Low cost Mars Sample Return.

RGClark · 2012-09-03 18:18:41

A very important use of the Falcon Heavy would be for a Mars Sample Return mission. This has long been considered the Holy Grail of planetary missions by NASA:

SPACEX FALCON HEAVY ROCKET: SHORTCUT TO MARS?
Scheduled for a 2013 maiden flight, the new rocket could make a Mars sample return mission a reality.
By Irene Klotz
Tue Apr 5, 2011 04:52 PM ET
http://news.discovery.com/space/spacex- … 10405.html

The problem had been NASA had previously estimated the costs would be in the $10 billion range requiring multiple expendable launchers. But with the Falcon Heavy costing only in the range of $100 million, and using a couple of Centaur upper stages at a cost in the range of $30 million each, it could probably could be done as a low-cost "Discovery class" mission. It could also be done with a Falcon 1e in place of the Centaurs at a few tens of million dollar cost. Both these cases though would require either lengthening the fairing of the Falcon Heavy or widening the stages to be used for the space traverse in order to shorten them to fit in the current planned Falcon Heavy fairing.
Since the Falcon Heavy is planned to be flight tested in 2013, the close 2018 Mars opposition would be a particular good time for such a mission. The 2018 opposition is so close that NASA asked the public for ideas on missions to be launched during this opposition:

NASA WANTS YOU TO DESIGN ITS 2018 MARS MISSION.
Analysis by Amy Shira Teitel
Mon Apr 16, 2012 02:02 PM ET
http://news.discovery.com/space/nasa-wa … 20416.html

Some proposed missions for Mars Sample Return were discussed during a Mars workshop in June:

Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration (2012).
Thursday, June 14, 2012
TECHNOLOGY AND ENABLING CAPABILITIES:
MARS SAMPLE RETURN ARCHITECTURES, STRATEGIES, AND VEHICLES
8:00 a.m. Lecture Hall
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/marsco … ess501.pdf

Surprisingly though none of the proposals mentioned how low cost a Falcon Heavy based mission could be carried out for MSR.

A question about this architecture. Rather than waiting 2 years after arrival for a next opposition to depart back to Earth, I want the return vehicle to return soon after picking up samples. Then the vehicle, hopefully, could return the samples within 1 year, rather than 3 years. This would be especially important for a version that uses the hydrogen fueled Centaurs to limit fuel boil-off. Estimates of low delta-V and return times assume you wait for the next opposition to return. But if you return soon after arrival how does this affect the delta-V required and the return times?

Bob Clark

Last edited by RGClark (2012-09-04 06:08:29)

GW Johnson · 2012-09-07 09:52:42

Bob:

Why not a scaled-down design similar to my chemical manned lander concept? Conical aeroshell, blunt heat shield, ascent rocket on the core axis sticking out a bit. A fleet of small rovers tucked away inside amongst the rocket-braking propellant.

Do it as a direct descent from transfer orbit, launched by a Falcon Heavy. My guess is it'll come out of hypersonics too low for a chute or ballute, so just go for direct rocket braking from M3 on down.

Rovers scoot around gathering samples, and bring them back to the ascent rocket. It'll need a contraption to load the samples into the return capsule. Direct return to Earth, and a free entry from transfer orbit. Or, stop in LEO and go get it with the X-37.

GW

RGClark · 2012-09-07 12:07:25

GW Johnson wrote:

Bob:
Why not a scaled-down design similar to my chemical manned lander concept? Conical aeroshell, blunt heat shield, ascent rocket on the core axis sticking out a bit. A fleet of small rovers tucked away inside amongst the rocket-braking propellant.
Do it as a direct descent from transfer orbit, launched by a Falcon Heavy. My guess is it'll come out of hypersonics too low for a chute or ballute, so just go for direct rocket braking from M3 on down.
Rovers scoot around gathering samples, and bring them back to the ascent rocket. It'll need a contraption to load the samples into the return capsule. Direct return to Earth, and a free entry from transfer orbit. Or, stop in LEO and go get it with the X-37.
GW

I was trying to get it from already existing components for the space traverse stage(s). You would need stages that totaled less than the 53 mT capacity of the FH to LEO using hypergolics. Or use the FH to do the trans Mars injection, and use smaller stage(s) for the landing and return. According to Zubrin, the Falcon Heavy can send 17.5 mT on a trans Mars injection flight towards Mars:

The Use of SpaceX Hardware to Accomplish Near-Term Human Mars Mission
posted May 16, 2011 6:50 AM by Michael Stoltz [ updated May 20, 2011 11:12 AM ]
Robert Zubrin, Pioneer Astronautics, 05.15.11
http://www.marssociety.org/home/press/n … arsmission

Doing it this way though does not leave much leeway for dense propellant upper stage(s) for the landing and return flight, as they would have to total 17.5 mT in gross mass.

Bob Clark

GW Johnson · 2012-09-07 14:39:25

Hmmm. Well, what about launching up to a 53 ton vehicle to LEO with Falcon-Heavy, and then refueling it there with a Falcon-9 or maybe something else, depending on the mass to be transferred. Atlas-V-552 can put 25 tons to LEO, and I think Delta-IV puts about 18-20 in its most-strapons configuration. F-9 is either 10.1 or 13 tons, depending upon which version of its engines. That's a lot of refuel mass.

I'd work backward from the payload you want to return, and see how "bad the damage is", and what combination of mission options and rockets might be made to work. One mission / one launch is not the only viable model here.

GW

RGClark · 2012-10-31 10:57:37

GW, it might indeed be possible to do a Mars sample return using hypergolic in-space stages launched by the Falcon Heavy. I was doubtful there would be small enough hypergolic stages yet extant. However the OMS pods on the shuttle orbiters are detachable and mass in the range of 12 mT gross each. So these might work.
In my estimates of Mars missions I've been using all aerobraking solutions, i.e., no thrusters, to save propellant. Suppose this is not workable, how much do you estimate would be the delta-V needed for soft landing on Mars using currently doable aerobraking methods?

Bob Clark

GW Johnson · 2012-10-31 21:10:42

Hi Bob:

The answer depends upon the ballistic coefficient of what you are trying to land, which in turn depends on the mass you are trying to land. That answer also depends very strongly on whether you do a direct entry from "deep space" vs an entry from low Mars orbit. The detailed "critical variables" are velocity and trajectory angle (relative to horizontal) at the entry interface altitude. I've been using Justus & Braun's interface altitude of 135 km, entered from a 200 km circular orbit, for which the entry angle is about 1.6 degrees and the de-orbit burn delta-vee is about 50 m/s maximum. The Mach at end-of-hypersonics (with severe heating) is about 3 (local). The M3 altitude ranges from near 30 km at around 100 kg/sq.m to around 5 km at around 1000 kg/sq.m.

If you come out of hypersonics below about 20 km, there's not time to deploy a chute, much less have the time for it to do any good. So, I was looking at direct rocket braking to touchdown from the M3 altitude. No chutes at all. It actually seems to be feasible. There's about 3 km/s delta vee required to touchdown from that M3 point, by the time you get all the speed killed, do the final slow approach with some hover, and throw in a kitty for contingencies. It varies from scenario to scenario, but you are moving around 2 km/s more or less horizontally at that M3 point. That puts a sort of lower bound on it.

Hope that helps.

GW

RGClark · 2012-11-03 17:34:51

GW Johnson wrote:

Hi Bob:
The answer depends upon the ballistic coefficient of what you are trying to land, which in turn depends on the mass you are trying to land. That answer also depends very strongly on whether you do a direct entry from "deep space" vs an entry from low Mars orbit. The detailed "critical variables" are velocity and trajectory angle (relative to horizontal) at the entry interface altitude. I've been using Justus & Braun's interface altitude of 135 km, entered from a 200 km circular orbit, for which the entry angle is about 1.6 degrees and the de-orbit burn delta-vee is about 50 m/s maximum. The Mach at end-of-hypersonics (with severe heating) is about 3 (local). The M3 altitude ranges from near 30 km at around 100 kg/sq.m to around 5 km at around 1000 kg/sq.m...

Do you have a link for Justus and Braun? Keep in mind too that this is for a unmanned robotic mission, not for a manned mission, so will be much smaller. In fact we can consider the lander to be in the Mars Pathfinder range of less than 300 kg. We need to include also though the ascent stage propellant and dry mass. That will be much smaller for cryogenic but then we have to use special methods to minimize boil-off for such a long mission.
Let's say we first stop in orbit, then have a separate lander stage land on the surface. I think I can get a cryogenic stage of lightweight Centaur type of less than 3 mT gross mass, though none that small size have been built. What would the aerobraking and/or landing delta-V requirements be in that case?
For a hypergolic ascent stage I found this on Astronautix:

Delta P.

N2O4/Aerozine-50 propellant rocket stage. Loaded/empty mass 5,434/820 kg. Thrust 41.92 kN. Vacuum specific impulse 301 seconds.

http://www.astronautix.com/stages/deltap.htm

This would be enough to carry a Mars Pathfinder size lander back to low Mars orbit assuming a 4,100 m/s required delta-V. What would aerobraking and/or landing delta-V be then?

Bob Clark

GW Johnson · 2012-11-06 16:04:21

Bob:

I don't have the Justus and Braun link in front of me. It's a NASA paper cited in one or more of the ballistic coefficient / Mars lander articles I posted over at "exrocketman". I think I formally cited it in a references list in the 6-30-12 article titled "Atmosphere Models for Earth, Mars, and Titan". It's probably cited again in some of the subsequent articles.

GW

RGClark · 2015-09-11 15:30:24

'Red Dragon' Mars Sample-Return Mission Could Launch by 2022.
by Mike Wall, Space.com Senior Writer | September 10, 2015 09:00am ET

Even the most eyebrow-raising part of the plan — landing the roughly 10-ton Red Dragon capsule softly on Mars — is feasible without any big technological leaps, he and colleague Larry Lemke, a now-retired former Ames researcher, stressed during the FISO talk.
While Red Dragon is far too heavy for the rocket-powered "sky crane" system that put the 1-ton Curiosity down and will be used again for the 2020 rover, detailed modeling studies suggest that the vehicle could land safely using its onboard SuperDraco thrusters. (These engines will come standard on the crew-carrying Dragon variant SpaceX is developing, as well as newer versions of the cargo Dragon. The SuperDracos' main purpose is to get the capsule to safety in the event of a launch emergency.)
Red Dragon is too heavy to use parachutes, but it could slow down enough for the SuperDracos to take over by entering the thin Martian atmosphere at a relatively shallow angle, thereby subjecting itself to the effects of drag for a long period of time, Lemke said.
So how much would all of this cost? It's unclear at the moment, because the team has not yet drawn up any cost estimates. But Gonzales said he's hopeful that the Red Dragon concept would be considerably cheaper than the Mars sample-return effort envisioned by the 2013 Decadal Survey, which would likely cost around $6 billion.

http://www.space.com/30504-spacex-red-d … eturn.html

Can be done even more cheaply than this, in fact by a single Falcon 9 launch. Using a fueled Dragon forces a 10 ton lander in the mission. Much smaller propulsive stages exist to reduce the mission size.

Bob Clark

SpaceNut · 2016-02-04 21:17:10

This Red dragon topic seems to follow the timeline of continuing for the other and then leads to New Red Dragon Mission?

SpaceNut · 2016-04-28 20:29:45

Bump here is the 4th topic on red dragon use....

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-09-13 14:21:58

What would it take to land the heaviest spacecraft to ever touch down on the Red Planet?
https://twitter.com/nasajpl/status/1700225635459936285
MarsSampleReturn teams are running tests to find the right footpads that would ensure a safe landing for the Sample Return Lander.

Animation from 10 months ago, maybe not Low Cost, a very complex mission
and its all working so far

Mars Sample Return: Bringing Mars Rock Samples Back to Earth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9G36CDLzIg
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-09-13 14:31:35)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-09-25 04:12:49

Osiris-Rex: Nasa capsule safely returns to Earth with Bennu asteroid dust
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/66909865

NASA's Mars Simple Return mission has a 'near zero probability' of being on schedule
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/93434/na … index.html
An independent review of NASA's plans to get Mars samples collected by its Perseverance rover

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-09-26 05:57:12

Historic NASA wind tunnel testing Mars Ascent Vehicle
https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Hist … e_999.html

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-09-30 15:45:30

Independent reviewers find NASA Mars Sample Return plans are seriously flawed
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/09/i … ut-broken/
"MSR was established with unrealistic budget and schedule expectations from the beginning."

The report says that NASA must do a better job of engaging with the planetary science community to explain its prioritization of the mission and its status as the culmination of a decades-long Mars exploration strategy. Moreover, the reviewers said canceling Mars Sample Return would not free up billions of dollars for other planetary science missions.

In all, the report makes more than 20 findings and recommendations that clearly signal to NASA and the mission's lead field center, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, that its current plans for the Mars Sample Return mission are broken. As a result, the agency must significantly revamp its plans with the aim toward lowering costs, establishing a reasonable timeline, and maximizing the science potential.

NASA has responded to the report's release by announcing its own review of the review, saying that this team will make a recommendation by March 2024 regarding a path forward for Mars Sample Return within a balanced overall science program.

RGClark · 2023-09-30 22:36:04

By the commercial space approach it could be done at a cost in the range of 1/100th the ca. $10 billion estimate of NASA. Firstly, SpaceX and now multiple other launch start-ups like Rocket Lab have shown rockets and spacecraft can be developed by private financing at costs a tenth of that of the usual government financing approach. Secondly, use currently existing stages rather than developing entire new stages from scratch as NASA plans.

In point of fact, by following the commercial approach such a mission could be carried out at a profit:

Low cost commercial Mars Sample Return.
https://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2023/ … eturn.html

The Ansari XPRIZE offered $10 million for passenger suborbital space flight. The prize was won by Spaceshipone. Peter Diamandis progenitor of the prize suggests this method of incentivizing prizes may be a general method accomplish some key goal at low cost.

NASA could offer say, $200 million for a team that accomplishes Mars Sample Return by the commercial space approach, i.e., being fully privately funded. If nobody accomplishes it, then NASA loses nothing. But if someone does it will be a major accomplishment.

Robert Clark

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-10-22 12:38:52

NASA starts reassessment of Mars Sample Return architecture

https://spacenews.com/nasa-starts-reass … hitecture/

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-11-01 05:23:18

NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Independent Review Board-2 Final Report
https://astrobiology.com/2023/10/nasa-m … eport.html

SpaceNut · 2023-11-01 20:21:15

I quickly looked through the report and its design is based on the Insight lander platform with a return rocket that will cache samples amounting to just 0.5 kg of mars.

RGClark · 2023-11-01 23:11:31

SpaceNut wrote:

I quickly looked through the report and its design is based on the Insight lander platform with a return rocket that will cache samples amounting to just 0.5 kg of mars.

Does the report give an estimated mission cost?

Robert Clark

SpaceNut · 2023-11-03 17:33:27

https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads … report.pdf

A 2030 Launch Readiness Dates (LRDs) for both Sample Retrieval Lander (SRL) and Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) is estimated to require ~$8.0-9.6B, with funding in excess of $1B per year to be required for three or more years starting in 2025.
The program is not ready to be baselined due to continued technical issues that have yet to be resolved and anticipated fiscal year funding streams that are out of line with Program estimated funding requirements. The earliest feasible launch opportunities will occur in 2030.
However, utilizing these opportunities is only possible with adequate fiscal year funding and a total lifecycle cost on the order of $8-11B.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-11-23 07:28:39

Members of Congress seek increase in Mars Sample Return funding

https://spacenews.com/members-of-congre … n-funding/

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-11-23 07:40:05

What’s Going on With the Mars Sample Return Mission?

https://www.universetoday.com/164415/wh … n-mission/

While the technical and engineering challenges in getting those samples into scientists’ hands here on Earth are formidable, budgeting and funding might be the mission’s biggest headaches.

SpaceNut · 2023-11-23 10:09:19

Mars_Sample_Return_overview_infographic_pillars-1920x1200.jpg

The fact that the mission is over several flight periods and shared responsibility for getting other nations involved for equipment has a part of the issue for integration into the process of gathering the samples from the ground where they have been left awaiting collection. That time is critical for the fuels that can be used and what sort of material return vehicle design. This is just one of the issues.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-11-23 11:20:24

California Lawmakers Urge NASA Not To Cut Mars Sample Return Funding

https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/cali … n-funding/

Six members of California’s congressional delegation sent a letter to NASA Adminstrator Bill Nelson today urging him not to scale back Mars Sample Return funding right now. Saying they are “mystified” by the agency’s decision to pause the MSR program, revealed at a NASA advisory committee meeting last week, they asserted the decision violates Congress’s authority.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2012-09-03 18:18:41

Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#2 2012-09-07 09:52:42

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#3 2012-09-07 12:07:25

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#4 2012-09-07 14:39:25

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#5 2012-10-31 10:57:37

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#6 2012-10-31 21:10:42

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#7 2012-11-03 17:34:51

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#8 2012-11-06 16:04:21

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#9 2015-09-11 15:30:24

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#10 2016-02-04 21:17:10

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#11 2016-04-28 20:29:45

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#12 2023-09-13 14:21:58

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#13 2023-09-25 04:12:49

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#14 2023-09-26 05:57:12

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#15 2023-09-30 15:45:30

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#16 2023-09-30 22:36:04

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#17 2023-10-22 12:38:52

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#18 2023-11-01 05:23:18

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#19 2023-11-01 20:21:15

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#20 2023-11-01 23:11:31

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#21 2023-11-03 17:33:27

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#22 2023-11-23 07:28:39

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#23 2023-11-23 07:40:05

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#24 2023-11-23 10:09:19

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

#25 2023-11-23 11:20:24

Re: Low cost Mars Sample Return.

Board footer