Connect with us

News

DeepSpace: Europe reveals Mars sample return spacecraft as SpaceX builds Starships

Published

6 years ago

on

The European Space Agency (ESA) revealed a concept for a spacecraft that would work alongside NASA to return samples of Martian soil to Earth. (ESA)

Eric Ralph · May 28th, 2019

Welcome to the latest edition of DeepSpace! Each week, Teslarati space reporter Eric Ralph hand-crafts this newsletter to give you a breakdown of what’s happening in the space industry and what you need to know. To receive this newsletter (and others) directly and join our member-only Slack group, give us a 3-month trial for just $5.

On May 27th, the European Space Agency (ESA) published updated renders of a proposed spacecraft, called the Earth Return Orbiter (ERO). ERO would be the last of four critical elements of a joint NASA-ESA Mars sample return mission, meant to return perhaps 1-5 kg (2-11 lb) of Martian samples to scientists on Earth. In a best-case scenario, such a sample return is unlikely to happen before the tail-end of the 2020s and will probably slip well into the 2030s, barring any unexpected windfalls of funding or political support.

Enter SpaceX, a private American company developing Starship/Super Heavy – a massive, next-generation launch vehicle – with the goal of landing dozens of tons of cargo and just as many humans on Mars as few as 5-10 years from now. The radically different approaches of SpaceX and NASA/ESA are bound to produce equally different results, while both are expected to cost no less than $5B-$10B to be fully realized. What gives?

The high price of guaranteed success

  • As proposed, the Mars sample return mission will be an extraordinary technical challenge.
    • At a minimum, the current approach involves sending a single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) rocket from Earth to Mars, landing the SSTO with extreme accuracy on the back of a new Mars lander, deploying a small rover to gather the sample container, loading that container onto the tiny rocket, launching said rocket into Mars orbit, grabbing the sample with large orbiter launched from Earth, and returning said sample to Earth where it will reenter the atmosphere and be safely recovered.
  • This downright Rube Golberg machine-esque architecture is nevertheless the best currently available with current mindsets and hardware. It’s also likely the only way NASA or ESA will independently acquire samples of Mars within the next few decades, barring radical changes to both the mindsets and technologies familiar and available to the deeply bureaucratic spaceflight agencies.
  • However, this is by no means an attempt to downplay the demonstrated expertise and capabilities of the space agencies and their go-to contractors. Both ESA and NASA have a decades-long heritage of spectacular achievements in robotic space exploration, reaching – however briefly, in some cases – almost every major planet and moon in the solar system.
    • The NASA-supported Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) remains a world-leading expert of both designing, building, and landing large, capable, and long-lived rovers/landers on the surface of Mars. JPL also has a track record of incredible success with space-based orbiters, including Cassini (Saturn), Magellan (Venus), Galileo (Jupiter), Voyager (most planets, now in interstellar space), Stardust (comet sample return), Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO, Mars orbiter) and more.
  • This success, however, can often come with extreme costs. NASA’s next Mars rover – essentially a modified copy of the Curiosity rover currently operating on Mars and a critical component of the proposed sample return – is likely to cost more than $2B, while Curiosity cost ~$2.5B. The Cassini Saturn orbiter cost around ~$3.5B for 15 years of scientific productivity. ESA’s Rosetta/Philae comet rendezvous cost at least $2B total. In the scheme of things, it would be hard to think of a more inspiring way to spend that money, but the fact remains that these missions are extremely expensive.

High risk, high reward

  • The price of missions like those above may, in fact, be close to their practical minimum, at least relative to the expectations of those footing the bill. However, it’s highly likely that similar results could be achieved on far tighter budgets, another way to say that far more returns could potentially be derived from the same investment.
    • The easiest way to explain this lies in the fact that the governments sponsoring and funding ESA and NASA have grown almost dysfunctionally risk-averse, to the extent that failure really isn’t an option in the modern era. Stakeholders – often elected representatives – expect success and often demand a guaranteed return on their support before choosing to fight for a given program’s funding.
    • As it turns out, an unwillingness to accept more than a minute amount of risk is not particularly compatible with affordably attempting to do things that are technically challenging and have often never been done before. That happens to be a great summary of spaceflight.
    • As risk aversion and the need for guaranteed success grew hand-in-hand, a sort of paradox formed. As politicians strove to ensure that space agency funding was efficiently used, space agencies became far more conservative (minimizing results and the potential for leaps forward) and the cost of complex, capable spacecraft grew dramatically.
    • The end result: spacecraft that are consistently reliable, high-performance, derivative, and terrifyingly expensive.
  • SpaceX is in many ways an anathema of the low-risk, medium-reward, high-cost approach that government space agencies and their dependent contractors have gravitated towards over the last 40-50 years. Instead, SpaceX accepts medium to high risk to attain great rewards at a cost that space agencies like NASA and ESA are often unable to accept as possible after decades of conservatism.
    • This is the main reason that it’s possible that NASA/ESA and SpaceX will both succeed in accomplishing goals at a dramatically disproportionate scale with roughly the same amount of funding.
    • If NASA/ESA bite the bullet and begin to seriously fund their triple-launch Mars Sample Return program, the missions will take a decade or longer and cost something like $5 million per gram of soil returned to Earth, but success will be all but guaranteed.
    • Both SpaceX’s Starship/Super Heavy and Mars colonization development programs run significant risks of hitting major obstacles, suffering catastrophic failures, and could even result in the death of crew members aboard the first attempted missions to Mars.
    • For that accepted risk, the rewards could be unfathomable and the costs revolutionary. SpaceX could very well beat the combined might of ESA and NASA to return large samples of Martian soil, rock, and water to Earth, all while launching ~100,000 kg into Martian orbit instead of the sample return’s ~10 kg.
    • In a best-case scenario, SpaceX could land the first uncrewed Starship on Mars as early as 2022 or 2024. Barring some unforeseen catastrophe or the company’s outright collapse, that first uncrewed Mars landing might happen as late as the early 2030s, around the same time as NASA and ESA’s ~10kg of Mars samples will likely be reentering Earth’s atmosphere.
  • Regardless of which approach succeeds first, space exploration fans and space scientists will have a spectacular amount of activity to be excited about over the next 10-20 years.
Thanks for being a Teslarati Reader! Become a member today to receive an issue of DeepSpace each week!

– Eric
Advertisement
-->
Related Topics:

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving lands in a new country, its 7th

Published

17 hours ago

on

November 23, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla Korea

Tesla Full Self-Driving has officially landed in a new country today, its seventh overall after it launched in both Australia and New Zealand earlier this year.

On Sunday, Tesla owners in South Korea reported that the company’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) had started arriving in their vehicles. Owners reported that it was v14.1.4, which is not the latest version available in other countries, but is one of the most recent releases Tesla has deployed to drivers:

Advertisement
-->

This marks the seventh country in which Tesla has enabled its Full Self-Driving suite, following the United States and Puerto Rico, Canada, China, Mexico, Australia, and New Zealand.

Tesla launched Full Self-Driving most recently in Australia and New Zealand about three months ago. The expansion is a major breakthrough for the company as it aims to launch Full Self-Driving on a global scale.

However, the company’s biggest challenge thus far has been getting European regulatory agencies to handle the red tape that has inhibited Tesla from launching its semi-autonomous driving suite on the continent. Recently, it admitted that it sees a pathway through Dutch regulatory bodies, which seem to be the most willing to work with Tesla to get FSD in Europe.

Tesla Full Self-Driving appears to be heading to Europe soon

The company said that it has driven over 1 million kilometers safely on European roads across 17 different countries in internal testing. But its path to success will be by “partnering with the Dutch approval authority RDW to gain exemption for the feature. This involves proving compliance with existing regulations (UN-R-171 DCAS) + filing an exemption (EU Article 39) for yet-to-be-regulated behaviors like Level 2 systems off-highway, system-initiated lane changes with hands-off the wheel, etc.”

Advertisement
-->

Perhaps the expansion into Europe will be the biggest challenge for Tesla, but it could also yield major results and advantages for the company moving forward. Tesla said it hopes to have FSD available in Europe sometime early next year.

For now, the expansion in South Korea is the latest win for Tesla and its self-driving efforts. In the U.S., it now turns its focus toward fully autonomous operation, as it works with state agencies to launch Robotaxi outside of Texas, California, and most recently, Arizona.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla CEO Elon Musk teases insane capabilities of next major FSD update

Published

2 days ago

on

November 22, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla China/Weibo

Tesla CEO Elon Musk teased the insane capabilities of the next major Full Self-Driving update just hours after the company rolled out version 14.2 to owners.

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 had some major improvements from the previous iteration of v14.1.x. We were on v14.1.7, the most advanced configuration of the v14.1 family, before Tesla transitioned us and others to v14.2.

However, Musk has said that the improvements coming in the next major update, which will be v14.3, will be where “the last big piece of the puzzle finally lands.”

Advertisement
-->

There were some major improvements with v14.2, most notably, Tesla seemed to narrow in on the triggers that caused issues with hesitation and brake stabbing in v14.1.x.

One of the most discussed issues with the past rollout was that of brake stabbing, where the vehicle would contemplate proceeding with a route as traffic was coming from other directions.

We experienced it most frequently at intersections, especially four-way stop signs.

Elon Musk hints at when Tesla can fix this FSD complaint with v14

In our review of it yesterday, it was evident that this issue had been resolved, at least to the extent that we had no issues with it in a 62-minute drive, which you can watch here.

Advertisement
-->

Some owners also reported a more relaxed driver monitoring system, which is something Tesla said it was working on as it hopes to allow drivers to text during operation in the coming months. We did not test this, as laws in Pennsylvania prohibit the use of phones at any time due to the new Paul Miller’s Law, which took effect earlier this year.

However, the improvements indicate that Tesla is certainly headed toward a much more sentient FSD experience, so much so that Musk’s language seems to be more indicative of a more relaxed experience in terms of overall supervision from the driver, especially with v14.3.

Musk did not release or discuss a definitive timeline for the release of v14.3, especially as v14.2 just rolled out to Early Access Program (EAP) members yesterday. However, v14.1 rolled out to Tesla owners just a few weeks ago in late 2025. There is the potential that v14.3 could be part of the coming Holiday Update, or potentially in a release of its own before the New Year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad

Published

2 days ago

on

November 22, 2025

By

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.

With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.

While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.

With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.

However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.

Advertisement
-->

The Good

Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation

Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.

This was a major problem.

However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.

This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.

Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable

There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.

Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.

It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.

Advertisement
-->

Better Overall Operation

I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.

v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.

The Bad

Parking

It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.

This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.

However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.

You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading