Frequently Asked Questions
Learn more about the mission, technology, and how this spacecraft will begin humanity’s journey beyond the Solar System.
Everyone has their own reason, one that Philip is passionate about is drawing attention to the Fermi paradox. Either we are very special, or not. Describe the Fermi paradox. Over 50-100 years we need to be careful. Could be that only over the next 3 years we can do it! Might be a calamity. Sometimes when I try explain the Fermi paradox people say "Well if life is expansionary and it's so easy to get to other stars, why haven't we sent anything to another star yet." To which one must respond: "errmmm, good point". Anyway, we want the answer to be "we have!" That makes the Fermi paradox much easier to understand.
It's the closest, has three stars, habitable. is also infront of the galactic core so after we pass it and if we miss we will pass many other stars. There is also the closest planner to us close by, the Proxima Centauri B, could hold liquid water, cloud be the first habitable exo planet
Now possible. Also wars, might not be possible in future. Ion propulsion only recently this good.
We have essentially strapped a jet engine to a bycycle. Brute force it..
No. Nobody has tried. The similar attempts are xyz and ran out of money.
No. Voyager will get 1.4 light years (we will be much closer). That cost $1bn. We are $10m.
It's not planned to go to a star, it's randomly going to get 1.4 light years away from a star in 40,000 years. We are going to be 99% of the way to AC, at least 20x closer than Voyager's closest star. Also after we pass AC we will head to the galactic core and pass many thousands of stars. and we are doing it for $10m rather than $5bn. We will be within the Oort Cloud of AC, voyager will be nowhere near the Oort Cloud of any star
Yes, the one from yuri. We wish them luck but it doesn't seem like it will be launching soon.
Yes, the following list. We would love to collaborate with them and will be reaching out!
They tried. Ran out of money. Ion propultion and launch cost now cheap. Those missions have their value, they are doing RnD and we are very supportive.
I hope so!. Cleopatra New York.also if not then very worth doing.
Yes we should be able to do considerably faster and closer than the goals set, with a lower budget and lower cost. These are to be non-negotiable limits to help guide priorities.
Try getting closer, in less time, with more communications, Jupiter slingshot etc. You are welcome to try and one of the aims of this mission is to inspire others to. This mission is what we consider the minimum viable mission at the lowest cost possible to Alpha Centauri. We will try to do the best we can with $10m but that is the guiding constraint in this respect. Could I try to do more? Yes. Are we going to? No. If we are successful in just the first mission and can send a spacecraft from here to our nearest star, it would be the first interstellar spacecraft and one of the most significant events in the history and of humanity, of our galaxy, and maybe the universe. It's as if Cleopatra had sent a ship out to get to New York and 5000 years later it was about to arrive. It would be one of the most precious items.
Here is what we expect. We have done enough work for AD to validate that it can be completed well within the $10m budget but not more than that. Once we hit $100k we will produce a more detailed mission plan. All plans will be made open source
Mission timeline: $100k then 3 months for design. As soon as we have a launch cost of $1.5m we book the next available f9 rideshare which is likely 2028, we try to bring forward if we can. Then book a bus and prop system when I have next $4m. Need to raise quickly.
We will know the speed and direction it is travelling so we will be able to anticipate when it will arrive but we will not be able to track it after x distance.
Not without tech but maybe with new tech. For the next 100,000 years when people look up at the stars they'll see AC and think there is a craft between here and there. It's been described as similar to filling up the container area of a container ship with more fuel and setting it off to see how far it can get. It's been described as strapping a jet engine to a bicycle. It's been described as filling up the back of a van with only more fuel tanks and seeing how far you can get.
That's one approach.m but it's usually much more expensive. We want to do no end on the hardware side and use only components with considerable flight heritage to give the mission the highest chance of success.
Perfect combination of cheap and experienced. Their experience is the following. While they don't have experience of missions beyond geo (basically only nasa does), they have a history of successfully completing low cost bespoke one off missions and tech demonstrators.
If we have an antenna you can bump the price up well north of $1bn. The science in this is to show that we can't get something to the nearest star for <$10m (move to pr stunt bit).
Show image above but with a red circle around it. Say or cloud. Say can get closer.
Very. Feel free to send your calculations if you believe we have made a mistake. We have assumed a pointing accuracy of 0.7 degrees.
What about astronomy, orbital debris, the planetary protection society. Yes. All good on each for the following reasons:…
This might be the first and last time in history that this is possible and that you have the possibility to send something to another star.
This will be one of the most significant moments in the life of our universe. In 10bn years if you look back at the significant points in time there will be a few very important points. The first life, the first mammals to climb out of the water, Neil Armstrong, the first person on Mars, and the first interstellar travel.
You get these benefits.
The rough breakdown of the cost is $2m for the launch, $3m for the bus, $2m for the propulsion, $1m for the project management, $2m for overheads, contingency, and buffer.
The plan is to raise up to $10m and stop. If it comes in under this, we will donate the rest to charity.
Almost all will be but we may spend a small proportion on marketing, donor engagement, project management, website updates etc and other overheads
No.
Also no, but we will make the designs public and open source.
Likely yes but we want to get going and will possibly apply for this later.
No, you can do what you like but I wanna get going.
For corporate sponsorship, please reach out to philip@fermiexplorer.com. If you want your brand associated with long term thinking, big ambitious goals, international collaboration, cutting edge technology, and AI responsibility, then there could be strong alignment in partnering with the Fermi Explorer mission.
Like and share.
We don't plan on doing any paid PR or media. We will post updates about it on social media and the website and will respond to queries from the press if they are interested.
For the last 10 years since electric propulsion became more available I've been waiting to see if anyone will do it. And so far nobody has. Now that the nasa budget has been cut it seems unlikely anyone will. It's more important than ever that private and philanthropic missions take up the mantle of governments, if not us then who.
Quarterly updates.
the board all has other full time other jobs and are doing this in their own time for free as a personal passion project. The day to day will be managed by Astro digital and they will be compensated for project management.
No.
Much higher than most, since we are using proven technology etc. there is always a risk of failure but the primary objective for us is getting the mission done, not coming up with new propulsion technology, and so execution is prioritised above RnD.
For a first new spacecraft, historically they have had about a 50% likelihood of success. Our opinion is that the likelihood is higher than that since it is a relatively simple mission with proven technology. However, if you are donating to the project it would be wise to assume around a 50% chance of success.
The most common ways in order of frequency and the potential mitigants are: 1. Failure to make contact with the satellite after detachment from the launch vehicle. Using proven stuff, etc. 2. Launch vehicles RUD. Using SpaceX, 3. Prop system failure, using experience there is no scientific instrument on board.
Maybe… eh screw 'em, we're still the first ever mission to our nearest star. That is the science. Don't wanna spend $1bn. We have priced the donation amounts to include everyone.
We have made it as accessible as possible to all with just $100 getting your initials etched on the craft.