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

Elon Musk

Trump’s invite for Elon just reshuffled Tesla’s big Signature Delivery Event

Tesla rescheduled its final Model S farewell to May 20 after Musk joined Trump in China.

Published

2 hours ago

on

May 11, 2026

By

Tesla has rescheduled its Model S and Model X Signature Edition delivery event to Wednesday, May 20, 2026, after abruptly calling off the original May 12 celebration. The event will take place at Tesla’s factory at 45500 Fremont Boulevard in Fremont, California, the same location where the Model S first rolled off the line in 2012. Invitees received a follow-up email asking them to reconfirm attendance and download a new QR code ticket, with Tesla noting that all travel and accommodation expenses remain the buyer’s responsibility.

The reason behind the original cancellation came into focus the same day it was announced. President Trump invited Elon Musk, Apple’s Tim Cook, BlackRock’s Larry Fink, Boeing’s Kelly Ortberg, and executives from Goldman Sachs, Blackstone, Citigroup, and Meta to join his trip to China this week for a summit with President Xi Jinping. The agenda covers trade, artificial intelligence, export controls, Taiwan, and the Iran war, following weeks of escalating friction between Washington and Beijing over AI technology, sanctions, and rare earth exports. Trump wrote on Truth Social, “I am very much looking forward to my trip to China, an amazing Country, with a Leader, President Xi, respected by all.”

Tesla launches 200mph Model S “Gold” Signature in invite-only purchase

The vehicles at the center of all this are the last Model S and Model X units Tesla will ever build. Priced at $159,420 each, the 250 Model S and 100 Model X Signature Edition units come finished in Garnet Red with a one-year no-resale agreement, giving Tesla right of first refusal if the owner decides to sell. As Teslarati reported, the Model S defined Tesla’s early identity as a serious luxury automaker, and the Fremont factory line that built it is now being converted to manufacture Optimus humanoid robots.

Advertisement

Musk’s inclusion in the China delegation drew attention given his very public relationship with Trump, and the invitation signals the two have moved past and past grievances. Trump originally brought Musk on to lead the Department of Government Efficiency following his inauguration, and despite a sharp public dispute in mid-2025, the two have appeared together repeatedly in recent months. A seat on the China trip, the most diplomatically consequential visit of Trump’s current term, puts Musk back at the table on U.S. economic policy at a moment when Tesla’s China revenue remains one of the company’s most important financial pillars.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla launches its solution to rare but relevant Supercharger problem

Published

7 hours ago

on

May 11, 2026

By

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has launched a new solution to a rare but relevant Supercharger problem with a new Virtual Waitlist, a remedy that will solve sequencing confusion when there is a line to charge at one of the company’s locations.

Teslarati reported on what we called the Virtual Queue last month. In rare occurrences, there were physical altercations at Superchargers when someone might have cut in line to charge. Tesla started to develop some sort of system that would resolve this issue, and now it is finally rolling it out.

Tesla launches solution to end Supercharger fights once and for all

It will start with a Pilot Program, and Tesla is calling it the ‘Waitlist.’

Advertisement

Announced on May 11 on the official TeslaCharging X account, the pilot program is currently active at sites in Los Gatos, Mountain View, and San Francisco in California, as well as San Jose, CA, and the Bronx, NY (East Gun Hill Road). Drivers are encouraged to share feedback directly through the Tesla app to refine the system before a potential broader rollout.

Advertisement

Tesla released the video above to showcase the feature, which automatically joins the waitlist when your vehicle has the Supercharger with the wait as the destination in the navigation. There is also a notification that lets you know your place in line.

In this specific example, the video shows that the wait is less than five minutes, and that there are two cars ahead of the one in the video:

Credit: Tesla

Having a wait at a Supercharger is relatively rare, but it does happen. It is even more frequent now that there are more EVs allowed to use the Supercharger Network. Those non-Tesla EVs can also join the queue, as Tesla added in its social media release of the pilot program that they can join the waitlist using the Tesla app.

The release of this program should help alleviate the rare risk of incidents at Superchargers. Tesla will expand this program as it sees fit, and it gathers valuable data and reviews from users.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla Optimus is already benefiting investors, top Wall Street firm says

Piper Sandler has updated its detailed valuation model for Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA), concluding that at recent share prices around $400–$420, investors are essentially acquiring the company’s ambitious Optimus humanoid robot project at no extra cost.

Published

15 hours ago

on

May 11, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla Optimus is already benefiting investors from a fiscal standpoint, at least that is what Alexander Potter at Piper Sandler, a top Wall Street firm covering the company, says.

Piper Sandler has updated its detailed valuation model for Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA), concluding that at recent share prices around $400–$420, investors are essentially acquiring the company’s ambitious Optimus humanoid robot project at no extra cost.

Analyst Alexander Potter, in the firm’s latest “Definitive Guide to Investing in Tesla,” built a comprehensive framework covering 17 separate product lines.

This granular approach values Tesla’s core businesses—including electric vehicles, energy storage, Full Self-Driving (FSD) software, in-house insurance, Supercharging network, and a standalone robotaxi operation—at approximately $400 per share, without assigning any value to Optimus or related inference-as-a-service opportunities.

Advertisement

“At $400/share, we think investors can buy Optimus for ‘free,’” Potter stated in the note. Piper Sandler maintained its Overweight rating on Tesla shares and a $500 price target, which implicitly attributes roughly $100 per share to the robot-related businesses— a figure the analyst views as potentially conservative.

The updated model incorporates elements often overlooked by other sell-side analysts, such as detailed forecasts for Tesla’s insurance operations, Supercharger revenue, and a distinct valuation for the robotaxi business separate from FSD software licensing. It also accounts for Tesla’s 2025 CEO compensation plan for the first time.

Potter acknowledged that his estimates for 2026 and 2027 fall below Wall Street consensus, citing factors like declining deliveries from certain discontinued models and reduced regulatory credit income.

However, he expressed limited concern, noting that traditional vehicle delivery metrics are expected to matter less over time as FSD subscriber growth and robotaxi deployment metrics gain prominence. On Optimus specifically, Potter suggested the humanoid robot program, combined with inference services, “arguably will be worth more than Tesla’s other businesses combined,” though the firm has not yet produced formal long-term forecasts for these segments.

Advertisement

Elon Musk reveals shocking Tesla Optimus patent detail

Tesla shares have traded near the $400 range in recent sessions, reflecting ongoing investor focus on the company’s autonomous driving progress and expansion into robotics and AI. The Optimus project remains in early development stages, with Tesla aiming to deploy the robots initially for internal factory tasks before broader commercial applications.

This Piper Sandler analysis highlights the growing emphasis among some investors and analysts on Tesla’s long-term technology platform potential beyond its current automotive and energy businesses.

As with any forward-looking valuation, outcomes will depend on execution timelines, technological breakthroughs, regulatory approvals for autonomous systems, and market adoption of humanoid robotics—areas that carry significant uncertainty and execution risk.

Advertisement

The note underscores a common theme in Tesla coverage: differing views on how to quantify emerging high-growth opportunities like robotics within the company’s overall enterprise value. Investors are advised to consider their own risk tolerance and conduct thorough due diligence regarding these speculative elements.

Continue Reading