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?

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 is not sparing any expense in ensuring the Cybercab is safe

Images shared by the longtime watcher showed 16 Cybercab prototypes parked near Giga Texas’ dedicated crash test facility.

Published

8 hours ago

on

December 22, 2025

By

Credit: @JoeTegtmeyer/X

The Tesla Cybercab could very well be the safest taxi on the road when it is released and deployed for public use. This was, at least, hinted at by the intensive safety tests that Tesla seems to be putting the autonomous two-seater through at its Giga Texas crash test facility. 

Intensive crash tests

As per recent images from longtime Giga Texas watcher and drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer, Tesla seems to be very busy crash testing Cybercab units. Images shared by the longtime watcher showed 16 Cybercab prototypes parked near Giga Texas’ dedicated crash test facility just before the holidays. 

Tegtmeyer’s aerial photos showed the prototypes clustered outside the factory’s testing building. Some uncovered Cybercabs showed notable damage and one even had its airbags engaged. With Cybercab production expected to start in about 130 days, it appears that Tesla is very busy ensuring that its autonomous two-seater ends up becoming the safest taxi on public roads. 

Prioritizing safety

With no human driver controls, the Cybercab demands exceptional active and passive safety systems to protect occupants in any scenario. Considering Tesla’s reputation, it is then understandable that the company seems to be sparing no expense in ensuring that the Cybercab is as safe as possible.

Tesla’s focus on safety was recently highlighted when the Cybertruck achieved a Top Safety Pick+ rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). This was a notable victory for the Cybertruck as critics have long claimed that the vehicle will be one of, if not the, most unsafe truck on the road due to its appearance. The vehicle’s Top Safety Pick+ rating, if any, simply proved that Tesla never neglects to make its cars as safe as possible, and that definitely includes the Cybercab.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla’s Elon Musk gives timeframe for FSD’s release in UAE

Provided that Musk’s timeframe proves accurate, FSD would be able to start saturating the Middle East, starting with the UAE, next year. 

Published

8 hours ago

on

December 22, 2025

By

Tesla CEO Elon Musk stated on Monday that Full Self-Driving (Supervised) could launch in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as soon as January 2026. 

Provided that Musk’s timeframe proves accurate, FSD would be able to start saturating the Middle East, starting with the UAE, next year. 

Musk’s estimate

In a post on X, UAE-based political analyst Ahmed Sharif Al Amiri asked Musk when FSD would arrive in the country, quoting an earlier post where the CEO encouraged users to try out FSD for themselves. Musk responded directly to the analyst’s inquiry. 

“Hopefully, next month,” Musk wrote. The exchange attracted a lot of attention, with numerous X users sharing their excitement at the idea of FSD being brought to a new country. FSD (Supervised), after all, would likely allow hands-off highway driving, urban navigation, and parking under driver oversight in traffic-heavy cities such as Dubai and Abu Dhabi.

Musk’s comments about FSD’s arrival in the UAE were posted following his visit to the Middle Eastern country. Over the weekend, images were shared online of Musk meeting with UAE Defense Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, and Dubai Crown Prince HH Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed. Musk also posted a supportive message about the country, posting “UAE rocks!” on X.

Advertisement
-->

FSD recognition

FSD has been getting quite a lot of support from foreign media outlets. FSD (Supervised) earned high marks from Germany’s largest car magazine, Auto Bild, during a test in Berlin’s challenging urban environment. The demonstration highlighted the system’s ability to handle dense traffic, construction sites, pedestrian crossings, and narrow streets with smooth, confident decision-making.

Journalist Robin Hornig was particularly struck by FSD’s superior perception and tireless attention, stating: “Tesla FSD Supervised sees more than I do. It doesn’t get distracted and never gets tired. I like to think I’m a good driver, but I can’t match this system’s all-around vision. It’s at its best when both work together: my experience and the Tesla’s constant attention.” Only one intervention was needed when the system misread a route, showcasing its maturity while relying on vision-only sensors and over-the-air learning.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla quietly flexes FSD’s reliability amid Waymo blackout in San Francisco

“Tesla Robotaxis were unaffected by the SF power outage,” Musk wrote in his post.

Published

9 hours ago

on

December 22, 2025

By

Tesla highlighted its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system’s robustness this week by sharing dashcam footage of a vehicle in FSD navigating pitch-black San Francisco streets during the city’s widespread power outage. 

While Waymo’s robotaxis stalled and caused traffic jams, Tesla’s vision-only approach kept operating seamlessly without remote intervention. Elon Musk amplified the clip, highlighting the contrast between the two systems.

Tesla FSD handles total darkness

The @Tesla_AI account posted a video from a Model Y operating on FSD during San Francisco’s blackout. As could be seen in the video, streetlights, traffic signals, and surrounding illumination were completely out, but the vehicle drove confidently and cautiously, just like a proficient human driver.

Musk reposted the clip, adding context to reports of Waymo vehicles struggling in the same conditions. “Tesla Robotaxis were unaffected by the SF power outage,” Musk wrote in his post. 

Musk and the Tesla AI team’s posts highlight the idea that FSD operates a lot like any experienced human driver. Since the system does not rely on a variety of sensors and a complicated symphony of factors, vehicles could technically navigate challenging circumstances as they emerge. This definitely seemed to be the case in San Francisco.  

Advertisement
-->

Waymo’s blackout struggles

Waymo faced scrutiny after multiple self-driving Jaguar I-PACE taxis stopped functioning during the blackout, blocking lanes, causing traffic jams, and requiring manual retrieval. Videos shared during the power outage showed fleets of Waymo vehicles just stopping in the middle of the road, seemingly confused about what to do when the lights go out. 

In a comment, Waymo stated that its vehicles treat nonfunctional signals as four-way stops, but “the sheer scale of the outage led to instances where vehicles remained stationary longer than usual to confirm the state of the affected intersections. This contributed to traffic friction during the height of the congestion.”

A company spokesperson also shared some thoughts about the incidents. “Yesterday’s power outage was a widespread event that caused gridlock across San Francisco, with non-functioning traffic signals and transit disruptions. While the failure of the utility infrastructure was significant, we are committed to ensuring our technology adjusts to traffic flow during such events,” the Waymo spokesperson stated, adding that it is “focused on rapidly integrating the lessons learned from this event, and are committed to earning and maintaining the trust of the communities we serve every day.”

Continue Reading