The SpaceX Plan to Colonize Mars

At this week's International Astronautical Congress, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk outlined a bold and well thought out approach for the colonization of Mars based on three key principles:

1. Reusing all system components to minimize costs
2. Fueling outbound transports in orbit to maximize payload capacity
3. Enabling fuel production on Mars to eliminate the need to carry return fuel

Reusable booster rockets will carry interplanetary transport vehicles and fuel tankers into Earth orbit and return to land back at the launch site. These massive boosters, powered by 42 of SpaceX's new Raptor engines, have four times the payload capacity of the Saturn V moon rocket. Reusing these boosters not only cuts cost, but drastically reduces the time required to deliver additional payloads.

The transport vehicles will carry people and cargo back and forth between Earth and Mars, and the tankers will be used to fuel the transports in Earth orbit. This approach will allow the transports to be launched without fuel on board, maximizing the amount of people and supplies each ship can carry to Mars.

The transport ship and tanker will be based on the same fuselage design to keep costs to a minimum. Both of these ships can return to Earth using aerobraking and propulsive landing capability so they can be reused on subsequent missions, another key factor in managing costs. The transport ship will also be capable of landing on Mars and launching from there back to Earth. Since Mars' gravity is only 38% of Earth's, the transports will not require a booster rocket to return home.

In order to get back to Earth, fuel must be produced on Mars. To enable this, the Raptor engine runs on methane and oxygen, both of which can be produced on Mars using the carbon dioxide that makes up most of the atmosphere and the water ice that can be found on and under the ground. Power generated by solar panels or nuclear reactors can be used to melt the ice and split the hydrogen from the oxygen via electrolysis. Some of the oxygen can be used for rocket oxidizer, and the rest can be used for life support. The hydrogen can then be combined with the carbon dioxide in a reaction to create methane rocket fuel and water for life support.

Musk's plan is based on the (approximately) 2-year cycles of Earth-Mars orbital alignment when getting to Mars will only take 90 to 120 days. He envisions a fleet of transports that will gather in Earth orbit and all leave for Mars together at these times. This will allow large amounts or cargo and large numbers of colonists to arrive at once, increasing the odds of survival for the colonists since the loss of any one ship will have less overall impact on the mission.

All of this sounds amazing, yet what makes it plausible is that SpaceX is already a successful, fully-integrated space systems provider, and they have already developed many of the technologies required for this plan to succeed. However, there are still some major obstacles to clear:

• SpaceX will need a lot of additional cash to complete this plan. Musk was clear that he will need funding help from both the private and public sector to get the system built.
• The booster and transport/tanker vehicles are still being designed, and there are major technical challenges to be worked out along the way. For example, the design calls for composite fuel tanks to keep weight down, but it may be difficult to make this material work at this scale and with the temperatures and pressures required as Lockheed learned during their failed attempt to build the SSTO Venture Star space transport back in 2001.
• How the colonists will be housed, fed, and protected from radiation on the long journey to Mars is still being worked out. Musk believes the radiation risk is small and can be mitigated by keeping the ship pointed away from the sun during the transit, using the engine, fuel tanks, water stores, and cargo to shield the passengers.
• How the proper landing sites will be selected and prepared prior to the first colonists' arrival is still to be determined. Building enough habitat for hundreds or thousands of colonists is a large task, and making sure that fuel production and food production facilities are already in place is critical to success. If you land too far from the ice, or if one of the transports crashes on the fuel factory, the mission is doomed.
• Exactly how the colony will be sustained in terms of food, water, air, and housing is still not clear. We'll need to figure out how to build and maintain airtight and radiation-proof structures using as much local material as possible. We'll also need to learn how to grow food on Mars.
• Having a lot of people on Mars will require some form of local government. Just like on Earth, there will be disagreements, crimes, and other problems between people that will have to be dealt with. You will need police, courts, and jails.
• Since there will be men and women, there will be babies. Education facilities will be required at some point.
• What will be the basis of the colonists' economy? Will they be employees of SpaceX? Will they get (or even need) a salary? Will there be taxes? How will goods and services be equitably distributed?

Musk indicated a belief that building a self-sustaining colony on Mars would be a 40 to 100 year process, and he plans to start sending the first ships by 2018. These would initially be the smaller unmanned Dragon capsules, followed by the large colonial transports in 2023. Assuming he can get the funding, given the estimated costs and life expectancy of the various ships, he believes he can deliver people and cargo to Mars for less than $140,000 per ton. This is an amazing achievement when compared to the cost of current approaches for interplanetary travel.

Finally, we should consider the human element of this endeavor. Life on Mars will be difficult, the work will be hard, and the risk of death will be omnipresent. In many ways, the Martian colonists will be like those who left Europe for the New World in the 17th century. Many will die in shipwrecks, from work accidents, from illnesses, and other things that we don't often concern ourselves with in the developed world. On top of all that they will have to live in an enclosed habitat all the time; going outside will require a space suit. Given this, will people even want to go to Mars? If they go will they want to stay? What will be their motivation? Musk's goal of making humanity a multi-planet species is admirable, but previous colonization events have been driven by people's internal desires to find a better life for themselves and their family. Will Mars hold this kind of promise for enough people to create a viable community, or will it end up as just another lonely outpost for a few dedicated explorers and scientists? Only time will tell, and I look forward to seeing how this develops over the next few years.

Sour Apples: iPhone 7 Disappoints

The new iPhone 7 is a disappointment, not for what it is but for what it could have been.

Let me explain.

On Wednesday, Apple announced their new hardware, specifically updated watches and phones. There was a lot of anticipation in advance of the event, with intense speculation that Apple would remove the analog headphone jack from the phone.

The headphone jack is certainly gone from the iPhone 7. However, what's also missing is any real innovation. There are many small refinements including better cameras, improved CPU performance, improved wireless network performance, and improved battery life, but these are things most consumers take for granted in annual tech refresh cycles. Other changes like new case colors, stereo speakers, and the new home button design seem more focused on style than substance.

The headphone jack removal is very polarizing for Apple consumers, because it interferes with common usage patterns that have persisted for almost a decade. Many people listen and recharge at the same time, and now you'll need an extra dongle for that. Many people plug their phones into their cars and other audio gear using the headphone jack, and now you'll need an extra dongle for that, too. And did we mention that this dongle doesn't offer another Lightning port for charging? So if you don't have Bluetooth audio in your car, forget about playing your tunes and arriving with a fully-charged phone.

Why didn't Apple add wireless charging? This is a feature found on many high-end Android phones and the Apple Watch. It would have nullified the complaint that with the new iPhone people can't simultaneously charge their phone and listen to music or make phone calls. It would have eliminated the need for a 'charge and listen' dongle that people don't want to carry around with them since they already have to carry a charger and/or they have one on their desk or nightstand. The option to use Bluetooth headphones is there, but these also have limitations mostly in the form of battery life; I have been on many conference calls that exceed the 4-hour capability of Apple's new AirPods, so would I have to buy two sets of them just in case they conked out mid-call?

Why didn't Apple introduce an OLED screen? This offers better contrast and lower power consumption than LCD, and has also been a feature on higher-end Android competitors for years. Because it doesn't required a backlight panel, it would have let the iPhone get even thinner or the extra space could have been used to increase battery capacity.

Finally, why didn't Apple ditch the Lightning jack altogether and introduce WiGig capability? This super fast 60GHz radio would have let the iPhone support HD and UHD video to desktop monitors and big screen TVs. It would have also allowed the device be totally sealed against dirt and water with no external connectors. More than that, it would have allowed the iPhone to become a single device that could use multiple screens and peripherals to serve as a phone, tablet, desktop, and entertainment device. Imagine pairing your iPhone with a wireless game controller and big screen TV to play video games in high-definition, or pairing it a desktop monitor, keyboard, and trackpad to use office applications and browse the web.

These are the kinds of changes Apple's customers are looking for, but at this point we can only hope for next year. Unfortunately for Apple, the Android platform is more competitive than ever. The recently released and highly-polished Nougat OS and new high-end devices from Samsung and other manufacturers are appealing even to Apple die hards. It seems like Apple's visionary image is tarnishing, and they are transforming into just another mega company trying to protect margins on existing products instead of taking bold risks on new capabilities that drive the industry forward.

p.s.: I didn't even mention that there was not a single announcement related to their personal computer business, even though the Mac lineup has not seen a major change in several years. I'm writing this on a three-year-old Macbook Air, and Apple doesn't have a single product that is compelling me to upgrade. I'll probably write about this in a future article.

Three Wishes for the iPhone 7

There's no doubt that the iPhone is one of the most popular consumer devices ever made, but to some extent it may be a victim of its own success. We now have all the screen sizes we need, from 4 inches to 5.5 inches, and all of them have pixels so small that adding more won't make the image any sharper to the human eye. The processors are fast enough for any application you might want to run, and the cellular, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth radios deliver enough connectivity options and bandwidth. All iPhone models have fingerprint recognition and Apple Pay capability, and battery capacity is good enough for most people to get through their entire day without concern.

So what new features can Apple put into the next iteration of the iPhone to keep the platform fresh and compel current users to upgrade? Certainly another bump in processor speed or memory capacity isn't going to be very interesting, although it is probably inevitable. If I could ask for three enhancements, these are what they would be.

Wish #1: WiGig

Apple should add a new radio capability to the iPhone 7 called WiGig. Also known as 802.11ad, this technology uses the 60 GHz frequency band to transmit data at up to 7Gb/s. It won't replace your LTE or Wi-Fi connection, because these high frequency signals can't pass through walls, but it will provide several valuable capabilities.

The most immediately useful of these is the ability to watch movies streamed right from your phone to your TV in full fidelity with no messy cables or adapters. Imagine, taking your iPhone into the family room, opening up the Netflix app, and playing a 4K movie to your big screen TV without juggling remote controls. Then imagine going over to a friend's house and watching that same movie on his TV. You can try this today with AirPlay over Wi-Fi, but the video may be choppy and 4K resolution is not supported so it's 1080P at best. This might be the set top box killer we've all been waiting for.

It will also allow video games to display on the TV while using the iPhone as a controller. As an option, a Bluetooth game controller can be coupled to the iPhone to allow a more conventional game console experience where the iPhone replaces the console completely.

WiGig can allow the iPhone to drive a tablet display when you need more screen real estate; for example, while reading a magazine or book. The user can interact with the tablet while their iPhone is sitting on their desk or nestled in their pocket. Apple could create a 'dumbed down' version of the iPad for this, or just add this capability into new iPads.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it will allow the iPhone to be used with a high-resolution desktop monitor. When coupled with a Bluetooth mouse and keyboard, this could allow your iPhone to be your only computer. Apps could be extended to support a mouse, just as they have been extended to support a pencil on the iPad Pro. You would never have to sync your iPhone with your PC because all of the data would stay on the iPhone. Imagine traveling without a laptop computer, just using available WiGig terminals in hotels, offices, and other workspaces when you need a more traditional PC interface.

Wish #2: Visual Unlock

While the fingerprint reader has been a useful addition to the iPhone, I think we all have experienced the frustration of it not working from time to time, as well as the awkwardness of using it when your hands are full, dirty, covered in gloves, or just not conveniently positioned.

Apple should use the front-facing camera to enable the iPhone to be unlocked visually, by examining your facial features and getting enough of a sample with small movements and eye blinks to know that it's not being fed a static image.

Wish #3: Remove the Connectors

It's time to eliminate the anachronism of electrical sockets. The iPhone's Lightning connector and the 3.5mm audio jack should be removed, because there's just no need for them anymore.

Getting rid of these metal sockets will allow more freedom in physical design and, with minor changes to cover the volume, mute, sleep, and home buttons, allow the phone to survive serious encounters with water and dirt. Imagine not worrying about taking your iPhone to the beach or pool. Imagine being able to clean your phone by sticking it under running water.

The audio jack is made redundant by Bluetooth. I'm sure this will make some audiophiles choke, but for the vast majority of people Bluetooth is a better option because it is free of cables and provides comparable audio quality at the range of a normal headphone cable.

The Lightning connector can be eliminated by adding inductive charging to the iPhone; just lay the phone on top of a charger to top up the battery. Besides charging, the only other reason for Lightning is fast data transfer, but WiGig has that covered.

I'm sure this suggestion will elicit gasps from those who believe that this will upset users with legacy Lightning devices, but it's easy to imagine a WiGig to Lightning/USB adapter that can keep them out of the scrap heap.

Wrapping Up

It's time for some serious innovation in the iPhone family, and at this point that means Apple needs some extreme focus on key features that will really make these devices better and more useful for the majority of their customer base.

Distracted Driving: Let's Slay the Monster We Created

Almost every day we see it: Someone in one of the cars around you moving down the road at high speed with their attention focused on their smartphone instead of the traffic around them. It's a global phenomenon, and there's no sign of it decreasing in frequency despite all the laws against it. According to distraction.gov, the official US government website for distracted driving, 3,179 people were killed and 431,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers in the USA during 2014. The World Health Organization predicts that by 2030, road traffic injuries will be the fifth leading cause of death globally, surpassing AIDS, diabetes, violence, and all forms of cancer. Yet with all that carnage, the site goes on to say: "The best way to end distracted driving is to educate all Americans about the danger it poses."

As a technologist, this is appalling to me. This problem exists because of the smartphone and mobile network technology we have created, and has grown because of the improvements we have made to that technology specifically so that all of us can be connected at all times, everywhere. Yet our best solution is to try to convince people that they shouldn't do the very thing that the technology was designed to enable!

I can't accept that, and I think we need to devise and implement technological solutions for this technological problem. Certainly people can and will continue to eat, drink, groom themselves, and engage in other distracting activities while driving, but I think we all agree that very few of these have the same distractive capacity as messages and other notifications that are actively pushed to your device at random times during the day causing it to flash, shake, and make all kinds of noises to get your attention.

The solution seems obvious: Simply stop the driver's phone from creating or allowing distractions while the vehicle is moving. Unfortunately, a logical examination of that approach leads to another set of problems that are not easily addressed:

• How do you know that the user is driving and not just a passenger in a car, bus, or train?
• What applications are allowed? Should the driver be able to have a voice conversation over Bluetooth? Should they be able to have a voice interaction with Siri, Alexa, or Cortana? What about Google Maps? Pandora radio? How do you allow some interactions and prevent others?
• How do you disable the driver's phone yet allow the passengers' phones to continue normal operation? People have multiple cars, multiple devices, and people also rent and share cars, so this is not straightforward.
• How do you deal with people who actively try to bypass or override the control mechanisms?

This used to be a problem related solely to text messaging, and perhaps could have been addressed through controlling SMS delivery in the mobile operator networks, but now it's about mobile applications over the Internet. Since you cannot disable Internet service without making the device completely useless, the solution must lie with the device manufacturers and the automobile manufacturers. I don't know what the answer is, but I believe it will involve a few specific technological components. 

First, every mobile device must be able to transition into a Driver Mode that limits its capabilities. For example, screen input may be disabled and only voice interaction permitted. Applications will have to be qualified to operate in this mode, and if not they will be disabled by the device operating system.

Second, every automobile must be able to provide information to the device that would allow it to engage and disengage Driver Mode at appropriate times, such as when the car is put into or taken out of a drive gear, or when the car is in motion or stopped.

The automobile could also assist or take over engagement with the driver in more intelligent ways, perhaps via technologies such as Apple's CarPlay or Google's Android Auto. It's certainly better to present visual information on the car's dashboard or infotainment display than require the driver to look at their phone's screen, and it's also better to present audio information over the car's speakers than those on the phone. In today's world where every smartphone can use Bluetooth and screen sharing, this should not be a big leap.

Finally, there will have to be some solution for dealing with multiple devices in the car. One approach may be to have each device's location precisely analyzed to determine which one is nearest the driver's position. Another may be for the car to detect all devices and force one to be placed into Driver Mode with the notion that passengers would object to having their phone disabled by the driver.

There are a few technical solutions available now, such as CellControl, but these are mainly for teen drivers and require parents to install and configure hardware in the car and applications on their child's phone. Most adults would never voluntarily install this kind of control, and could choose to opt out of it whenever they wanted. 

I think this problem is serious enough that phone and car manufacturers should get together and agree to a solution that works, and ensure that the technology is standardized, documented, and freely licensed. A subset of drivers will try to circumvent the solution, but the majority of drivers will probably appreciate the improved interaction and integration between their phones and cars and never look back.

If you have any thoughts on this important problem, please share them!