Can NASA's troubled Mars Sample Return mission be saved?
NASA wants to return Mars samples to Earth, but budget problems and technical woes have the mission caught between a rock and the Red Planet.
There appears to be an unofficial robotic space race underway involving the Red Planet. Both the U.S. and China are scripting strategies for bringing goodies back to Earth from Mars via their respective Mars Sample Return (MSR) endeavors.
For America, things are currently happening in real-time on Mars. NASA's Perseverance rover is busily wheeling about within the ins and outs of Jezero Crater, biting into and snatching primo chunks of Mars for eventual pick-up by a future MSR mission. But early on, for NASA, the space agency found itself caught between a Mars rock and a budgetary and timing hard place. The space agency's plans for MSR eventually rang a price tag upwards of $11 billion. Additionally, NASA estimated that samples of Mars dirt, rock, and atmosphere wouldn't be returned to Earth until 2040.
That plan, as blueprinted by NASA and its cooperative MSR partner, the European Space Agency (ESA), was unacceptable and declared so by NASA leadership. What followed were a set of studies for NASA, from within and outside the agency, to help pinpoint avenues to cut MSR costs and shorten the calendar time for return to Earth of prime-time Mars collectibles. Now, yet another shoe is set to drop thanks to an additional review by an independent committee looking into the MSR program.
MSR Review team
The new review is being conducted by the MSR Strategy Review Team chaired by Maria Zuber, an MIT planetary scientist. The team is assessing the studies conducted by industry, a team across NASA centers, the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory.
That team will recommend to NASA a primary architecture for the campaign, including associated cost and schedule estimates.
What they have found will be reported by NASA soon.
"Our current status is that the Mars Sample Return Strategy Review team is delivering a final report to NASA's associate administrator for the Science Mission Directorate before the end of [2024]. NASA anticipates additional Mars Sample Return updates in the first quarter of 2025," said Karen Fox, a NASA spokesperson, responding to a Space.com inquiry.
Get the Space.com Newsletter
Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!
Zuber and colleagues are to assess all the study outputs, eyeing a central question: Is America's Mars Sample Return endeavor salvageable?
Red planet probing
Looming large in space and time for sampling of Mars is China's Tianwen-3 mission that could retrieve specimens for lab looks here on Earth around 2031.
According to a newly published research paper, the Tianwen-3 spacecraft involves two launches around 2028 headed for distant Mars.
According to the study, which appeared in the National Science Review journal, mission planners are currently analyzing where on Mars to sample, what to choose, how to sample and how to utilize the collected materials.
At China's Deep Space Exploration Laboratory, the mission's chief scientist Hou Zengqian and its chief designer Liu Jizhong, with colleagues, are blueprinting their exploration strategy. "The primary scientific goal of which is to search for signatures of life on Mars," they explain.
But will China's Mars mission constitute a "grab bag," one-stop shopping approach or host other type of sample-gathering gear once on the Red Planet. So far, details are skimpy.
High priority questions
Meanwhile, the MSR dilemma in the United States is under intense discussion at gatherings of the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG). It serves as a community-based, interdisciplinary forum for inquiry and analysis to support NASA Mars exploration objectives.
"The NASA/ESA approach to MSR seeks to address as many different high-priority science questions about Mars as we can from one location - Jezero Crater," said MEPAG chair, Victoria Hamilton, also a leading planetary scientist at Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado.
"Although looking for signs of ancient biosignatures addresses one of those questions, it is only one of the many scientific questions that can be addressed by returning samples from Mars, and the choice to collect samples from in and around Jezero Crater reflects this thinking," said Hamilton. "MEPAG has not put forward a position on China's plans for MSR."
Scientifically selected samples
That said, MEPAG has always advocated strongly for the return of a scientifically-selected suite of samples, Hamilton told Space.com, "so that we can best address as many high-priority science questions as possible.
Hamilton said that "scientifically-selected" includes things like obtaining samples representing a diversity of geologic environments/processes, the availability of bedrock or other in-place materials to sample and obtain appropriate context information, "and specifically targeting locations where there is a likelihood of ancient bio-signature preservation."
Abandoned idea
Although the return of any samples from Mars, Hamilton added, will certainly provide new insights, "not all destinations provide samples of equivalent value."
The science community largely abandoned the idea of a "grab bag" site partly because the Mars Pathfinder mission of 1997 landed in a region with no intact bedrock, "and the results obtained from measurements of the nearby loose rocks were difficult to understand absent their original context," said Hamilton.
In short, the approach taken jointly by NASA and ESA with MSR has been focused on returning the best possible samples, Hamilton said, "and that could end up meaning that MSR is not the first Mars sample return mission."
China scoops
Bruce Jakosky is a long-time Mars investigator and is a senior research scientist at the University of Colorado's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics in Boulder.
"Any sample is better than no sample," Jakosky told Space.com, "but the suite of samples that has been collected by Perseverance is way, way better than any grab sample or short traverse rover you could do."
Carefully selected samples of different type of materials are far better than one piece of a rock or one soil sample, said Jakosky. "In that sense, scientifically, I don't worry about whether the Chinese will scoop us. I think that all science is good science. It becomes a political question of whether we want to let the Chinese scoop us," he said.
Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.
Leonard David is an award-winning space journalist who has been reporting on space activities for more than 50 years. Currently writing as Space.com's Space Insider Columnist among his other projects, Leonard has authored numerous books on space exploration, Mars missions and more, with his latest being "Moon Rush: The New Space Race" published in 2019 by National Geographic. He also wrote "Mars: Our Future on the Red Planet" released in 2016 by National Geographic. Leonard has served as a correspondent for SpaceNews, Scientific American and Aerospace America for the AIAA. He has received many awards, including the first Ordway Award for Sustained Excellence in Spaceflight History in 2015 at the AAS Wernher von Braun Memorial Symposium. You can find out Leonard's latest project at his website and on Twitter.
-
monkeyonmars I think Musk can do it for less than $11 billion. Just got to get that fuel transfer working.Reply -
danR
Not only can SpaceX do it for less, the whole project is being rendered moot by the company's own boots-on-the-ground timeline. They could have a complete robotic lab on Mars <2030 that will simply obviate any need for a 'sample return'.monkeyonmars said:I think Musk can do it for less than $11 billion. Just got to get that fuel transfer working.
Before landing people on Mars, Musk's project necessarily entails not only such a lab, but multiple sampling labs all over the surface to find optimum landing spots for establishing a colonizing base. It will be a trivial matter to add the assets needed to accomplish this present, mooted, sampling project. -
Nik0101 danR said:Not only can SpaceX do it for less, the whole project is being rendered moot by the company's own boots-on-the-ground timeline. They could have a complete robotic lab on Mars <2030 that will simply obviate any need for a 'sample return'.
Before landing people on Mars, Musk's project necessarily entails not only such a lab, but multiple sampling labs all over the surface to find optimum landing spots for establishing a colonizing base. It will be a trivial matter to add the assets needed to accomplish this present, mooted, sampling project.
Ah, yes. And I'm sure he'll begin building his Mars base with AI powered, self-replicating, Go-Go dancing robots at the same time. The base that should have been in operation 5 years ago.
Musk says a lot of things and habitually gives overly optimistic timelines. The next launch window is in 2026 and the following one is in 2028/2029. His company will have to demonstrate capability to design, build, and land multiple labs & rovers on the Moon before getting anywhere near Mars within those 4 years. -
analysisparalysis
While I wish SpaceX could meet their objectives as stated, Elon has a history of overpromising schedule. Back in 2018, he stated it would be likely SpaceX would send astronauts to Mars by 2024. https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-spacex-mars-plan-timeline-2018-10 In addition, per their report, the GAO "found that SpaceX used more than 50 percent of its total schedule to reach PDR in November 2022. On average, NASA major projects used about 35 percent of the total schedule to reach this milestone". Space takes time, even for SpaceX.danR said:Not only can SpaceX do it for less, the whole project is being rendered moot by the company's own boots-on-the-ground timeline. They could have a complete robotic lab on Mars <2030 that will simply obviate any need for a 'sample return'.
Before landing people on Mars, Musk's project necessarily entails not only such a lab, but multiple sampling labs all over the surface to find optimum landing spots for establishing a colonizing base. It will be a trivial matter to add the assets needed to accomplish this present, mooted, sampling project.
GAO Report: https://www.gao.gov/assets/d24106256.pdf -
blueamber OK, whats the hurry? Yeah, a scientist wants to be first to ID a bug on mars, but we are getting there eventually anyway... why spend extra money on scientific fluff, spend it colonizing mars... let a martian find the bug!Reply -
Nik0101
"ID a bug"?? "Scientific fluff"?? Wait... What!?blueamber said:OK, whats the hurry? Yeah, a scientist wants to be first to ID a bug on mars, but we are getting there eventually anyway... why spend extra money on scientific fluff, spend it colonizing mars... let a martian find the bug!
Do you mean definitively answering the question mankind has been pondering since when we were living in caves & looked up at the sky at night? The specific reason we've been sending missions to Mars since the 1960s in the first place?
If you think sending robotic missions is expensive, getting squishy and fragile humans to Mars and back will be exponentially more costly.
Note: All missions sent to land on Mars are thoroughly sterilized so we don't introduce any microorganisms onto the planet or mistake Earth microbia for life present or past life native to the Red Planet. -
Torbjorn Larsson As long as politicians are not involved, I'm sure we can get a program that is cheaper for the US. (Remember that ESA is currently paying up for the orbital return craft.)Reply
Science is hard work that funders, dominated by private industry, is willing to pay to get access to new knowledge and technology. The haste is because the involved experiments are getting old - people live only that long - and because return on investment is larger the faster it happens.blueamber said:OK, whats the hurry? Yeah, a scientist wants to be first to ID a bug on mars, but we are getting there eventually anyway... why spend extra money on scientific fluff, spend it colonizing mars...
Re the astrobiology, it is unlikely that any organism would be caught in the samples, you have to wait for the 2m ExoMars drill for that to happen. (IT won't return samples, but could identify living organisms that could live in subcrustal conditions.*) What Perseverance could return is understanding of the habitability and possibly trace fossils indicating possible life when Mars was younger.
*If not below the 2 m of radiation sterilized rock, so a couple of kilometers down. New research on potential Mars crust conditions has increased the prior likelihood by finding specifics:
"Our findings indicate that Mars' crustal processes were far more dynamic than previously thought," said Lee, the Harry Carothers Wiess Professor of Geology and professor of Earth, environmental and planetary sciences.
https://phys.org/news/2024-12-ancient-mars-thick-crust-hidden.html
"Not only could thick crust in the southern highlands have generated granitic magmas without plate tectonics, but it also created the thermal conditions for stable groundwater aquifers—reservoirs of liquid water—on a planet we've often considered dry and frozen."At an estimated 2 billion years old, Black Beauty is the second oldest Martian meteorite ever discovered. However, the Curtin University team discovered something even older within it: a 4.45 billion-year-old zircon grain that harbors the fingerprints of fluids rich in water.
https://www.livescience.com/space/mars/did-alien-life-exist-in-hot-water-on-mars-billions-of-years-agoOn Earth similar conditions led to the split between biology and geology, now robustly dated to ~ 4.4-4.2 billion years ago.
Team member Aaron Cavosie from Curtin's School of Earth and Planetary Sciences thinks this discovery will open up new avenues to understanding hydrothermal systems associated with the activity of volcanic magma that once ran through Mars.
"We used nano-scale geochemistry to detect elemental evidence of hot water on Mars 4.45 billion years ago," Cavosie said in a statement. "Hydrothermal systems were essential for the development of life on Earth, and our findings suggest Mars also had water, a key ingredient for habitable environments, during the earliest history of crust formation." -
George²
I remember when I lived in a cave and I looked up, I could see the ceiling of the cave.Nik0101 said:Do you mean definitively answering the question mankind has been pondering since when we were living in caves & looked up at the sky -
Torbjorn Larsson
Sorry to disappoint, but AFAIK complete sterilization attempts only happened with the Viking probes. Soviet (crash) landers before that was cleaned at best (probably not), and that goes for all subsequent missions chutes - vast square meters of textile hiding places - and insides as well.Nik0101 said:Note: All missions sent to land on Mars are thoroughly sterilized so we don't introduce any microorganisms onto the planet or mistake Earth microbia for life present or past life native to the Red Planet.
There have been many possibilities of biological transfers to (and from) Mars, including billion of years of impact ejecta like Black Beauty described above. Though the harsh radiation environment of today's Mars cuts down on the transfer likelihood, and recent transfer should be possible to identify by sharing evolutionary traits (genome, specific proteins, et cetera).
The main reason to clean, including antibacterial cleaning agents where they can be used, is to prevent own organic contamination to foul up the analysis experiments. That could prevent, desensitize (cause false negatives) or cause false positives in an analysis.
Planetary protection concerns are moral, and we will see how that plays out. In any case our own fauna is at first worse adapted to subcrustal conditions than any extant fauna and could be outcompeted. -
danR
Sounds like you do not disagree with a <2040 date, then, which satisfies the constraints indicated in the article. As for ~2029, SpaceX has already demonstrated the ability to launch a Tesla to a cis-Martian flypast. It would be a delta-V energy stretch from that event to getting a automobile-sized mass on Martian soil; but it would be within the capabilities of an energy-scrounging booster&secondstage-sacrificed (no return) Starship, even without LEO refueling.Nik0101 said:Ah, yes. And I'm sure he'll begin building his Mars base with AI powered, self-replicating, Go-Go dancing robots at the same time. The base that should have been in operation 5 years ago.
Musk says a lot of things and habitually gives overly optimistic timelines. The next launch window is in 2026 and the following one is in 2028/2029. His company will have to demonstrate capability to design, build, and land multiple labs & rovers on the Moon before getting anywhere near Mars within those 4 years.
Note that SpaceX has already demonstrated launch-to-orbit capability for Starship, it was simply decided not to follow through.