OpinionMarch 20, 20255 min readWere Not Going to Mars Anytime SoonDespite What Musk SaysElon Musk and Donald Trump have announced ambitious plans to send a mission to Mars in 2026 and 2028. Its not going to happenBy Paul M. Sutter edited by Dan VerganoElon Musk gives a tour to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump and lawmakers of the control room before the launch of the sixth test flight of the SpaceX Starship rocket on November 19, 2024 in Brownsville, Texas. Brandon Bell/Getty ImagesIn his January inaugural address, President Donald Trump declared that we will pursue our Manifest Density into the stars and plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars. He reiterated the Mars promise in his March 4 speech to a joint session of Congress. As for a timeline, SpaceXs founder and CEO Elon Musk, stated in November that he is highly confident that we will send several of his companys Starships to Mars in two years, and if those go well, with crewed missions to follow in four.Meanwhile, on March 6, SpaceXs latest Starship exploded mid-flight for the second time in a row, sending debris raining over Florida and the Caribbean, closing airports in the process.Somethings not adding up.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.The stated goals of Mars landings in 2026 and 2028 do not correspond to a comprehensive, articulated plan. Its simply the next open launch window, when Earth and Mars are in conjunction on the same side of the solar system, and transfers to that planet require the least amount of energy. Its like announcing a camping trip on your next available weekend, without having purchased any camping supplies. And your car is in the shop. And has exploded.So far, the only details of a Mars mission that Musk has shared consist of a brief comment on X, when someone asked him what cargo of the first Starship to the red planet would carry. His response: Cybertrucks and Optimus robots.While such statements may play well to sycophants on social media, its nowhere near an actual plan to go to Mars, especially considering the calls to cut NASAs science budget by up to 50 percent.A mission to Mars is not outright impossiblethere are no laws of physics that forbid itand indeed SpaceX has made enormous strides in developing reusable rocket boosters. And Im confident that Starship, with its impressive launch cadence, will achieve orbit and land safely back to Earth in short order. Even so, theres still a long road to go to get to Mars.In the 1960s the Apollo program went from blueprints to lunar landing in less than a decade. But Mars is another beast. At its closest approach, that planet is 56 million kilometers awayroughly 150 times the distance to the moon. Starship cannot launch directly from the Earth and reach Mars in one go. It must refuel in orbit, a technology only in its earliest development. While estimates vary, a full refill of Starship is likely to take an additional 10 to 20 tanker launches of fuel.Next, Starship has to plunge through the thin Martian atmosphere and land on its cratered surface in a controlled, powered descentsomething that no lander has ever achieved before. SpaceX was already contracted to provide the lunar lander for the Artemis mission, but last year a Government Accountability Office report found significant issues with SpaceXs supporting evidence that its mission can be achieved within schedule and acceptable risk.A crewed mission to Mars isnt a one-way trip. A return journey would entail another launch from Mars, another transfer across interplanetary space, another plunge through an atmosphere, and another controlled landingagain, all never before done from interplanetary distances. The return trip fuel would either have to be transferred there ahead of time (meaning even more launches) or we must the develop the machinery to create methane from ice water and the thin carbon dioxide atmosphere on Marstechnologies that have yet to be demonstrated, let alone deployed.And all this is just for the uncrewed, robotic proof-of-concept that Musk envisions for 2026. A crewed mission brings its own headaches. For starters, we have no working human-rated deep-space vehicleat all. Starship will have to undergo rigorous installation and testing of life-support systems, and demonstrate a much higher degree of safety, to be certified to carry a human crew to Mars.A typical Mars round trip takes around two years, including transfer time and waiting on the Martian surface for our planets to come back into conjunction. The record-holders for the longest duration stay at the International Space Station are cosmonauts Oleg Kononenko and Nikolai Chub, at only 374 days. For the duration of a Mars mission, Starship would have to remain fully independent, unlike the ISS, which gets regular supplies and materials, not to mention constant guidance from the ground to fix the myriad issues that crop up.Starship also has to protect the crew against cosmic radiation for those two years, and maintain their health against the ravages of microgravity. Research into this is one of the primary motivations for the ISS, which Musk called for deorbiting after insulting one of its former commanders.Plus, Starship cant just be a transit vehicle. It also has to be (or at least provide for) the operating base on the Martian surface. Whatever Starship is at this point, its definitely not that. No Starship has even successfully landed on Earth yet.We are very, very far away from these ideas becoming prototypes, let alone robust mission components.Indeed, the U.S. was developing exactly those mission components when, in 2016, the Obama administration announced a pivot from the moon-focused initiative of the Bush years with a focus on getting to Mars in the 2030s. Then Trump reversed that by disregarding Mars and aiming again for the moon with the Artemis project.Now with Musk calling the moon a distraction, rumors are swirling that the second Trump administration may cancel Artemiscalls that seem to come from Musks insistence that we colonize Mars.The only way were going to Mars is by spending a lot of money. Likely, up to trillions of dollars. Perhaps thats Musks real aimto funnel enormous sums of money away from researchers at NASA and its partners and into his privately-held company without having to answer to shareholders or deliver on promised schedules. A bold enough claim could substantially increase his already vast fortune.Followers of Musk are used to his audacious, and sometimes incredible, assertions. For example, Tesla drivers are still waiting for their vehicles Full Self Driving system to achieve Level 5 autonomy, which was supposed to occur in 2021; meanwhile, the systems under scrutiny for fatal accidents. But while statements of grand ambition may excite shareholders and fans, they dont make for sound space progress. If we keep whipsawing between priorities, and allow outlandish, self-interested claims to direct policy, the only place well be going is nowhere.This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.