NASA to study two alternative architectures for Mars Sample Return

NASA to study two alternative architectures for Mars Sample Return

Alvin Lieberman Alvin Lieberman

Alvin Lieberman

CHIEF SYSTEMS ENGINEER | PE | ENGR, MSEE, BEE | NASA,FAA,IBM,NRL,USAF,USN,SSPO | S&T | RDT&E | AIAA,IEEE,NSPE,INCOSE,SPIE,ION,ANS,NDIA |

发布日期: 2025年1月10日
+ 关注

NASA will spend the next year and a half studying two different approaches for returning samples from Mars, one leveraging technologies used on previous Mars missions and the other new commercial vehicles. NASA leadership announced Jan. 7 that it would pursue studies of two architectures for its Mars Sample Return effort that would take samples currently being collected by the Perseverance rover and bring them back to Earth as soon as 2035. The main difference between the two options would be how to deliver a redesigned sample retrieval lander to the surface of Mars, which would take the samples from Perseverance and launch them into orbit on a rocket called the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). The samples would then be picked up by a European spacecraft, the Earth Return Orbiter, and brought back to Earth. The first option, which NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said would cost between $6.6 billion and $7.7 billion, would use the “sky crane” technology previously developed by Jet Propulsion Laboratory for landing the Perseverance and Curiosity rovers. The second option, with projected costs of $5.8 billion to $7.1 billion, would use a commercially provided “heavy lander”. ... Jeff Foust

James Hazelrig

Mars Rover Tactical Commander

1 个月

A billion dollars savings to use an unproven method for something as precious and delicate as sample return only makes sense if someone is pushing an agenda. By the way for what was originally asked for by nasa, $11billion was still a good deal to ensure success, because a do over would cost more than that plus potentially 20 more years if samples need to be reacquired. This love affair with “private” space forgets that JPL is not staffed by government civil servants like other nasa centers, which is why the writer had to use “commercial” to differentiate, because Caltech is non-profit. Landing on Mars safely is incredibly difficult, let’s get serious about how this is really going to get done and stop wasting time.

赞
回复
6 次回应

要查看或添加评论，请登录

Alvin Lieberman的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了