Connect with us

News

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

Published

7 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?

Advertisement

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
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

Cybertruck

Tesla confirms date when new Cybertruck trim will go up in price

Tesla has officially revealed that this price will only be available until February 28, as the company has placed a banner atop the Design Configurator on its website reflecting this.

Published

1 hour ago

on

February 25, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has confirmed the date when its newest Cybertruck trim level will increase in price, after CEO Elon Musk noted that the All-Wheel-Drive configuration of the all-electric pickup would only be priced at its near-bargain level for ten days.

Last week, Tesla launched the All-Wheel-Drive configuration of the Cybertruck. Priced at $59,990, the Cybertruck featured many excellent features and has seemingly brought some demand to the pickup, which has been underwhelming in terms of sales figures over the past couple of years.

Tesla launches new Cybertruck trim with more features than ever for a low price

When Tesla launched it, many fans and current owners mulled the possibility of ordering it. However,  Musk came out and said just hours after launching the pickup that Tesla would only keep it at the $59,990 price level for ten days.

Advertisement

What it would be priced at subsequently was totally dependent on how much demand Tesla felt for the new trim level, which is labeled as a “Dual Motor All-Wheel-Drive” configuration.

Tesla has officially revealed that this price will only be available until February 28, as the company has placed a banner atop the Design Configurator on its website reflecting this:

Advertisement

Many fans and owners have criticized Tesla’s decision to unveil a trim this way, and then price it at something, only to change that price a few days later based on how well it sells.

It seems the most ideal increase in price would be somewhere between $5,000 and $10,000, but it truly depends on how many orders Tesla sees for this new trim level. The next step up in configuration is the Premium All-Wheel-Drive, which is priced at $79,990.

Advertisement

The difference between the Dual Motor AWD Cybertruck and the Premium AWD configuration comes down to towing, interior quality, and general features. The base package is only capable of towing up to 7,500 pounds, while the Premium can handle 11,000 pounds. Additionally, the seats in the Premium build are Vegan Leather, while the base trim gets the textile seats.

It also has only 7 speakers compared to the 15 that the Premium trim has. Additionally, the base model does not have an adjustable ride height, although it does have a coil spring with an adaptive damping suspension package.

Continue Reading

Cybertruck

Tesla set to activate long-awaited Cybertruck feature

Tesla will officially activate the Active Noise Cancellation (ANC) feature on Cybertruck soon, as the company has officially added the feature to its list of features by trim on its website.

Published

3 hours ago

on

February 25, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is set to activate a long-awaited Cybertruck feature, and no matter when you bought your all-electric pickup, it has the hardware capable of achieving what it is designed to do.

Tesla simply has to flip the switch, and it plans to do so in the near future.

Tesla will officially activate the Active Noise Cancellation (ANC) feature on Cybertruck soon, according to Not a Tesla App, as the company has officially added the feature to its list of features by trim on its website.

Tesla rolls out Active Road Noise Reduction for new Model S and Model X

Advertisement

The ANC feature suddenly appeared on the spec sheet for the Premium All-Wheel-Drive and Cyberbeast trims, which are the two configurations that have been delivered since November 2023.

However, those trims have both had the ANC disabled, and although they are found in the Model S and Model X, and are active in those vehicles, Tesla is planning to activate them.

In Tesla’s Service Toolbox, it wrote:

“ANC software is not enabled on Cybertruck even though the hardware is installed.”

Advertisement

Tesla has utilized an ANC system in the Model S and Model X since 2021. The system uses microphones embedded in the front seat headrests to detect low-frequency road noise entering the cabin. It then generates anti-noise through phase-inverted sound waves to cancel out or reduce that noise, creating quieter zones, particularly around the vehicle’s front occupants.

The Model S and Model X utilize six microphones to achieve this noise cancellation, while the Cybertruck has just four.

Tesla Cybertruck Dual Motor AWD estimated delivery slips to early fall 2026

As previously mentioned, this will be activated through a software update, as the hardware is already available within Cybertruck and can simply be activated at Tesla’s leisure.

Advertisement

The delays in activating the system are likely due to Tesla Cybertruck’s unique design, which is unlike anything before. In the Model S and Model X, Tesla did not have to do too much, but the Cybertruck has heavier all-terrain tires and potentially issues from the aluminum castings that make up the vehicle’s chassis, which are probably presenting some challenges.

Unfortunately, this feature will not be available on the new Dual Motor All-Wheel-Drive configuration, which was released last week.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model S and X customization options begin to thin as their closure nears

Tesla’s Online Design Studio for both vehicles now shows the first color option to be listed as “Sold Out,” as Lunar Silver is officially no longer available for the Model S or Model X. This color is exclusive to these cars and not available on the Model S or Model X.

Published

5 hours ago

on

February 25, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Model S and Model X customization options are beginning to thin for the first time as the closure of the two “sentimental” vehicles nears.

We are officially seeing the first options disappear as Tesla begins to work toward ending production of the two cars and the options that are available to those vehicles specifically.

Tesla’s Online Design Studio for both vehicles now shows the first color option to be listed as “Sold Out,” as Lunar Silver is officially no longer available for the Model S or Model X. This color is exclusive to these cars and not available on the Model S or Model X.

Tesla is making way for the Optimus humanoid robot project at the Fremont Factory, where the Model S and Model X are produced. The two cars are low-volume models and do not contribute more than a few percent to Tesla’s yearly delivery figures.

With CEO Elon Musk confirming that the Model S and Model X would officially be phased out at the end of the quarter, some of the options are being thinned out.

Advertisement

This is an expected move considering Tesla’s plans for the two vehicles, as it will make for an easier process of transitioning that portion of the Fremont plant to cater to Optimus manufacturing. Additionally, this is likely one of the least popular colors, and Tesla is choosing to only keep around what it is seeing routine demand for.

During the Q4 Earnings Call in January, Musk confirmed the end of the Model S and Model X:

“It is time to bring the Model S and Model X programs to an end with an honorable discharge. It is time to bring the S/X programs to an end. It’s part of our overall shift to an autonomous future.”

Fremont will now build one million Optimus units per year as production is ramped.

Advertisement
Continue Reading