Mars Sample Return Options

[StargazeInWonder]

Thanks for the link regarding the camera. That's got some tidbits along the way that are interesting regarding the process, though we're now in an enigmatic phase.

I notice that the entries in the study are not all parallel with one another. Despite the same timeline, it seems that some are focused on small subsets of the problem, befitting different institutional missions. Maybe some of the ten are implicitly being grouped with others as plug-and-play portions of the whole architectures. Certainly, as noted earlier, different parts of the architecture(s) fall into very different parts of the spectrum between Proven and Unprecedented.

It's safe to say that SpaceX has approached some aspects of the business with far more showmanship and flair than the more established aerospace contractors. It's also safe to say that showmanship and flair don't in and of themselves solve any engineering problems that make MSR challenging.

[mcaplinger]

https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Hum...design_maturity

The critical design review for the spacecraft's platform was completed today with the involvement of European industry and NASA... "The configuration of the spacecraft is robust enough to be flexible with the cargo and to help finding solutions for a new architecture."

Somewhat tone-deaf release from ESA considering the whole mission is in real jeopardy of being scrapped or massively retooled, but I guess it's all they can do at this point.

[StargazeInWonder]

And at least one concept for retooling the mission would make the Earth Return component nonexistent. That was true of Boeing's proposal, which isn't in the running, but I wouldn't be surprised if some other suppliers of very big rockets also proposed that.

However this turns out, nobody's going to look back on it as a positive example of how to plan a multi-launch mission.

[bobik]

Okaaaay!!! ... "As part of a current mission redefinition in the frame of the project “Mars Sample Return - Earth Return Orbiter Spacecraft” (“MSR-ERO”), Airbus Defence and Space SAS and ESA will be pleased to invite you to submit your best proposal for the Mechanisms Package of the Get and Release Unit (GRU) payload. The mission of the GRU payload is to capture the Orbiting Sample (OS) containing the Mars soil samples in low Mars orbit and release it on a stable cis Lunar orbit for final capture and return to Earth by a NASA mission. [...] The GRU Mechanisms package is a set of 2 mechanisms included in the GRU design: · A Door mechanism opening and closing the external door of the GRU payload · An Ejection mechanism pushing the OS outside of the GRU payload"

EDIT: In this context, see also the attached ISSFD2024 paper:  Bucci___Trajectory_design_of_ERO_alternative_return_towards_a_lunar_Distant_Retrograde_Orbit.pdf ( 1.33MB ) Number of downloads: 102

[StargazeInWonder]

An editorial by David Southwood about MSR has appeared in Science. It doesn't try to go deep on technical or scientific details, but has thoughtful commentary on process and the path forward.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adr7337

[mcaplinger]

An editorial by David Southwood about MSR has appeared in Science. It doesn't try to go deep on technical or scientific details, but has thoughtful commentary on process and the path forward.

Seems way too ESA-centric to me, YMMV.

[bobik]

Okaaaay!!! ...

On second thought, it would be a nice answer to the concerns of the IRB-2 report, it would get rid of the horrible ESA-NASA interface between the ERO and CCRS, and it would make it possible to shift NASA's investment into a kind of CCRS salvage mission at least a hundred years to the right, determined by the stability of the OS lunar orbit.

[StargazeInWonder]

More public-facing information affirming China's MSR on an earlier timeline than NASA.

It's interesting that of three possible landing regions, two match that of the Viking landers.

https://spacenews.com/china-to-launch-mars-...ion-guidelines/