A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

R.I.P. Mars One



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 12th 19, 02:03 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Alain Fournier[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 366
Default R.I.P. Mars One


Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Alain Fournier
Ads
  #2  
Old February 12th 19, 06:10 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,856
Default R.I.P. Mars One

Alain Fournier wrote on Mon, 11 Feb 2019
20:03:57 -0500:


Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Is this any surprise? Did they ever do anything but take in money?
How can you promise trips to Mars in a couple years with no rocket, no
vehicle, no nothing?


--
You are
What you do
When it counts.
  #3  
Old February 12th 19, 10:33 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,504
Default R.I.P. Mars One

On 2/11/2019 8:03 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:

Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared
bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Alain Fournier


At least they didn't get sued out of existence by grieving families.

Dave

  #4  
Old February 13th 19, 12:07 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,794
Default R.I.P. Mars One

In article ,
says...

Alain Fournier wrote on Mon, 11 Feb 2019
20:03:57 -0500:


Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Is this any surprise? Did they ever do anything but take in money?
How can you promise trips to Mars in a couple years with no rocket, no
vehicle, no nothing?


But Fred, they had pretty pictures of all their hard engineering work!
/s

Good riddance to bad rubbish, IMHO.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
  #5  
Old February 13th 19, 12:12 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,794
Default R.I.P. Mars One

In article , says...

On 2/11/2019 8:03 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:

Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared
bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Alain Fournier


At least they didn't get sued out of existence by grieving families.


What crewed spaceflight company has ever been "sued out of existence by
grieving families"?

When the US does start flying crew commercially, the FAA attitude is
more or less make sure that the participants are informed of the risk.
That's about it. I don't see this upcoming era of crewed commercial
spaceflight being that much different than early aviation when crashes
and deaths were frequent. How the heck else are we supposed to learn
how to make spaceflight routine and affordable?

I keep meaning to buy this book by one of our former frequent posters:

Safe Is Not an Option Paperback - October 31, 2013
by Rand E. Simberg (Author), William Simon (Editor), Ed Lu (Foreword)
https://www.amazon.com/Safe-Not-Opti.../dp/0989135519

I ought to just buy it on Kindle ($3.79) and read it on my phone (I
don't have a dedicated Kindle with e-Ink display).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
  #6  
Old February 15th 19, 01:17 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Alain Fournier[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 366
Default R.I.P. Mars One

On Feb/12/2019 at 12:10, Fred J. McCall wrote :
Alain Fournier wrote on Mon, 11 Feb 2019
20:03:57 -0500:


Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Is this any surprise? Did they ever do anything but take in money?
How can you promise trips to Mars in a couple years with no rocket, no
vehicle, no nothing?


I agree.

I vaguely remember another company which also had a dubious space
project. Some company, in Scandinavia I think, was proposing to use
decommissioned Russian missiles and put a space tourist where the
nuclear warhead was. I don't remember seeing anywhere that the project
has been abandoned. But I haven't seen anywhere yet that they have sent
to space a customer (or the customers corpse if said customer doesn't
survive). Does anyone remember that project? Does anyone know if it has
been officially cancelled?


Alain Fournier
  #7  
Old February 15th 19, 02:08 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,504
Default R.I.P. Mars One

On 2/13/2019 6:12 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 2/11/2019 8:03 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:

Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared
bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Alain Fournier


At least they didn't get sued out of existence by grieving families.


What crewed spaceflight company has ever been "sued out of existence by
grieving families"?


Well first. This wasn't a spaceflight company. This was an outfit
providing "one-way" trips to Mars. Kinda like those ill fated guided
tours up Mt. Everest.

When the US does start flying crew commercially, the FAA attitude is
more or less make sure that the participants are informed of the risk.
That's about it. I don't see this upcoming era of crewed commercial
spaceflight being that much different than early aviation when crashes
and deaths were frequent. How the heck else are we supposed to learn
how to make spaceflight routine and affordable?

Jeff please don't confuse spaceflight companies with Mars One.
SpaceX at least provisionally is providing a return capability for their
proposal. It may require in-situ refueling, but I'm sure they will have
that solved before sending up large numbers of people. Unlike Mars One.

I keep meaning to buy this book by one of our former frequent posters:

Safe Is Not an Option Paperback - October 31, 2013
by Rand E. Simberg (Author), William Simon (Editor), Ed Lu (Foreword)
https://www.amazon.com/Safe-Not-Opti.../dp/0989135519

I ought to just buy it on Kindle ($3.79) and read it on my phone (I
don't have a dedicated Kindle with e-Ink display).


It's an excellent read, yes you should definitely get it.
It has really nothing to do with Mars One.


Jeff


BTW, just because folks sign releases up the wazoo, doesn't mean those
left behind can't or won't sue their carrier. We've seen this time and
again with "settlements" arranged after some tragic airline mishap.

Sometimes these suits are often brought by insurance companies
themselves trying to re-coup losses on life insurance policies that
don't exclude air travel for example. In this case its insurance
companies vs insurance companies.

My take is Mars One was ill-considered from the get go. That it died
from poor organization before it got anyone killed is to its credit
actually. It would almost certainly would have had to deal with a
carrier such as SpaceX or Blue Origin to achieve its goal. Why the
middle man? Maybe once Mars flights are more common a Mars One type
"colony" company can responsibly contract flights for carriers to get
their "communities" established, with even return capability if
something goes majorly wrong. Time will tell.

Dave
  #8  
Old February 15th 19, 10:50 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,856
Default R.I.P. Mars One

David Spain wrote on Fri, 15 Feb 2019 08:08:11
-0500:

On 2/13/2019 6:12 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 2/11/2019 8:03 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:

Mars One, which was proposing one-way trips to Mars has declared
bankruptcy.

https://spacenews.com/mars-one-company-goes-bankrupt/


Alain Fournier

At least they didn't get sued out of existence by grieving families.


What crewed spaceflight company has ever been "sued out of existence by
grieving families"?


Well first. This wasn't a spaceflight company. This was an outfit
providing "one-way" trips to Mars. Kinda like those ill fated guided
tours up Mt. Everest.


Yes, this wasn't a spaceflight company because one can apparently get
people to Mars without spaceflight.

When the US does start flying crew commercially, the FAA attitude is
more or less make sure that the participants are informed of the risk.
That's about it. I don't see this upcoming era of crewed commercial
spaceflight being that much different than early aviation when crashes
and deaths were frequent. How the heck else are we supposed to learn
how to make spaceflight routine and affordable?

Jeff please don't confuse spaceflight companies with Mars One.


Yes, because you can get people to Mars just by having them click
their heels together three times and chant, "There's no place like
Mars". No spaceflight at all required.


SpaceX at least provisionally is providing a return capability for their
proposal. It may require in-situ refueling, but I'm sure they will have
that solved before sending up large numbers of people. Unlike Mars One.


What's that got to do with whether something is 'space flight' (flying
through space) or not?

I keep meaning to buy this book by one of our former frequent posters:

Safe Is Not an Option Paperback - October 31, 2013
by Rand E. Simberg (Author), William Simon (Editor), Ed Lu (Foreword)
https://www.amazon.com/Safe-Not-Opti.../dp/0989135519

I ought to just buy it on Kindle ($3.79) and read it on my phone (I
don't have a dedicated Kindle with e-Ink display).


It's an excellent read, yes you should definitely get it.
It has really nothing to do with Mars One.


I'm pretty sure no one implied that it did.


BTW, just because folks sign releases up the wazoo, doesn't mean those
left behind can't or won't sue their carrier. We've seen this time and
again with "settlements" arranged after some tragic airline mishap.


OK, name the airlines that have been sued out of existence by grieving
relatives.


Sometimes these suits are often brought by insurance companies
themselves trying to re-coup losses on life insurance policies that
don't exclude air travel for example. In this case its insurance
companies vs insurance companies.


OK, name the airlines that have been sued out of existence by grieving
insurance companies.


My take is Mars One was ill-considered from the get go.


My take is that it was within a hairs breadth of being fraud. Where
did the money go?


That it died
from poor organization before it got anyone killed is to its credit
actually. It would almost certainly would have had to deal with a
carrier such as SpaceX or Blue Origin to achieve its goal.


Yet it apparently had no plans to do either and was promising trips to
Mars before either of those companies would have vehicles.


Why the middle man?


Because they can take the money, deliver nothing, and then declare
bankruptcy.


Maybe once Mars flights are more common ...


You mean 'more common' as in 'exist'?


... a Mars One type
"colony" company can responsibly contract flights for carriers to get
their "communities" established, with even return capability if
something goes majorly wrong. Time will tell.


Perhaps, but they will be organizations that have some working
relationship with people who can actually deliver boosters and
vehicles and actual plans for sending people and equipment. Mars One
had none of that.


--
"Taught me how to shoot to kill.
A specialist with a deadly skill.
A skill I needed to have to be a survivor.
It's over now, or so they say.
But sometimes it don't work out that way.
And you're never the same when you've been under fire."
-- Huey Lewis and the News "Walking On A Thin Line"
  #9  
Old February 17th 19, 02:16 AM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,504
Default R.I.P. Mars One

On 2/15/2019 4:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
BTW, just because folks sign releases up the wazoo, doesn't mean those
left behind can't or won't sue their carrier. We've seen this time and
again with "settlements" arranged after some tragic airline mishap.


OK, name the airlines that have been sued out of existence by grieving
relatives.


It's a bit of a stretch to compare airlines to Mars One no?


Sometimes these suits are often brought by insurance companies
themselves trying to re-coup losses on life insurance policies that
don't exclude air travel for example. In this case its insurance
companies vs insurance companies.


OK, name the airlines that have been sued out of existence by grieving
insurance companies.


Not my words. Insurance companies routinely do this, it's a standard
business practice. Usually doesn't even go to court. An airline would
not be at risk because they've been indemnified by their insurance
carrier, that's why they have insurance no?



My take is Mars One was ill-considered from the get go.


My take is that it was within a hairs breadth of being fraud. Where
did the money go?


That's a great question.


That it died
from poor organization before it got anyone killed is to its credit
actually. It would almost certainly would have had to deal with a
carrier such as SpaceX or Blue Origin to achieve its goal.


Yet it apparently had no plans to do either and was promising trips to
Mars before either of those companies would have vehicles.


Why the middle man?


Because they can take the money, deliver nothing, and then declare
bankruptcy.

Excellent point. Caveat emptor.


Maybe once Mars flights are more common ...


You mean 'more common' as in 'exist'?


Touche. Yes.



... a Mars One type
"colony" company can responsibly contract flights for carriers to get
their "communities" established, with even return capability if
something goes majorly wrong. Time will tell.


Perhaps, but they will be organizations that have some working
relationship with people who can actually deliver boosters and
vehicles and actual plans for sending people and equipment. Mars One
had none of that.



Agreed, completely.
  #10  
Old February 17th 19, 07:00 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,856
Default R.I.P. Mars One

David Spain wrote on Sat, 16 Feb 2019 20:16:27
-0500:

On 2/15/2019 4:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
BTW, just because folks sign releases up the wazoo, doesn't mean those
left behind can't or won't sue their carrier. We've seen this time and
again with "settlements" arranged after some tragic airline mishap.


OK, name the airlines that have been sued out of existence by grieving
relatives.


It's a bit of a stretch to compare airlines to Mars One no?


Only because, unlike airlines, they have no ongoing relationship with
equipment providers, gates, etc. Probably be more appropriate to
compare them to a fraudulent travel agency, but that puts them even
further from being "sued out of existence by grieving relatives".


Sometimes these suits are often brought by insurance companies
themselves trying to re-coup losses on life insurance policies that
don't exclude air travel for example. In this case its insurance
companies vs insurance companies.


OK, name the airlines that have been sued out of existence by grieving
insurance companies.


Not my words. Insurance companies routinely do this, it's a standard
business practice. Usually doesn't even go to court. An airline would
not be at risk because they've been indemnified by their insurance
carrier, that's why they have insurance no?


So you're just off the topic of the thread, then?


My take is Mars One was ill-considered from the get go.


My take is that it was within a hairs breadth of being fraud. Where
did the money go?


That's a great question.


Now if only we had a great answer. Presumably the money went into the
'non-profit' side of the house and vanished.


That it died
from poor organization before it got anyone killed is to its credit
actually. It would almost certainly would have had to deal with a
carrier such as SpaceX or Blue Origin to achieve its goal.


Yet it apparently had no plans to do either and was promising trips to
Mars before either of those companies would have vehicles.


Why the middle man?


Because they can take the money, deliver nothing, and then declare
bankruptcy.


Excellent point. Caveat emptor.


There are fraud laws that would cover this.


Maybe once Mars flights are more common ...


You mean 'more common' as in 'exist'?


Touche. Yes.


I'm still trying to figure out why so much of the coverage of this
seems to assume that Mars One was legitimate, despite promising things
that don't exist.


... a Mars One type
"colony" company can responsibly contract flights for carriers to get
their "communities" established, with even return capability if
something goes majorly wrong. Time will tell.


Perhaps, but they will be organizations that have some working
relationship with people who can actually deliver boosters and
vehicles and actual plans for sending people and equipment. Mars One
had none of that.


Agreed, completely.


Mars One isolated itself from the non-profit that presumably wound up
with the money.


--
You are
What you do
When it counts.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity, now in its seventh yearon Mars, has a new capability Sam Wormley[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 1 March 24th 10 04:30 AM
Mars Express radar reveals complex structure in ionosphere of Mars(Forwarded) Andrew Yee News 0 December 1st 05 06:25 AM
Buried craters and underground ice -- Mars Express uncovers depthsof Mars (Forwarded) Andrew Yee News 0 December 1st 05 06:20 AM
Finally, southern hemisphere clouds on Mars![ Polarized clouds on Mars, further evidence for liquid water in Solis Lacus, Mars?] Robert Clark Astronomy Misc 0 August 16th 05 04:45 PM
JAXA gave up injecting Mars Orbiter "Nozomi" into orbit of Mars (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 December 10th 03 05:58 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.