Comments on: NASA “pauses” Mars Sample Return mission

By: Questioner

Questioner — Sat, 18 Nov 2023 07:14:15 +0000

It seems possible that the US empire will be defeated by China when it comes to Mars samples!?

Tianwen-3: China’s Mars sample return mission (present launch date target: 2031)

https://www.planetary.org/articles/tianwen-3-china-mars-sample-return-mission

By: Jerry Greenwood

Jerry Greenwood — Thu, 16 Nov 2023 17:27:12 +0000

NASA’s plan should be to turn the entire project over to SpaceX and just let them run with it.

By: pzatchok

pzatchok — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 23:14:38 +0000

The super Dracos are still used on the craft. They are the emergency escape system.

To use them for landing on Mars would not require anything more than some Earth side testing and maybe a few adjustments.

By: Col Beausabre

Col Beausabre — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:29:02 +0000

Ok, let’s think about the unthinkable (to quote Herman Kahn). Let’s get rid of NASA. What is the value of a Soviet style entity in space exploration? Sell off the facilities – the parts that make sense will be purchased. if there are no buyers, it shows what they are worth. Funding for research can come from the public. And yes it can work

“The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation is the independent nonprofit technology transfer organization serving the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Morgridge Institute for Research. It provides significant research support, granting TENS OF MILLIONS (my emphasis) of dollars to the university each year and contributing to the university’s “margin of excellence”.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Alumni_Research_Foundation

There is nothing to prevent organizations banding together in consortia to fund major projects.

Some institutions can fund major projects by themself. Harvard is sitting on $41B, Yale $30B, Stanford $28B, Princeton, $26B, MIT $17B, Penn $15B, etc, etc. Consider the profits if Harvard’s $40B is making just average returns in the market…..

By: Richard M

Richard M — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:28:35 +0000

It is amusing that the otherwise fiscally skinflint GOP-controlled House just opened up the money spigot for MSR, and it was the Democratic-controlled Senate that deployed the hammer. But the explanation seems to be porky in nature.

Honestly, though, given the requirements for this mission, I don’t think that even the most aggressively commercial profile is going to get the cost down a whole lot. And then we will get to see which end of Congress is going to get its way.

By: MDN

MDN — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:36:34 +0000

I conjecture that if NASA had not forced SpaceX to abandon the Super Draco propulsive landing plan for the Dragon capsule (forcing them to uses parachutes instead) then we’d already have a perfectly suitable platform to build the Mars sample return mission around for free.

SpaceX had already stated intentions to send some Dragon missions to Mars. And as they are designed to land with a substantial payload in a robust and stable hull that has all the power, comms, and avionics you’d need, it would have been pretty trivial to integrate a recovery drone, sample loading system, and return rocket stage into a Dragon based configuration compared to a From Scratch design. And in all likelihood such a mission could have been flying already for far less than even the original budget.

MHO anyway.

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:21:49 +0000

“..listening to industry and seeing what ideas they have.” Industry will probably have people standing on Mars watching these robots puttering around just to haul back a miniscule amount of material for scientific study. When will the mindset at NASA change? Unfettered Industry is their path to success.