NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-16 10:10:27

The article at the link below reports on progress in defining the technology to be used for the proposed Mars sample return mission, under study by NASA and affiliated researchers.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/04/20/n … f-of-mars/

Of particular interest may be the decision to settle on use of a solid rocket motor to provide reliable launch service from the surface of Mars.

I am hoping GW Johnson will provide his insight on this decision, and its implications for future Mars missions, including ones including human explorers.

Quite recently, in this forum, GW Johnson published notes on a proposal to design an exploration mission that would be designed entirely around storable liquid fuel/oxidizer components, to insure the safe return of the explorers, by eliminating risk of attempting to make fuel and oxidizer at Mars.

The use of solid rocket motors no doubt has its own risks, and that use has the distinct disadvantage that each such rocket transported to Mars can be used only once.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-16 10:30:05

As a follow up to Post#1, here is an article from late in 2019, before the final decision was made to go with solid rocket motor.

The article describes the competition between hybrid technology and traditional solid rocket motors.

https://www.airspacemag.com/airspacemag … 180973115/

One point that the article makes is that solid rocket motors have been used successfully on Mars to achieve landings for multiple probes.

I would be interested if someone who investigates the history of this decision can find reports on the arguments and how solids ultimately won.

A factor against solids (that I was not aware of) is their vulnerability to cracking in the temperature cycles of Mars. Apparently a countermeasure is to allocate some solar energy to maintaining the temperature of the motor while it waits on the surface for the sample collection rovers to complete their tasks.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-16 17:03:06

We have talked about this mission structure for what seems like forever.
Solids in the cold of mars will not have the boiloff issue or the power to create for getting the sample back home.
The trouble with a ready to return rocket for the sample is also how do we land that extra mass as we will want to get more than the rocket to return home as the payload as we need a rover and other tools to make it worth wild.

http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=4465

http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6983

http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=7616

Then we have the ESA plans as well

https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/04/20/n … f-of-mars/
With estimated cost of $7 billion, the multi-part mission is ambitious, but NASA officials argue it is achievable.

The Perseverance rover is launching with 43 sample tubes. Five of the tubes will be blanks — they will not be filled with Martian samples — to help scientists analyzing the specimens sort out what molecules came from Mars, and what originated on Earth.

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-16 17:55:22

For SpaceNut ...

I tried to find previous work on this topic, but got so many results back with the searches i tried that it seemed hopeless.

I would be happy to see you move this set of three posts to one of the previous ones.

The intention of Post #1 was to report on what appears to have been a decision finalized to use solid rocket motor technology for the return vehicle.

Thank you for finding and showing those previous topics.

If you can move the new posts to a topic that is about the NASA return mission, I think that might be better.

The European project deserves its own topic, I would think.

Interesting (to me at least) that one of the earlier posters complained that the MSR would be delayed to 2022 with all the foot dragging.

That prediction looks pretty accurate << grin >>

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-16 19:25:54

GW is the expert when it comes to solids me I am just an Estes rocketeer from when I was building them as a teen.
Single stage to multiple stages with parachutes and camera's to capture at altitude shots/ A few times the rocket was lost to wind, trees, and yes spiraling to the ground ending up like a dart in the lawn.

tahanson43206 · 2020-11-11 19:04:53

Here's an update on the sample return effort ...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … d=msedgntp

NASA is moving swiftly to bring Mars samples back to Earth
Mike Wehner 1 day ago

I would imagine trying to solidify as much as possible during the current administration is a factor in reported speedy efforts.

(th)

GW Johnson · 2020-11-11 23:22:19

I missed seeing this thread until now. Interesting.

Two solid motors then a liquid RCS system. Might work, or it might not be accurate enough to rendezvous, unless they add more RCS. Dunno.

The way the Minuteman missile had a 100-yard CEP halfway around the world was not the 4 solid stages, it was the hydrazine-fueled warhead bus that could tailor the end-of-boost trajectory quite precisely. The 4 solid stages gave you instant launch response time. The liquids never could.

The extreme cold could be a problem unless they consult with some tactical motor designers. Never get there with PBAN binder. The big motor boys don't deal with extreme cold (or heat) because their products are kept in nice cozy silos. Underground, in a sub, makes no difference. Cozy. Not extreme. (And the +29 F that killed shuttle Challenger is NOT extreme!)

The tactical boys do deal with extremes, routinely. -65 F to 145 F (-54 C to 63 C) is mil spec. We did it using HTPB or CTPB binders, and the ability to routinely build and analyze finite element grain stress models in 2-D or even 3-D for every single design, and that was long before there were ever any desktop computers! There is a glass transition temperature down around -70 to -100 F with binder materials. You simply cannot go that low. Must heat if exposed to that.

You can relieve a lot of the cold shrinkage stress if you don't do a case-bonded grain design. But such are NOT spherical motors! And the grain mounting design is much more complicated. There is such a thing as a stress-relieving liner, which was used for end-burners that had to go to -65F. Took effort to develop, took effort to build in production, but it was worth it. Otherwise, in a more conventional internal-burning grain design, the bore reduces the stresses at least a little, and full length slots do even more.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2020-11-11 23:33:12)

SpaceNut · 2020-11-22 16:48:30

Report on the Construction and Operation of a Mars In-Situ Propellant Production Unit
Contains the Sabatier reactor diagram which this contains....
The prototype used bottle gasses but to do this on mars requires.
Sabatier reactor, which operates at about 0.8 bar (Denver ambient) pressure and 250 Centigrade, to form CH4 and H2O vapor.
The electrolyser requires about 160 W, in the form of 4 V, 40 A DC power.

The group that has gone forward with this has a much lower mass and power levels to achieve the goal of making fuel insitu mars.

A Comparison of Methods for the Mars Sample Return Mission

SpaceNut · 2020-12-06 22:11:21

Same image for this article
Independent Review Indicates NASA Prepared for Mars Sample Return Campaign

The MSR campaign will require three advanced space vehicles.
The first, NASA's Mars 2020 Perseverance rover, is more than halfway to Mars following launch in July. Aboard Perseverance is a sophisticated sampling system with a coring drill and sample tubes that are the cleanest hardware ever sent to space. Once on Mars, Perseverance aims to cache rock and regolith samples in its collection tubes.
It then would leave some of them on the Martian surface for an ESA-provided "fetch" rover to collect and deliver to a NASA-provided Mars Ascent Vehicle, which then would launch the samples into orbit around Mars.
An ESA-provided Earth Return Orbiter would then rendezvous with the samples in orbit around Mars and take them in a highly secure containment capsule for return to Earth in the 2030s.
"Mars Sample Return is something NASA needs to do as a leading member of the global community," said NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine. "We know there are challenges ahead, but that's why we look closely at these architectures. And that's why in the end, we achieve the big accomplishments."
Sample return is a top priority of the National Academies' Planetary Science Decadal Survey for 2013-2022, and NASA has worked to mature the critical capabilities and overall MSR concept for the past three years.

SpaceNut · 2020-12-19 20:15:22

DECEMBER 17, 2020 NASA Moves Forward With Campaign to Return Mars Samples to Earth

SpaceNut · 2021-06-05 20:45:16

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/06 … le-update/

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-20 05:19:01

Planetary science decadal endorses Mars sample return, outer planets missions
https://spacenews.com/planetary-science … -missions/

The final report of the planetary science decadal survey, developed by a committee of the National Academies and released April 19, also recommended work on a space telescope to track near Earth objects, a Mars lander to look for evidence of life and a lunar rover to collect samples that would be returned by astronauts.

“This report sets out an ambitious but practicable vision for advancing the frontiers of planetary science, astrobiology and planetary defense in the next decade,” Robin Canup, co-chair of the steering committee for the decadal survey and assistant vice president of the Planetary Sciences Directorate at the Southwest Research Institute, said in a statement about the decadal.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-05-12 12:52:05

'Scientists worried Mars rocks retrieved by NASA may host alien germs'

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/sci … 00539.html

NASA plunged robust Mars sample-return gear into a U.S. desert

https://mashable.com/video/nasa-mars-sample-return-test

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-05-12 13:02:45)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-08-24 07:22:30

Shutdown Threat Looms Large Over NASA; Science Programs Face Cuts

https://www.astralytical.com/insights/s … -face-cuts

There is a bipartisan consensus in both chambers, the House of Represenatives and the Senate, not to cut the crewed Artemis missions to the Moon, with a wary eye on a rising China being a primary motivator.

The Senate has clearly taken aim at the Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission to balance the books, while the House has yet to reveal where their pain will be felt.

Public Attitudes On NASA Show Little Change

It is clear that despite the Congressional budget drama the general public has maintained their support for NASA and their same historical priorities for the space agency.

Roughly 50% of people love everything NASA does. Roughly 15% of people hate it all. The 35% in between appear to be largely Earth-centric and not at all interested in crewed missions to the Moon or Mars.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-08-24 07:24:42)

GW Johnson · 2023-08-25 10:52:53

Congress as we know it is incompetent to be setting mission goals, other than in the broadest sense. Because of porkbarrel politics, over the decades they have micromanaged NASA's detailed objectives and spending assignments. This has had bad effects ever since the end of Apollo. It's past time to put a stop to that practice.

GW

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-09-05 11:13:13

MSR won't be as costly as the ISS but might become more expensive than JWST

There was a test drop of a Mars sample return in the Utah desert and now Pressure to get it all done on budget.

'Testing Mars Sample Return: Finding the Right Footpad Size for the Sample Retrieval Lander'

https://mars.nasa.gov/resources/27620/t … al-lander/

the original plan, perhaps a Russian Soviet idea to take samples and Von Braun Kennedy also looked to Mars, then Bush Snr and his Space Exploration Initiative was a 1989–1993 space public policy initiative before Bush Jnr

Then a new date

Launch: No Earlier than 2014
https://web.archive.org/web/20050206210 … le_return/
Science instruments: TBD

during the late nineties, plans called for the first elements of a sample return mission to be launched in 2003, for a return of samples by 2008.

Costs going the wrong way?

2018 vid, before European sanctions on the Russian Lander and the War in Ukraine.

'How to Get Mars Samples to Earth - 3 Missions Necessary?'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK7ZLBcV4q4

Cost Concerns For NASA's Mars Sample Return Mission
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1-7QnhIieo

First it was half a Billion or a Few Hundred Million, then it becomes 1 Billion Dollars, more people join the team and Mars sample return campaign at 1.5 billion euros, next 3-4 Billion Dollars and now it becomes 9 Billion?

The Budget is under pressure, there might be a recession coming again.

What do we know about 2023, 2024, 2025 up until 2028 or 2032.

China is hinting at stuff, the Moon, maybe Mars, maybe Saturn or Uranus or Neptune nobody is sure, maybe Asteroids or a Jupiter Callisto mission or a Space Telescope. There hints from press release and posts on social media.

India is expanding through Brics with other nations, lands a robot on the Moon and is planning future missions.

JWST is makes greeat discovery, it can look at the planets of the Solar system now, perhaps more Dark Matter results or Older than the Oldest Galaxy findings or seeing strange results from an exoplanet atmosphere

Artificial intelligence will be driving more cars, chatting to people online, it could be acting almost exactly like a pet dog or overall the science of AI and propaganda power more prominent

Perhaps results from Mars orbiters and Rovers discovery will keep coming, past waters, more gas or minerals or methane found on Mars

Russia is starting to stumble, its Moon mission and planetary mission ability drops.

'Speaker McCarthy acknowledges the clock is running out on the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30.'
https://twitter.com/rollcall/status/1691955557115068816

Meet the Mars Samples: Swift Run and Skyland (Samples 10 and 11)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfvPKPSDJcc

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-09-05 11:27:21)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-01-18 13:40:20

NASA’s Troubled Mars Sample Mission Has Scientists Seeing Red
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti … eeing-red/

NASA’s Mars Sample Return program is the agency’s highest priority in planetary science, but projected multibillion-dollar overruns have some calling the plan a “dumpster fire”

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-06-05 16:43:57

Perseverance rover's Mars rock sample may contain best evidence of possible ancient life
https://www.space.com/the-universe/mars … cient-life

the Lunar mission by China some say testing a technique for Mars?

China successfully lands Chang’e 6 sample-return probe on moon’s far side
https://interestingengineering.com/spac … on-landing

A Job for AI maybe Comparing Moon Rocks with Lunar Meteorites.

Crimes?

Because of their rarity on Earth, and the difficulty of obtaining more, Moon rocks have been frequent targets of theft and vandalism, and many have gone missing or were stolen.

Moon rocks on Earth come from four sources: those collected by six United States Apollo program crewed lunar landings from 1969 to 1972; those collected by three Soviet uncrewed Luna probes in the 1970s; those collected by the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program's uncrewed probes; and rocks that were ejected naturally from the lunar surface before falling to Earth as lunar meteorites. Rocks from the Moon have been measured by radiometric dating techniques. They range in age from about 3.16 billion years old for the basaltic samples derived from the lunar maria, up to about 4.44 billion years old for rocks derived from the highlands.

How do we know that it is a rock from the moon?
https://sites.wustl.edu/meteoritesite/i … -the-moon/

Lunar mineralogy
Only four minerals – plagioclase feldspar, pyroxene, olivine, and ilmenite – account for 98-99% of the crystalline material of the lunar crust. (Material at the lunar surface contains a high proportion of non-crystalline material, but most of this material is glass that formed from melting of rocks containing the four major minerals.) The remaining 1-2% is largely potassium feldspar, oxide minerals such as chromite, pleonaste, and rutile, calcium phosphates, zircon, troilite, and iron-nickel metal. Many other minerals have been identified, but most are rare and occur only as very small grains interstitial to the four major minerals and cannot be seen with the unaided eye.

No lunar meteorite has yet been found in North America, South America, or Europe. They undoubtedly exist, but the probability of finding a lunar meteorite in a temperate environment is incredibly low.

Realistically, the probability that an amateur will find a lunar meteorite is so low that I cannot raise much enthusiasm to examine the thousands of rocks and photos that I have been asked to examine. If I wanted to find a lunar meteorite myself, I would not scour the Mojave Desert. I would look through rock collections at colleges and universities. It is not unreasonable that a lunar meteorite exists in an old drawer somewhere because a sharp-eyed geology student or professor found a funny-looking rock years ago in a place it did not belong. It would not surprise me to learn that some “expert” proclaimed that the rock was not a meteorite because it did not look like an ordinary chondrite, after analysis it did not contain a high concentration of nickel, or it did not attract a magnet (most lunar meteorites do not contain enough iron-nickel metal to attract a simple magnet; more below). Both visually and compositionally, lunar meteorites “look” more like terrestrial (Earth) rocks than do “normal” meteorites (ordinary chondrites). It would be easy to overlook a lunar meteorite. A weathered lunar meteorite would look remarkably unremarkable.

Some of the most common minerals at the surface of the Earth are rare or have never been found in samples collected on the moon. These include quartz, calcite, magnetite, hematite, micas, amphiboles, and most sulfide minerals. Many terrestrial minerals contain water as part of their crystal structure. Micas and amphiboles are common examples. Hydrous (water containing) minerals have not been found in samples collected on the moon. The simplicity of lunar mineralogy often makes it very easy for me to say with great confidence “This is not a Moon rock.” A rock that contains quartz, calcite, or mica as a primary mineral is not from the moon.

On Earth, volcanoes are often cone-shaped mountains because they are a pile of ash and lava ejected from a vent. The lavas are viscous and solidify before they flow very far. Because of their iron-rich composition and lack of water, lunar lavas were much less viscous, more like motor oil. When lunar lavas erupted onto the lunar surface, they did not form volcanoes, they simply flowed and filled low spots. As a result, lunar lava deposits are flat, thin, and cover wide areas. Also, because the moon has no atmosphere and little gravity, ejected ash dissipated widely instead of piling up near the vent, as on Earth.

Starting about the time of the period of intense meteorite bombardment, the lunar mantle partially melted. The resulting magmas rose through the crust to the surface and ponded in low spots. These low spots were mainly the huge craters, called basins, that were left by impacts of the largest meteorites. Lunar volcanism continued for about 2 billion years. The confusion from Tektites they are gravel-sized bodies composed of black, green, brown or grey natural glass formed by terrestrial debris ejected during meteorite impacts. About one in every thousand newly discovered meteorites is a lunar meteorite, whereas the vast majority of meteorites are from the asteroid belt. In the 19th century most scientists even believed that all meteorites falling towards the Earth were from the Moon.

277 meteorites had been classified as Martian, less than half a percent of the 72,000 meteorites that have been classified. The largest complete, uncut Martian meteorite, Taoudenni 002
https://www.livescience.com/worlds-larg … orite.html

list of lunar meteorites
https://meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/moon … lumina.htm
order of decreasing plagioclase abundance

Isotopic evidence for the formation of the Moon in a canonical giant impact
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22155-7

Lunar meteorites collected in Africa and Oman are, for all practical purposes, the only source of Moon rocks available for private ownership. This is because all rocks collected during the Apollo Moon-landing program are property of the United States government or of other nations to which the U.S. conveyed them as gifts. Similarly, all lunar meteorites collected by the U.S. and Japanese Antarctic programs are, by treaty, held by those governments for research and education purposes only.

Why a compendium?
https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/antmet/lmc/index.cfm#
The numbers of lunar meteorites have grown substantially the last few decades - as of January 2024 there are nearly 150 unique lunar meteorite groups that have been officially classified as lunar (see full listing on compendium home page). Sixteen of these are from the US Antarctic meteorite collection, 6 are from the Japanese Antarctic meteorite collection, and the others are from hot desert localities in Africa, Australia, and the Middle East.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2024-06-05 17:14:42)

GW Johnson · 2024-06-06 11:05:19

The Mars Sample Return mission is all but dead, due to delays and high costs. "New space" might bid lower, but the delay will still be too long with such a late start. The bigger the dinosaur, the longer the time interval between death and actually falling over (SLS is the biggest one I have ever seen). -- GW

SpaceNut · 2024-06-09 09:08:59

Investigating New Methods for Mars Sample Return: NASA’s Approach

NASA seeks to optimize the strategy for ferrying specimens from the Martian surface to Earth. A firm-fixed-price contract, with an aggregate value of $1.5 million for the completion of 90-day studies, has been issued to seven commercial respondents.
The following entities and their proposed studies were shortlisted in response to an April 15 solicitation for proposals:
Lockheed Martin in Littleton, Colorado: “Lockheed Martin Rapid Mission Design Studies for Mars Sample Return”
SpaceX in Hawthorne, California: “Enabling Mars Sample Return With Starship”
Aerojet Rocketdyne in Huntsville, Alabama: “A High-Performance Liquid Mars Ascent Vehicle, Using Highly Reliable and Mature Propulsion Technologies, to Improve Program Affordability and Schedule”
Blue Origin in Monrovia, California: “Leveraging Artemis for Mars Sample Return”
Quantum Space, in Rockville, Maryland: “Quantum Anchor Leg Mars Sample Return Study”
Northrop Grumman in Elkton, Maryland: “High TRL MAV Propulsion Trades and Concept Design for MSR Rapid Mission Design”
Whittinghill Aerospace in Camarillo, California: “A Rapid Design Study for the MSR Single Stage Mars Ascent Vehicle”

https://science.nasa.gov/mission/mars-sample-return/

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2020-06-16 10:10:27

NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#2 2020-06-16 10:30:05

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#3 2020-06-16 17:03:06

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#4 2020-06-16 17:55:22

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#5 2020-06-16 19:25:54

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#6 2020-11-11 19:04:53

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#7 2020-11-11 23:22:19

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#8 2020-11-22 16:48:30

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#9 2020-12-06 22:11:21

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#10 2020-12-19 20:15:22

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#11 2021-06-05 20:45:16

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#12 2022-04-20 05:19:01

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#13 2022-05-12 12:52:05

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#14 2023-08-24 07:22:30

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#15 2023-08-25 10:52:53

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#16 2023-09-05 11:13:13

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#17 2024-01-18 13:40:20

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#18 2024-06-05 16:43:57

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#19 2024-06-06 11:05:19

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

#20 2024-06-09 09:08:59

Re: NASA Mars Sample Return Mission

Board footer