step to go from
low-earth orbit then lunar landings then all the way to Mars a journey of
hundreds of millions of kilometers in two years at the least but there are two
places humans can go which are a stepping-stone between Earth and Mars
base camps that would let us gather our resources in relative safety before
dropping down into that gravity well I’m talking about the moons of Mars Phobos
and Deimos all the focus is on Mars and with good reason it’s pretty much the
only place that kind of resembles Earth in the solar system it has the same
length of day polar caps of carbon dioxide and water ice and daytime
temperatures that can be almost reasonable but we’ve also seen that Mars
eats spacecraft for breakfast of the 18 spacecraft given the task of landing on
the surface of Mars only nine have actually made it down safely and we’re
able to carry out their mission that’s 50% are we willing to risk the lives of
half the people we send to the Red Planet not to mention the increased
challenge of landing heavier payloads on Mars filled with soft and squishy humans
now I’ve done a whole video about why this is so difficult and check it out
here but Mars has two moons Phobos and Deimos offer an interesting alternative
instead of going directly from Earth to the surface of Mars humanity could set
up a station on these rocky moons a base camp for a serious and safer attempt on
Mars Phobos is the larger of Mars’s moons and it’s 27 kilometers on its
longest time engine it’s similar in composition to a C type or carbonaceous
chondrite asteroid planetary scientists think it was either a captured asteroid
or the debris from an ancient impact a long time ago it’s covered in fine
powder made from eons of micro meteorite impacts and has absolutely no atmosphere
the moon in orbits above Mars at an altitude of
5000 989 kilometres and takes only seven hours and 39 minutes to complete an
orbit around the planet damos is smaller just 15 kilometers
across at its longest part in orbits Mars every 30 hours had a much higher
altitude of twenty three thousand four hundred and sixty kilometers so what
would it take to set up a base on these moons and why is it any better than just
going directly to Mars even though it’s less massive than the earth Mars still
has a significant gravity well in order to go from the surface of Mars to low
orbit you need a velocity change of three point six kilometers per second
and if you want to go from Mars back to earth you need a velocity change of six
kilometers per second in 2015 three engineers from NASA JPL proposed a
minimal architecture for human missions to Mars proposing a series of missions
which establish a beachhead on one of Mars moons first before sending humans
down to the planet they suggested that a campaign to send humans to Mars would be
broken up into four major stages first missions would be sent to Phobos to set
up infrastructure on the moon next astronauts would go down to the surface
for a one month day then a longer one-year expedition would be carried out
and finally there would be the move to a permanent presence on Mars setting up a
presence on Phobos would require four launches of the Space Launch System
block two but SpaceX starships would work nicely to the first three rockets
would carry supplies a Phobos habitat and a return vehicle for astronauts to
come home the fourth launch would take an Orion capsule with four astronauts to
Mars following a 200 to 225 day trajectory to bring them to Phobos the
astronauts would live on the Fobo station for about 500 days performing
science on Phobos then they’d come home maybe even make a side visit over to
damos on the way taking another 250 days to return based
on the lessons learned from the Phobos mission the actual landing on Mars would
take another six SLS launches there’d be more supplies and a 75 ton Mars landing
vehicle which would wait in a high Mars orbit finally crew would launch from
Earth make the journey to the Fobo station and then prepare for a landing
on Mars when the conditions were right two crew would transfer to the descent
vehicle and land on Mars spending about a month down on the surface while the
other two astronauts remain on Phobos the first human would set foot on the
surface of Mars sometime in the 2030s or 2040s at the end of their month they’d
climb into their ascent vehicle returned to Phobos and then all the astronauts
would come home again with everything tested and proven more Rockets would
launch to Mars carrying more supplies for the Fobo station and a growing Mars
base and astronauts would carry out year-long expeditions on Mars and
eventually there’d be a permanent presence on Mars with overlapping crews
at Phobos at the growing Mars base and in transit now I know the joke you’re
gonna make that SpaceX will be sending starships a decade earlier and this
whole process is relevant haha stupid NASA maybe but Mars is completely
hostile to human life there’s absolutely no infrastructure there today and nobody
has fully thought-out the thousands of details it’ll take for humans to survive
there permanently it’s hundreds of days away with our fastest rockets and anyone
who does go to Mars will be beyond any kind of rescue if anything goes wrong
and when it comes to Mars you need to assume that things are going to go wrong
anyway if starship does fly then NASA just
becomes a customer and gets to do these missions cheaper faster with more
redundancy and safety remember that NASA is SpaceX’s biggest customer it turns
out that Phobos might actually make the perfect spot for a partial space
elevator in a 2003 paper entitled space
colonization using space elevators from Phobos NASA engineer Leonard Weinstein
looked into the feasibility of this idea a tether could be lowered down from
Phobos ending just above the atmosphere of Mars from the surface of Mars the end
of the tether would be moving through the sky at a velocity of only half a
kilometre a second passing over a spot on Mars twice a day payloads could be
launched from the surface of Mars and get captured by the bottom end of the
tether and then carried up to Phobos over about two days a second elevator
could even carry material up to the orbit of Deimos and I know this sounds
kind of extreme but when you think about the orbital mechanics
it actually takes less energy to carry material from Phobos to lunar orbit than
it does to get it from the surface of the Moon we’ve talked about Phobos as a
way station with a shortstop to Deimos but it might be that Deimos is actually
a better place to set up shop and I’ll get to that in a second but first I’d
like to thank Richard Campbell Michael Valles cristobal and the rest of our 818
patrons for their generous support the educational content should be freely
available to anyone in the world and the patrons make this possible join our
community at patreon.com slash universe today and get in on the action in the
2013 presentation Lockheed Martin engineer Josh Hopkins proposed that
Phobos and Deimos make sense as the first place for exploration by humans
and made this case that damos is even better
both Phobos and Deimos are tidally locked to Mars which means they always
show the same face to the surface of the planet
astronauts stationed on one of these moons would be able to tell or operate
Rovers and sample return missions with essentially no delay from its higher
altitude damos actually sees more of the surface of Mars than Phobos 98% of the
planet is visible from the moon with its slower path across the sky
Deimos would have the ability to communicate with the surface for almost
60 hours continuously while Phobos slips over the horizon every four point two
hours regions near the North Pole of damos would be in constant
sunlight and also have a constant view down to the surface of Mars getting to
and from damos would actually be easier needing about 400 meters per second last
change in velocity so imagine everything I said for a mission to Phobos but
replace that with damos instead but if we really want to stay we’ll want to
tunnel down inside Deimos and this is according to Jim Logan the co-founder of
the space Enterprise Institute during a recent presentation at a conference in
Seattle about space settlement Logan suggested that it should be possible to
build a permanent habitat inside damos I wasn’t there for the seminar but Alan
Boyle from geek wire was and he captured this cool photo of Logan’s talk
according to Logan the original idea for an O’Neill cylinder underestimated just
how much radiation shielding would be necessary by about a third
so remember when I said that they’d need forty five thousand starship launches to
build an O’Neill cylinder it turns out we might need a hundred and fifty
thousand instead but it should be possible to dig a tunnel right through
the center of Deimos from end to end and maybe call on Elon Musk’s boring company
to do the work the interior of Deimos is assumed to be porous and engineers would
find reserves of water ice precious metals and minerals as they dug through
which would support pretty much any scale of Base it could even be large
enough to put rotating habitats inside the moon to provide artificial gravity
for the inhabitants positions solar panels at the poles where they get
almost eternal sunlight all this focus on Mars but there’s a case to be made
for the moons of Mars Phobos and Deimos to serve as the first places we visit in
the region then we’ve got a good solid base camp and we make a serious attempt
on the red planet what do you think does it make more sense to focus on Phobos
and Deimos first let me know your thoughts in the comments here are the
names of the patrons who support us at the $10 level and more want to see your
name here in the work we do go to patreon.com/scishow
verse today once a week I gather up all my space news into a single email
newsletter and send it up it’s got pictures brief highlights about the
story and links so that you could find out more go to universe today comm slash
newsletter to sign up did you know that all of my videos are also available in a
handy audio podcast format so you can have the latest episodes as well special
bonus material like interviews with me show up right on your audio device go to
Universe Today calm some audio or search for Universe Today on iTunes Spotify or
wherever you get your podcasts I’ll put a link in the show notes if people do
start to explore the surface of the Moon or Mars the one a place that’s safer and
protected watch this video to find out why lava tubes make the best place to

100 thoughts on “Want To Explore Mars? Send Humans To The Moons Of Mars First: Phobos And Deimos”

  1. With human exploration, we have to go with baby steps. Phobos and Deimos make a lot of sense. However they might not provide as many resources for in-situ fuel production.

  2. Interesting idea there, Fraser, but I don't see it happening.
    At first, the 50% success rate, started in the 70ties. Since then we've been increasingly better at hitting the goal.
    Second, we wouldn't gaine any advantage with peoples on the Moons.
    Except no time dilation.
    Before we will be able to put astronauts on the moons of Mars, technology will make Mars rovers so much more autonomous.
    Btw. I would be sad to sit on the moon, looking down onto the surface of the object that's really the goal.

    Although. I always love your videos. 👍
    You've never failed to enlighten me.

  3. Thanks for the thought-provoking video. However I don't see many advantages to setting up camp on one of the moons as opposed to simply staying in Martian orbit on a spacecraft or space station. There is very little gravity on these moons so probably no health advantage. I don't see how we learn anything about landing and living on Mars by setting up camp on one of these moons. It would be just like living on our own moon but with essentially 0 g. It reminds me of NASA's idea of setting up the LOP-G station near the moon, in order to go to the moon. Why not just go to the moon? Same thing here: just go to Mars.

  4. I agree! It's strange that Mars' moons get so little attention. Hopefully probes will successfully land, analyze their internal composition, and pave the way for manned followup missions.

  5. The idea of sending people to Mars' moons seems legit. Although who will make it there? NASA or SpaceX?
    Unless Gen Z can make their own space company which will lead us to space exploration.

  6. Let us wait for better AI. better to send advanced machine. Just imagine that we will have wars. Those guys on mars would be as good as dead shortly. They failed to mention what is there for humans.

  7. In the Anime Knights of Sidonia, humans have had to build a massive city inside an Asteroid.
    I love the idea of a massive O'Neal Cylinder inside One of the moons of Mars, I would be down to move there and build an Aquaponics System to grow fish and fruits and vegetables.

    That for sharing and as always keep building👍

  8. Nasa is terrible at long term planning on massive projects….if Starship is completed by 2024 and can take 100T to Mars and can refuel in orbit i see SpaceX beating Nasa by decades….and also i think those astronauts would rather be in a Spacecraft that is the size of a jetliner instead of a tiny ass pod for 2-5 years

  9. We no longer need the SLS2, it is a vastly deeper gravity well than Mars will ever be, when you are talking money. The answer is to send humans directly to the surface of Mars, because the moons of Mars will make Mars no safer. Landings will always have a risk involved, so may as well go for the prize. Spacex re-usable hardware is the way.

  10. i like this because it's capabilities driven approach, slowly build up and make something robust. Not like Apollo, which was brute force

  11. Why? If you are 2 years from Earth… Why not start your base on the planet? Seems like you are splitting your resources and over complicating.

  12. I say it is best to wait until we have faster spacecraft. Not until you can make a one way trip in 2 months or less does it make much sense to go to Mars.

  13. Hi Fraser. Has there been any good research done to find out if you can make Mars regolith into usable soil to grow plants in? Do we even know enough about Mars regolith to make an accurate simulant or do we need to wait for a sample to return to Earth first? I know there is bad stuff that would have to be removed first but if that was even possible does it also remove any good nutrients that the dirt would have in it? If we are having to send all food to Mars I worry that would limit how much we could populate the planet. I am sure that we could grow some things hydroponically but that really limits the variety of food we could grow. What are your thoughts?

  14. Visiting them: yes
    Bases on them: no

    1) We need to find out what the moons offer. The speculations about water and carbon haven't been confirmed. JAXA might be able to confirm if Phobos physically has something with a proposed mission they're sending.
    2) You'd still have to deal with deep space radiation and weightlessness.
    3) The orbital mechanic benefits will only be useful when you have fuel production up and running.

    I do agree Deimos could be useful from a communications POV; I'd even think pushing it into a synchronous orbit as a space tether mount would be worth it. I disagree that a base would be worth it in the immediate future though; long-term maybe.

  15. Phobos and Deimos provides no gravity so the astronauts will be stuck in zero-gravity for two years! They lack ISRU resources to make liquid methane. And building a space elevator will probably delay the project by several hundred years. Way to go NASA! 🤪

  16. So if you tunneled through Deimos and built a habitat, could you just add a bit of spin with every mission and use that for artificial gravity? Could it stay tidally locked and then spin end over end?

  17. I agree with the Mars moon's staging area's..Just imagine if astronauts got there and a huge dust storm developed on Mar's then the astronauts could wait it out in safety on one of the moons

  18. simultaneously develop phobos/mars. Land methane and oxygen plants on mars and robot base+supplies on Phobos. Astronauts follow 2 years later and use Phobos atransit point to mars. With starship, nasa could send enough astronauts to man Phobos, mars and transit-return vehicle simultaneously (30+ astronauts)

  19. Fraser, would it be possbloble to add rockets to an asteroid to create spin, and live inside that asteroid with some amount of resulting gravity?

  20. Deimos … the literal stepping stone … Makes total sense. It is easier, safer, more likely to succeed and less costly before going to Mars. The people should commit to at least 4 years to make the trip worth while (much more cost effective than sending more people for less time). Also people on Deimos can operate telepresence robotics & equipment on Mars with acceptable latency. They would be busy preparing & constructing the Mars base with remote controlled equipment.
    Another key reason for Deimos is setting the foundation to terraform Mars. This requires thousands of square miles of 10 micron thick mirrors to reflect sunlight to warm the surface. A mirror cluster in Mars geo synchronous orbit would constantly heat the colony to near earth temperatures. Sunlight reflected off the mirrors would spread over a 40 mile spot due to solid angle of the sun and altitude of geosynchronous orbit. Deimos is better than Ceres because it is very close to the geosynchronous orbit, thus Mirrors constructed from Deimos material could be lowered to geosynchronous orbit with a "space elevator" swing that releases the payload with the correct velocity and altitude. Instead of colonists (and their equipment & dwellings) on Mars enduring -80C, they would be at 0 degrees C. And eventually, automated production on Deimos would produce 12 million square miles of orbiting mirrors which would heat the whole planet to temperate earth climate conditions pole to pole.
    Finally, a spaceship design optimized for getting from Earth (or Lunar) orbit to Deimos makes practical sense. And another transport ship designed for strictly going between Deimos and Mars is much more effective. A Deimos way station to Mars is crucial for success. It is a relatively easy to achieve this stepping stone to Mars with early payoffs and long term value. Cost, schedule, performance and risk are all excellent.

  21. Using Phobos to anchor a Martian sky hook seems like fun… right up until you use it one too many times and de-orbit the moon. Does the plan include anything like a mass driver on Phobos to recover the momentum loss from lifting all the mass up from Mars?

  22. I just had an idea. Instead of building rotating structures why not rotate entire asteroids or small moonlets like Phobos? It would require a lot of fuel to get them moving but without atmospheric drag technically you could do it over a long time. The structure then would just be a static cave dug into the rock and the spin of the asteroid itself would provide the acceleration. I don’t know how the physics would work out, if you need to cancel out the gravity of the asteroid itself, how fast it needs to spin, etc. Might not be practical?

  23. You're suggesting we leave astronauts in microgravity for over 2 years. That seems more dangerous than doing a direct landing. There is no safe way to explore space. There is far more chances for something to go wrong in this kind of long, complicated series of missions you are suggesting than process Musk is planning. 2040? Nonsense! Go Spacex, Mars by the 2020s.

  24. I like the phobos crane idea but, if you go that route why not make a martian space elevator. Mars has less gravity than earth and it rotates at a similar velocity. A space elevator there should be much more practical than on earth or the moon.

  25. With an escape velocity of just 13 MPH, I could see Elon Musk landing a car onto Deimos just so he could drive it off into space.

  26. Still not buying it. If direct isn't good enough, then anything that has benefits over direct can be achieved in Mars orbit instead, no extra landings on other bodies required. Landing elsewhere only makes sense if in-space manufacturing technology is already mature.

  27. Yeah absolutely it makes more sense to focus on the moons of Mars first, I agree. But it makes even more sense to focus on our own moon before embarking on any major long term projects on Mars. There's no other body in the solar system that's closer to us than the moon. It would be the easiest place for humanity to establish and maintain a permanently settled forward base, and set up manufacturing. It's even got water and H3! Mars is awesome, but it can wait, it aint going nowhere. Thoroughly colonizing and using the resources and convenience of our own moon first would give us the experience and resources we need to tackle the rest of the solar system.

  28. The problem with carrying out manned mission to Phobos and Deimos before a mission to do a manned landing to Mars is how this would be viewed by the public: It would likely be, after initial enthusiasm, seen as ultimately disappointing: "They went all the way to Mars and then they didn't land?" And imagine being an astronaut who spent first years training and theng two years in space on a mission where you flew to Mars but never set your feet beyond Phobos' surface? Anti-climactic. Manned outposts on Phobos and Deimos, as much as they would have to offer, should only come after, or simultaneously, with the establishment of a permanent human presence on the Martian surface – because pragmatic reasons are secondary when it comes to good publicity: When humanity goes to Mars, it has to land. And when it comes to rehearsing for a manned Mars landing mission through deep space missions that won't land, we have Venus where a manned orbital mission operating robotic missions to the atmosphere and surface would both serve a future Mars mission and gain a lot of scientific knowledge (perhaps finding out whether there is microbial life in the Venusian clouds!) without looking like a disappointment – "They turned back before landing to Mars! Why?!"

  29. I've had thoughts about Venus maybe once having hosted a civilization, but they destroyed themselves by causing a runaway greenhouse effect.

  30. All this sounds much more reasonable than trying to set up a base on Mars straight away. Honestly, I believe the whole idea of colonizing Mars in the near term is pointless. We could learn everything we need to learn with robotic missions at a tiny fraction of the cost. Would it not be better to wait another 10 or 20 years for technology and knowledge to advance and then make an attempt? I would imagine in 20 years robotic technology may be advanced enough to mine materials and build habitats on Mars before humans even arrive.

  31. I have an atypical opinion of how we should explore beyond Earth orbit. I think that we'd be wise to wait until we have a sophisticated, mature nanotechnology. It would be so much easier to just toss a capsule full of assemblers onto the Martian soil, and sit back and watch as they built any desired structure, and necessary infrastructure to go with it, from local materials. Settlers wouldn't need to protect themselves from radiation, either; medical nanobots could repair any cellular damage caused by it, as well as deal with any illness or injury.

  32. Clearing off the list of NEO's through telerobotic asteroid mining is the most important thing to do in space right now. Incremental mass reduction done through a myriad of low energy cost schemes can be developed for that. Then every asteroid, comet, planetesimal, moon, planet that's not Venus, Luna, Earth, and Mars should be exploited to the last molecule saving any discovered biota for xenozoos for biology research of course. The exploitation and utilization should be done for x^4 spherical expansion into outer space through void borne colonies. This way when we reach the first closest star we won't be far away from reaching the second, then the next 4, next 15, next 200, and so on.

  33. Lots of pretty pictures of astronauts walking around on moons that have no gravity. The longer you stay out there around Mars, the sooner you'll be fitted for your coffin. Nobody is coming back from Mars in good shape. Nobody.

  34. I think it's a great idea! We should use everything we have at our disposal to get to Mars safely and efficiently! We could also do some missions to asteroids first!

  35. A tether lowered from Phobos INTO the atmosphere could be used with a drag device able to handle the heating, and could bring Phobos down to collide with the surface. The resulting ceater would be so deep that there would be a thick enough atmosphere at the bottom that water would be liquid and no pressure suit needed. Oasis crater with a lake at the bottom and rainfall with only an oxygen mask needed If you want an O'Neil habitat, perhaps TK72010 is the best bet if a Venus assist can work to lower the required delta V.

  36. Why is it easier to land on the moons of Mars than Mars itself.
    You still need to slow the space craft down to slow speed to land on.

  37. I wish we could transform the military industrial into a space industrial focusing on putting people and infrastructure elsewhere to progress humanity into the future. It would require a one world governance abandoning all war forever to instead embark on the endeavor of unity, progress, and exploration. Instead of military for deployment to wars on the other side, we could have military for peace mission in space and on Earth with the official narrative of uniting and progressing humanity the way forward. Going to space could make a most patriotic military service and one that offers true career opportunities to those who are brave, noble, and true go getters as well as tons of career jobs for all the support personnel on and near the Earth. How hard can this be to do since it would make brilliant sense?

  38. We should give Musk a chance, give them time to terraform with modified nukes. But, if that were to work, then it happened there before already. So maybe we need to wait for the inevitable breakthrough in chemistry or physics, or wait for humans to evolve again.

  39. Okay, I get that it'd be far easier to get people on Phobos or Deimos from a delta-v standpoint, but wouldn't all the other technical hurdles to overcome in going to Mars still hold? I'm talking about the crew's radiation exposure en-route and on-site, the fact we haven't quite figured out how to keep people in space for extended periods of time without resupplies (we haven't even figured that out properly here on Earth, see the whole Biosphere 2 debacle)… Don't get me wrong, the idea of having a large underground base on the Moon or Mars, or one of Mars' moons does speak to my imagination and I would love to see it happen in my lifetime (I'm 41 going on 42 now), but apart from a few hundreds of kilograms of Moon rocks, and a few table spoons worth of Mars soil we haven't done much in the way of extraterrestrial ground-moving.

    BTW, loved the Doom reference…

  40. That is just delaying the risk of landing on Mars. Eventually you will need to risk it anyway. Don’t play around NASA please.

  41. Moon to moon makes the most sense to me except for creating fuel, and reusability. Moon to Moon the fuel needed is minute, and tethers doable in a few launches for long term. Also, the vacuum outside means no insulation is needed to keep heat from leaking away from our domes. My personal, current imaginary dome would have Graphene strips currently being made would be used to composite with Silica Aerogel in the gaps. Like multi layered bubble wrap, but the air is Aerogel. The Aerogel would have coils of Graphene ink printed inside it. The entire thing would be inflated like a big bag and the resin could be cured by UV light or by robots that heat the surface in a spiral path to support its self. A 3d printer / robot arm could also do this from the inside too. Nano tubes could replace resin, but I do not think we will need that kind of scale at first. Aerogel is intentionally made hydrophobic to keep it structurally strong. It starts out hydro topic and this could be a big advantage taking water from a near vacuum even, and used as a passive solar shield. It could be sprayed on the inside or outside of the dome inside will have moisture though. Combined with Graphene ink printed coils we would have both passive and microwave activated printed solar shielding. If we combined our tethers with Ion engines shipping supplies of food and water, plastic from plants would cost very little to ship in space, with a reactor for the fuel ion lifts could function for decades from a single launch. The big advantages Mars has over moon to moon is methane as a fuel can be made from the atmosphere and the type of engine is highly reusable, further Mars has nitrogen, but if you can afford space, you then can afford space commerce, and trade.

  42. I vote for a science outpost on Deimos with rovers and sample returns from the surface. I can't imaging going to Mars in an Orion capsule. I would go nuts.

  43. YES! Mission to moons is a much better first step. It’s more like docking than landing, whereas everyone tends to overlook that the Curiosity rover at 1 ton already maxes out our total capacity payload for soft landing on the Martian surface, and nothing yet developed can extend that limit to the many tons needed for human craft and habitats. Although the very slight gravity of the moons will pose problems for astronauts balance.

  44. could we drill phobos and build gauss cannon that shoot ships between mars and earth? I don't now if this could be viable or possible to do

  45. I think this plane actually makes a lot of sense. The one thing that concerns me is that many plans for getting to Mars count on harvesting CO2 from Mars' atmosphere and converting it to methane and oxygen to refuel for the return trip to Earth. Would the energy saved landing on Phobos or Deimos make up for not being able to refuel for the return trip?

  46. I think it's not correct to say that the risk of landing on Mars for people will be the same as for these landers. Thats becase people will not land on a different spacecraft every time. We will use simillar designs, which probably even will land without humans first, so the risk should be lower.

  47. In a few million years Phobos will crash into Mars as the last unstable moon to fall into the Martian gravity well (since there is some evidence suggesting Phobos and Deimos had sibling Moons that over billions of years have met a similar fate if true then it is just the most recent in a line of casualties else it still would be the last moon to fall in since Deimos period is longer than a Martian day and thus is moving away from Mars rather than towards Mars)

    I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig to test the outcome of jumping from a tidally disrupted world. Depending on how you Jump you might end up "falling" down to the surface of Mars if your jump velocity plus the gravitational acceleration towards Mars exceed Phobos's gravity. It would also probably be a shame to let all that mass fall back into a gravity well, though it would certainly be a spectacle to see naturally one that would be very bad for any resident Martians.

  48. Just add two zeroes to any plan that involves building a base on phobos or deimos. If you're going to build a base it should be on the moon due to the fact that the travel time means a rescue and stream of supplies is possible. Also you're a massive Elon Musk fanboy. Starship hasn't even come close to a real launch yet, let alone to the moon, let alone to Mars. Starship will probably take at least a decade of good progress before its ready for any kind of Mars mission.

  49. Deimos FTW! Sounds like a much more inspiring proposition with so many possibilities for creating awesome structures in space. With 1000km3 interior volume Deimos have enough space for a sizable city.

  50. With a surface gravity of 0.003 m/s landing on Deimos would be feather light. Almost like docking to the space station. Escape velocity is just 20 km/h, so don't run, walk 🙂

  51. The problem with this is the low gravity of Mars' moons. These missions will be so long and the negative effects on the astronauts due to low gravity will be substantial.

  52. Aside from scientific exploration, which is important, wouldn't humanity be better served by space stations and asteroid bases geared to exploit mineral resources and zero G manufacturing all without that pesky gravity well.

  53. yes, absolutely! if there were ever places truly deserving the name stepping stones in all of mankind's history, it's those two. it's almost as if they were placed there on purpose.

    play: doom.wav

  54. Why complicate the issue.. Land equipment and back up system on Mars, that valudiate a lot. Then send humans to Mars to utilize and test other systems and do science. Then scale up… Like the space station which waste 5 billion dollars from 4 space agencies… You send multiple missions every year with large rockets to Mars.

  55. Q and A:

    1) What is the shape of the Universe? I heard that it's 3 dimensional but i also heard that it's flat.

    2) I heard that the Universe is expanding faster than the speed of light. If that's the case do we know HOW MUCH faster than light it's expanding? 2 times faster? 10 times faster? Can we actually calculate that speed?

  56. Here is a question. Talking about jet planes helping things get to orbit got me thinking about the recent Falcon HTV2 tests. Now I know these are only tests on a prototype and much more research needs tl be done before a viable vehicle is made. But do you e er envision a future where a hypersonic plane could obtain enough velocity and as such momentum to enable it to continue to orbit before that velocity is lost and then just use a smaller rocket to adjust / maintain / set the correct orbit once it is there. I know that these motors reauire the atmosphere to work so it would have to obtain a pretty fast velocity to be able to coast to orbit once the hypersonic motor cuts out, but as a large part of what they use seems to be just air, then would they be more environmentally friendly for a way of launching Non- squishy payloads?

  57. Hi Fraser.
    Why all those calculations dont consider future technologies? They do consider SLS or Starship, that dont exist yet, but dont consider fusion for example. ITER has a very specific timeline, many private companies invested billions in the technology as well. It has the same chances as Starship, to be operational by 2030..

  58. I have the Doom Soundtrack as my ringtone. Was watching this, right at the start where you have Mars in all it's glory facing you and then-
    …Is Fraser secretly the Doom Slayer?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *