Connect with us

News

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

Published

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

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

Elon Musk offers to pay TSA salaries as government shutdown leaves agents without paychecks

Elon Musk offered to personally cover TSA salaries as the DHS shutdown deepens travel chaos nationwide.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk says that he is willing to personally cover the salaries of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workers caught in the crossfire of a partial government shutdown that has now dragged on for over a month. “I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country,” Musk wrote.


The offer arrives as Congress let funding expire for the Department of Homeland Security on February 14, amid a disagreement over immigration enforcement, leaving most TSA employees classified as essential and on duty but working without pay. The timing could not be more disruptive, as the shutdown is colliding directly with spring break travel season when millions of Americans are in the air.

This is not the first time TSA workers have endured this kind of hardship. TSA agents are being asked to work without pay until congressional action unblocks their paychecks, having previously held out through the longest government shutdown in U.S. history at 43 days. The pattern reveals a systemic failure in how Congress funds critical security infrastructure, and Musk’s offer shines a spotlight on that recurring failure at a moment when the public is directly feeling its effects through long lines and terminal closures.

Advertisement

Whether Musk can legally follow through remains unclear, as federal law generally prohibits government employees from receiving outside compensation related to their official duties.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI unveiled TERAFAB, a $25B chip factory targeting one terawatt of AI compute annually.

Published

on

By

Tesla TERAFAB Factory in Austin, Texas

Elon Musk took the stage over the weekend at the defunct Seaholm Power Plant in Austin, Texas, to officially unveil TERAFAB, a $20-25 billion joint venture between Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI that he described as “the most epic chip building exercise in history by far.” The announcement marks the most ambitious infrastructure bet Musk has made since Gigafactory 1 in Sparks, Nevada, and it fuses three of his companies into a single, vertically integrated AI hardware machine for the first time.

TERAFAB is designed to consolidate every stage of semiconductor production under one roof, including chip design, lithography, fabrication, memory production, advanced packaging, and testing.  At full capacity, the facility would scale to roughly 70% of the global output from the current world’s largest semiconductor foundry from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC).

Elon Musk’s stated goal is one terawatt of computing power annually, split between Tesla’s AI5 inference chips for vehicles and Optimus robots, and D3 chips built specifically for SpaceXAI’s orbital satellite constellation.

Tesla Terafab set for launch: Inside the $20B AI chip factory that will reshape the auto industry

Advertisement

The logic behind the merger of these three entities is rooted in a supply chain crisis Musk has been signaling for over a year. At Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call, he warned investors that external chip capacity from TSMC, Samsung, and Micron would hit a ceiling within three to four years. “We’re very grateful to our existing supply chain, to Samsung, TSMC, Micron and others,” Musk acknowledged at the Terafab event, “but there’s a maximum rate at which they’re comfortable expanding.” Building in-house was, in his framing, not a strategic option, but a necessity.

The space angle is where the announcement becomes genuinely unprecedented. Musk said 80% of Terafab’s compute output would be directed toward space-based orbital AI satellites, arguing that solar irradiance in space is roughly 5x greater than at Earth’s surface, and that heat rejection in vacuum makes thermal scaling viable. This directly feeds the SpaceXAI vision, which is betting that within two to three years, running AI workloads in orbit will be cheaper than doing so on the ground. The satellites, powered by constant solar energy, would effectively turn low Earth orbit into the world’s largest data center.

Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI

Historically, this announcement threads together every major Musk initiative of the past two years: the xAI-SpaceX merger, Tesla’s $2.9 billion solar equipment talks with Chinese suppliers, the 100 GW domestic solar manufacturing push, the Optimus humanoid robot program, and Starship’s development. TERAFAB is the capstone that ties them into a single coherent architecture — chips made on Earth, launched by SpaceX, powered by Tesla solar, run by xAI, and ultimately extended to the Moon.

Advertisement

“I want us to live long enough to see the mass driver on the moon, because that’s going to be incredibly epic,”Musk said during the presentation.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Rolls-Royce makes shocking move on its EV future

When Rolls-Royce unveiled its first all-electric model, the Spectre, in 2022, former CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös declared the brand would cease production of internal combustion engine vehicles by the end of the decade.

Published

on

Rolls Royce Wheels
Credit: BMW Group

Rolls-Royce made a shocking move on its EV future after planning to go all-electric by the end of the decade. Now, the company is tempering its expectations for electric vehicles, and its CEO is aiming to lean on its legacy of high-powered combustion engines to lead it into the future.

In a significant reversal, Rolls-Royce Motor Cars has scrapped its ambitious plan to become an all-electric manufacturer by 2030. The luxury British marque announced the decision amid sustained customer demand for traditional combustion engines and shifting regulatory landscapes.

When Rolls-Royce unveiled its first all-electric model, the Spectre, in 2022, former CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös declared the brand would cease production of internal combustion engine vehicles by the end of the decade.

The move aligned with the industry’s broader push toward electrification, promising silent, effortless power befitting the “Rolls-Royce of cars.”

Advertisement

However, new CEO Chris Brownridge, who assumed the role in late 2023, has reversed course. “We can respond to our client demand … we build what is ordered,” Brownridge stated.

The company will continue offering its iconic V12 engines, which remain a cornerstone of its heritage and appeal to discerning buyers who appreciate the distinctive sound and character. He noted the original pledge was “right at the time,” but “the legislation has changed.”

While not abandoning electric vehicles entirely, the Spectre remains in production, with an electric Cullinan option forthcoming; the decision marks the end of a strict all-EV timeline. Relaxed emissions regulations and slowing EV demand, evidenced by a 47 percent drop in Spectre sales to 1,002 units in 2025, forced the reconsideration.

It was a sign that perhaps Rolls-Royce owners were not inclined to believe that the company’s all-EV future was the right move.

Advertisement

Rolls Royce customers want more EVs, says company CEO

Rolls-Royce joins a growing roster of automakers reevaluating aggressive electrification targets.

Fellow luxury brand Bentley has pushed its full electrification from 2030 to 2035, while continuing to offer hybrids and ICE models. Mercedes-Benz walked back its 2030 all-EV goal, now aiming for about 50% electrified sales while keeping combustion engines into the 2030s. Porsche has abandoned its 80% EV sales target by 2030, delaying models and extending hybrids.

Mainstream giants are following suit. Honda canceled its U.S. EV plans, including the 0-Series and Acura RSX, facing a $15.7 billion hit as it doubles down on hybrids. Ford and General Motors have incurred tens of billions in writedowns, canceling models and pivoting to hybrids amid an industry total exceeding $70 billion in charges.

Advertisement

This trend reflects a pragmatic shift driven by infrastructure gaps, consumer preferences, and policy changes. In the ultra-luxury segment, where emotional connection reigns, automakers are prioritizing flexibility over rigid deadlines, ensuring brands like Rolls-Royce evolve without alienating their core clientele.

Continue Reading