NASA's Mars Sample Return Concept Studies Selected
https://lnkd.in/eEPx2Dz3
NASA recently announced the selections for the MSR (ROSES C.26) call to industry, showcasing a diverse range of concept titles proposed by various companies. The selected proposals include:
- 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 [edit] Kent, WA: “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”
These selections may bring fresh perspectives and innovative ideas to the mission, and it will be interesting to learn more about the concepts proposed. However, it remains unclear how the new studies will be integrated into or replace the current MSR architecture, what the timeline is, or what the expected costs really are. The focus on reducing complexity and enhancing reliability needs to align with the broader goals of ensuring mission feasibility and maximizing return on investment.
In the meantime, we find ourselves in a state of uncertainty. Given the pending elections and the current political and budgetary climate, it is doubtful that any significant decisions will be announced soon. This period of enforced stagnation is concerning, as it could have a detrimental effect on the already beleaguered and somewhat disillusioned workforce at JPL. The uncertainty and lack of clear direction may further erode morale and hinder the progress of ongoing and future projects.
In previous discussions and letters, I have consistently advocated for robust support and clear direction for NASA's missions. The MSR mission, in particular, is a testament to our ambition to explore and understand the cosmos. It is essential that we continue to support this mission, ensuring that it receives the necessary resources and attention to succeed.
While it is crucial to remain supportive of the studies and new ideas being brought to the table, it is equally important to seek clarity on how these new initiatives will be implemented. The inclusion of additional new players and fresh perspectives can potentially strengthen the mission's success, but only if managed effectively. This collaborative spirit is at the heart of our collective efforts to push the boundaries of human knowledge and exploration.
--
5moApparently we haven't looked at the design spec yet. A rocket will always be a problem when it comes to deep space, even to our Moon. A look at Wernher Von Braun's system and it needs a few mods as in hybridization. There's no such model yet . The real goal and part of the HARD given by JFK isn't fulfilled yet . Escaping Earth's Gravity Directly is that goal and people like myself who worked on this problem gets nowhere because the solution for y'all is , if it ain't broken why fix it. That's why progress has halted and some idiot decided to just jump to the next as in Nuclear propulsion. The term free energy transfer has eluded many but they show it all the time just like your video presentation of a satellite launch. Btw this is not Rocket science but real obtainable science.