NASA taps Lockheed Martin to build Mars parcel pickup rocket NASA has picked Lockheed Martin Space as the developer of the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), one of the vehicles that will retrieve samples collected by the Perseverance rover on the Red Planet. Perseverance is equipped with a drill and 43 sample tubes. Its mission plan calls for those tubes to be filled, then left on the Martian …
Might be cheaper to just ask spacex to bring some samples back. Their tentative date for a first manned mission is currently 2026.
While they're way behind on their original pre-starship estimates, given the rate they're progressing right now, I will be surprised if they don't come close to achieving this. Especially if they hit their target of an unmanned mission in 2024.
To get back to Earth a Starship has to land (and probably devastate) an unprepared area of Mars, deploy lots of solar panels, ice mining and fuel processing equipment. Although solar panels work better near the equator the ice mining equipment needs to be much nearer one of the poles than Perseverance. The good news is that the rock storm caused by a Starship landing (or lift-off) will be a easily far enough away from Perseverance but it will be a very long walk to collect the samples.
This could be solved with a solar powered helicopter (or a flock of them if reliability is a concern) but does not address one of the key requirements of US space exploration. Certain contractors have bi-partisan support and will get funding because they spread huge amounts of money over many different states. SpaceX does not waste anything like enough money.
You don't have to manufacture fuel in situ though, even though that may be the long term goal. For early return missions, they will probably send tankers to Mars orbit. Then they can fuel a starship with enough propellant to land and get back to Mars orbit, then refuel it again for the trip home.
It'd certainly be cheaper to ask Elon. However, it is well to remember that Musk is prone to make promises he can't/doesn't keep. e.g. Tesla battery exchange -- which looks not to be implemented for economic rather than technical reasons. Or Autopilot full self-driving that actually works well which quite possibly will be a few weeks/months away for all eternity.
Can SpaceX potentially get astronauts to Mars orbit and home again? I expect so although I'm skeptical that there is much point in doing so. Can SpaceX get astronauts to Mars surface and back to Earth? That's a LOT harder. Not any time soon I think. Can NASA collect 43 tiny rock sample tubes on Mars? Difficult. But it's doing so. Total sample mass including packaging? I don't know and can't quickly find a source to tell me. But I'd guess maybe 10kg give or take a lot. Can NASA retrieve that and get it from Mars surface to Mars orbit? Probably. It won't be easy. But probably. Can NASA then get that package back to Earth Orbit? This looks to be easier. Can NASA (or SpaceX for that matter) get the package down from Earth Orbit? For Sure.
I believe the current cost estimate to get that modest package of rock samples from Perseverance back to Earth is around $4B. It'll likely cost more. Current plan is to get the samples back in 2031 or so. Wouldn't be surprised if that turns out to be optimistic.
Musk's goal is to make humans a multi-planet species. The cars are partly a technological stepping stone to that goal and partly a financial stepping stone. Reality often causes Musk to change the route but not the destination. Hence the lack of battery exchange. The self-driving thing is an embarrassment. The problem is way harder then he expected. I do not know if he has admitted this to himself but he should certainly admit it publicly to get customers' expectations closer to reality before they read a book while the car drives itself hard into the back of a stopped ambulance. Self driving cars on Earth are not a requirement for colonising Mars so that will not get Musk's full attention. Self driving construction equipment on Mars is a valuable tool for colonisation and such equipment will not have the opportunity to crash into the back of an ambulance for decades.
Putting astronauts on a Starship is a requirement for colonising Mars so it will happen - eventually. Uncrewed Starships will have to land many times before they are considered safe enough for people.
Getting a Starship back from Mars by sending fuel from Earth it technically possible but expensive. You end up with a fleet of expensive empty tankers in Mars orbit. This is achievement is not required for colonising Mars so Musk will not do it unless NASA offers silly money like for Artemis.
Making fuel on Mars is a requirement for colonisation so Musk will make it happen - several years behind schedule.
Starships will bring rocks back from Mars but I doubt they will bring them back from Perseverance - unless Lockheed Martin take lessons in project management from Boeing.
Maybe there could be a way on landing the tankers and turning them into habitats?
If they have a few African artisans on the first manned Mars mission they can just let the tankers crash; those guys can turn any bit of scrap metal into amazingly useful stuff.
Icon: Castle lager
"You end up with a fleet of expensive empty tankers in Mars orbit."
You don't need lots of tankers, you only need one. It delivers most of its fuel and keeps enough to get itself back to LEO. There it can be refilled and sent to Mars again, as many times as needed until there is enough fuel at Mars. Once the job is done the tanker is still available for re-use in other missions, so really you only need to pay for (lots of) fuel.
Geez, you Musk Bois are annoying.
SpaceX are not going to be landing a manned Mars mission in 2026. That's just not going to happen.
And while I do appreciate the effort of their innovation and success, they are also reckless. They wanted to send that Tesla crashing into Mars, with zero consideration for contamination.
Go fast and break things is give up to a point. A Mars mission, or any manned space mission is not the place for it. Hell, Starlink is starting to be troublesome as it is.
The whole approach seems odd to me, having two different vehicles being designed and built by different contractors then being sent to Mars at similar times.
Surely, even if the one delivering the sample collector couldn't just hang around and wait for the return journey, at least using the same basic design/build for both would make sense in economies of scale and minimising risk.
The craft required to get a lander (with robot and rocket) to Mars orbit would have to be much bigger than tje craft required to return the samples.
You might use a flatbed truck to deliver sampling and retrieval kit to site. The actual samples you might bring back by motorcycle, if fuel is at a premium.
You can't have efficiencies - what are you thinking man? That would mean narrowing the opportunities for pork-barreling and backhanders (and thank you to the USAian taxpayers who get to foot the bill).
We all know that LM in particular have a spotless record in that sort of thing.
Eh, the lunar landings were achieved by having two different vehicles (Apollo command & service module + lunar module) designed and built by two different companies (North American Aviation and Grumman respectively) delivered to lunar orbit courtesy of a three stage launch vehicle where each of those stages were manufactured by yet another company (first stage by Boeing, second by North American Aviation, third stage by Douglas Aircraft), not to mention the engines, avionics, and other key components all being manufactured by yet another set of contractors. The only thing different about the Mars sample recovery thing is that half the mission is being done without the hardware for the second half of the mission having been designed yet (or even contractors picked..). Otherwise it's standard NASA operating procedure since at least the 1950s..
> Mars parcel pickup rocket ... Until today, no contractor had even been appointed
If NASA was going solely on price, they might have chosen DPD.
I can just imagine, instead of sending a rocket, they would just have slipped a card under NASA's door to say that they tried to pick up the stuff from Mars, but nobody was in.
"If NASA was going solely on price, they might have chosen DPD."
I assume you WANT to get the samples back?
If you really, really, really want the samples back I wouldn't use DPD - they have a habit of either losing parcels, or claiming that they don't have them, or that they will be delivering on a certain day, even sending an email out to confirm this...and then not turn up until it suits them on another day (which happened to me this week).
DPD = "Delay Parcel Deliveries"... ;-)
Surely, they will open the samples in a sealed chamber filled with a vacuum or an inert gas. Aside from the (miniscule) alien virus concern, opening a capsule in an Earth atmosphere environment would contaminate it with Oxygen,water vapor, diverse particulates, assorted micro-organisms and who knows what else. We've spent a whole lot of money to get a few thousand grams of Mars surface material to Earth. We'd presumably treat it with a bit of care.
I think the realistic fear is the final dropoff coming back to earth crashing and releasing the Andromeda strain upon us.
(Though it's not from Andromeda, the Martian strain? Invaders from Mars? I'm sure there's a suitably cheesy reference to make here!)
Contamination of samples from Earth is big worry, so they will be dealt with in extremely isolated environment (which is much easier to make on Earth than in ISS). That works both ways.
This is also why having SpaceX pick them up is not a good idea of course (even if SpaceX had reasonable chance of getting people on Mars soon.)
I would send them to the ISS to be opened first.
a) ISS is slated for decommissioning around that time, so any schedule slip in the SRL, MAV or ERO will nix that option.
b) ISS doesn't have the required gear onboard to do what you propose. Especially without human intervention.
c) Research so far shows Mars appears to be pretty well dead, biologically speaking.
My impression is that the sample tubes are -- over time -- removed from the carrier one by one, filled with a sample, capped, and put back in the carrier, Presumably what's returned to Earth is the carrier with 43 capped sample tubes, I could be wrong, If so, someone who follows this mission more closely will presumably correct me.
Except the Chinese will be there first and beat both NASA and ESA with returning samples from Mars. Mostly because the latter's architecture is much too complex and has to many moving parts and single-points-of-failures.
The Chinese are basically using a Martian version of their Chang'e lunar sample return architecture which consists of a lander with rover and ascend vehicle.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
