Why Getting Rocks Back From Mars Is A Massive Challenge

[@PhilfreezeCH]

This will easily be the most Kerbal thing humanity as attempted. It has everything, multiple launches, just slaming your return vehicle into the ground, complex docking procedures and more!

[@steveaustin2686]

LoL

[@atk05003]

Fortunately, we have one benefit over the Kerbals. We don't install explosives in every strut and heat shield.

[@MBooley]

@@atk05003 The only thing that beats Rapid Unplanned Disassembly is Rapid Planned Disassembly

[@Runix1]

I don't know what's best. Yeeting rockets up in the air before firing, or actual full speed lithobraking

[@AstroJosh]

Interesting thing about the Soviet proposal is that there were plans to conduct two Proton launches within 20 seconds of each other from adjacent launch pads

[@ryanhamstra49]

That would have been sick…. I wonder if Spacex could do that with falcons on starlink missions from 39a and 40? Even if it was 2-3 min apart but then they only have to shut down the range once in a week?

[@steveaustin2686]

@@ryanhamstra49 I believe that the Eastern range is set for like a standard 4 hour reset between launches. Gemini 8, 10, 11, & 12 all launched within 2 hours of there Agena target spacecraft I understand. I'm sure if they planned ahead, they could do that with Falcon 9. I'm not sure that they would want to space them quite that close together, a few mintues apart, though.

[@PhilfreezeCH]

@@ryanhamstra49 wouldn't that be a very bad, no good idea when it comes to landing boosters?

[@srrich27]

@@PhilfreezeCH eh, if Falcon Heavy can launch from one platform and land two boosters back at the same time, I imagine they could do it with 2 Falcons -- though I doubt they'd have any reason to

[@ryanhamstra49]

@@PhilfreezeCH no different than landing falcon heavy boosters

[@brian6421]

As someone that has been working on this project for many years, Scott's description of the technical details very good. I'm going to share the link with others as the best description that I've seen.

[@ksmi9109]

Wow, that’s gotta be great to work on. Much luck to you and the team.

[@serronserron1320]

what was your involvement with the mars project?

[@arturoeugster2377]

Brian, Then in your judgement , is it worth waiting until Elons first team arrives and collects some of the samples, and the few cŕew members, who elect to return, place them in the proper containers and bring them back ?

[@AppleGameification]

@@arturoeugster2377 you're assuming we will put humans on mars who are able to return before we're capable of doing the same with just a spacecraft. Beside, what's with all this faith in this elon guy? why wait for him?

[@arturoeugster2377]

@@AppleGameification Read Robert Zubrin's The case for Mars. Who builds Tesla cars? Who launched the first astronauts to the ISS after many years of Russian flights, (very expensive to NASA.)? Who is providing internet service by satellite worldwide? Who is determined to start a self sustaining colony on Mars? Who reduced launch costs by reusing the perfectly landed booster stages, every time. I was a member of the team, who landed the Viking spacecraft on Mars, the first successfull landings ever. Thanks to government interference the Mars bound Starship will be delayed. BTW, President Reagan did not tolerate regulation of space launch ( executive order 12465) Only every 26 months there is a launch opportunity to reach Mars.

[@jasonlee5477]

The logistics of this mission is crazy, I know they are going to pull it off, but 4 separate parts rendezvousing on another planet is absurd

[@fork9001]

It’s probably cheaper this way. Unless you want to use a SLS for the entire mission (rover+sample rocket+transfer stage)

[@alexsiemers7898]

Oh god, I didn’t even think about the landing location precision. 100km off and you’re set back several years

[@raymonddonovan3297]

Lol don't hold your breath. Lots of moving parts relying on multiple agencies with very questionable track records. Everyone mocks Elon time, but Elon time is downright punctual compared to NASA and ESA time. See SLS and JWST as topical examples.

[@k.sullivan6303]

Indeed Jason.

[@glennbabic5954]

Mars science is a minor bonus to the primary goal of us being so clever and pleased with ourselves for building the technology in the first place lol.

[@QuantumHistorian]

16:00 Ah yes, why use aerobreaking when you could use the much faster lithobreaking?

[@bbirda1287]

Maybe there might be an ISS replacement so they can just ship it down with the next experiment return mission.

[@limiv5272]

@@bbirda1287 The return capsule will have to be relatively small and simple so as to not make the whole payload too heavy. I'm not sure it'll have the complexity needed to ensure it won't crash into a crewed space station

[@kukulroukul4698]

@@limiv5272 THEY are all weighted NOW with this current mission

[@limiv5272]

@@kukulroukul4698 I'm sorry I don't understand

[@kukulroukul4698]

@@limiv5272 The Perseverance weights every sample already

[@paulcarpenter999]

They used to call Mars sample return missions "Apollo Without Astronauts", because it is such a difficult and expensive endeavor.

[@deusexaethera]

Meanwhile here I am still trying to figure out why they named an entire space program after chickens. Dammit, now I'm hungry.

[@johannesgutsmiedl366]

I feel like that doesn't even do it justice, Chang'e 5 did Apollo without astronauts, this is pretty much an order of magnitude more complicated with four separate spacecraft and three different landings in close proximity... I mean, this will probably the first time we'll actually get footage from the ground of a spacecraft landing on a planet other than Earth! Also, I'm not sure if I'm feeling more joy or dread seeing that sample capture and transfer mechanism on the return spacecraft :)

[@gordonstewart5774]

with SLS-type delays, a SpaceX astronaut may get the samples back more quickly.

[@andmos1001]

But it is an essential foundation for humans to get to be space fairers

[@LikeOnATree]

When the world is such a crazy, chaotic place... it's truly calming to have Scott Manley to talk about space and to give me some relief. Thanks Scott!

[@zapfanzapfan]

Mars sample return has been 10 years in the future for over 40 years, but now it might actually really be 10 year in the future 🙂

[@lo1bo2]

Reminds of how cold fusion is always X number of years in the future.

[@scottmanley]

Cold fusion is X*i years in the future. Regular fusion is decades away, or not.

[@youkofoxy]

so Mars return sample is the original JWST?

[@absalomdraconis]

@@scottmanley : Eh, I don't know, the NASA matrix-catalyzed fusion might work, even though it does remind me of Star Trek's dilithium crystals.

[@DrDeuteron]

what I was told is the only thing that changed is the medium: overhead transparencies, to power point, and so on.

[@ares106]

You can roughly tell how old a project is, based on the quality of the CGI associated with it.

[@arniboy1games93]

ok bud

[@AJ1Aerospace]

Yeah

[@aternias]

or lack thereof

[@oberonpanopticon]

Shiny realistic CGI - Wow, this is a pretty new plan Decent but rough around the edges CGI - Oh, okay, I guess this is a pretty old thing then Cheesy ancient CGI - Oh wow, this thing’s been in development for quite a while! No CGI - *oh god*

[@pablogarin5445]

A lot of mechanical parts, a lot of possible failures... most people probably don't understand the complexity of a project where you have a lot of moving parts that might get jammed, corroded, material fatigue, etc, so I would like to express my admiration to all the engineers working in this project and I wish them the best of luck on this. Science and exploration are the best way of improving our understanding of the universe.

[@cipher4213]

My problem with this is it’s so complex that if there’s any failure where the samples are lost that’s literally decades to restart the same process from sample collection again even if you have the blueprints figured out.

[@nonconsensualopinion]

I don't see it happening. I think before that happens we'll have a SpaceX starship on Mars and an astronaut will walk out, grab a rock, and take it back to the ship's deck 4 chemistry lab.

[@neodymidius]

The James Webb Telescope was complex, too. There are dozens of mission critical steps that have to succeed in order to have full functionality. And it seemed that it worked. But yes, it’s very risky and more complex than the JWT, but I have the feeling that it is possible and will succeed.

[@neodymidius]

@@nonconsensualopinion That then must be at the year of 2033 so in 11 years. I don’t see it happening in that time frame. There is one thing building the rocket and the other thing developing all the auxiliary stuff to survive and live on the Mars. But looking forward to the first orbital launch and return - hopefully - this year!

[@gcewing]

And before he gets the sample back to the ship, a wormhole will open up, a university student will step out of it in a diving suit and say "Would you like me to take that back for you?"

[@deusexaethera]

That's why it's happening in so many discrete steps. One robot packages samples, another robot collects them, a third robot stuffs them into the rocket, the rocket launches into a safe orbit, another rocket meets-up with the first rocket and takes the samples back to Earth orbit, and once they're in Earth orbit we have lots of options to bring them to the ground. The only "oh shit" failures are if the first rocket carrying the samples fails to achieve a safe orbit around Mars, or the Earth re-entry vehicle incinerates; everything else can get a "do-over" mission while the samples hang-out in their tubes.

[@TheDeathPunchSound]

Hey Scott! Can you make a video talking more about planetary contamination please? I've always wondered what the regulations and procedures were for that sort of thing.

[@nealinnc]

my daughter works on planetary protection and was part of the planetary protection team for the perseverance rocket. I'm not sure the regulations are too detailed but I could ask her.

[@rijuvenate]

I saw images of the sample canisters. My question is, given the long duration of this mission, won't the capsules be buried under the soil after repeated annual martian storms?

[@bilalsalam9370]

I believe those martian storms don't kick up nearly enough soil to entirely bury the samples, or at least where perseverance has dropped them there isn't much moving soil nearby. More likely they'll just be coated in a layer of the soil but not get in the way of anything.

[@kevinradtke3767]

The rover picking up the samples will probably be able to dig through dirt, or at least dig though a reasonable amount of dirt

[@sebdapleb1523]

theres a tracking system

[@fdavidmiller2]

No, the dust storms are just that, dust. Not that big of a deal really, unless you’re talking about solar panels.

[@ananttiwari1337]

@@fdavidmiller2 yeah

[@jimpumphrey7713]

Scott. You explain everything in such detail that anybody can understand what you are saying. Keep up the good work. It's nice to have someone with your knowledge that is willing to keep the public informed. Thank you for that.

[@kelvinc]

A part of my brain hears “bring back hundreds of pounds of rocks” and instantly reminds me of Robert Scott’s expedition dying in Antarctica hauling rocks from the South Pole. As much as I want to see people land on Mars, there’s something to applaud that we’ve developed robotic technologies that can do a lot of this work with a lot more safety.

[@mirandadonovan1272]

Not into ASMR, but listening to Scott talk on any subject makes me feel super relaxed. I couldn't tell you exactly what it is, other than he instills a sense of trust in me that I seldom feel when listening to others.

[@zognaldblormpf5127]

I stand with Russia

[@mirandadonovan1272]

@@zognaldblormpf5127 troll

[@tomasz9429]

To get some serious sample they would have to go the geological way, do borings. That means boring equipment, drills... Now get that automated, so it assembles itself, drills a hole, extracts a 6ft long sample from a desired depth, packs it in the return craft... I got a headache just thinking about it.

[@tertiaryobjective]

Starship, moho drills. Success.

[@AuditAmplifier]

They are drilling their samples. I know what you mean, though, they're just surface samples at this point.

[@RustyorBroken]

We need to send up Bruce Willis minus the nuke.

[@absalomdraconis]

Doing borings off Earth would be slow, but it's certainly doable (assembly would be done with a crane, and an arm with a pair of clamps to apply torque). Of particular note, they would probably _not_ extract a core, but instead drop a sensor module down the hole (or even more likely, have the sensor module carried inside the drill head so it could be used on the way back up). The main question is how they'd do the actual drilling, and extract the debris from drilling.

[@joshuacheung6518]

Don't forget monitoring the equipment and performing adjustments and repairs when the boring equipment breaks itself

[@seldoon_nemar]

the N1 didn't really go very far, but it really did go everywhere

[@jimsvideos7201]

😂

[@jamesrussell7760]

That's one way of describing it! LOL!!

[@cirkmannzirkel8229]

Me being granted one wish: "An evening of drinking beer with Scott Manley. That'd lift my spirits now!"

[@taskforce58]

Lithobraking as a legit method of landing. I like that.

[@TranscendianIntendor]

Thanks Scott. I really appreciate your news hounding. I have reasons to believe I won't live long enough to see these things happen. It is so sad that we have not had continuity since first landing on the moon. We are late for a planet defense system as well. We are human beings and we have traditionally discovered that time runs out.

[@ericrawlins6849]

at 8:17, 10/10 gif usage there. I love it

[@avejst]

Wow, it seems quite complicated Great walkthrough video as always 👍😀 Thanks for sharing your thoughts with all of us 👍😀

[@kleeblattchen38]

13:20 yeah that's such a bittersweet truth... "we already have experience lighting solid rocket motors in motion" "how?" "ICBM's" 👀

[@unvergebeneid]

Having the landing system on earth be a container that just falls from the sky and survives perfectly intact is crazy and amazing! :D

[@magnemoe1]

13:46, all sort of smaller missiles like guided anti tank and manpads also uses the toss and fire method, Also most missiles from planes are drop then fire, exception is rail launched ones but they compromise stealth

[@supertoasting1011]

Liked it and commented just to stimulate the algorithm for you Scott

[@aceweldon6926]

Have you ever considered doing a series of videos on canceled projects. You mentioned that Phobos sample return mission and that was something I had never heard of before. Would be interesting and learn more about stuff like that.

[@cyberista]

Hey Scott. Question: With the Earth having over 3.6 times the diameter of the moon and therefore occupying over 12 times the area (as seen from a distance, say, from the moon), *and* roughly 3 times the albedo/reflectance of the moon, then the earth should be, by my calculation, over 30 times brighter (i.e. hugely more striking an object) in the moon's 'sky' than the moon is in earth's sky. I know about the famous 'earthrise' image, taken from an Apollo mission, but how come the view of the earth from the lunar surface barely gets noticed, or mentioned?

[@coquequique250600]

7:58 and yet, it's the most powerful and advanced space proof cpu available I really hope you make a video about semiconductors for the space exploration, information in internet is not enough to justify that perseverance has an IBM cpu design while ingenuity has an snapdragon 801, a soc used in flagship smartphones not so far away Another fun fact is that the James webb telescope has an internal SSD of only 68gb! I mean, there is really a lot to explain in electronics for the space

[@kricketflyd111]

For a previous Mars Rover the great scientists had us put rocks and soil in a vacuum chamber so they could do equipment testing, we had to tell them we can't pump down the chamber with dirt and rocks in there. 😁

[@absalomdraconis]

Sure you can, just spend two years on the pump-down! Surely that's not too long to keep a vacuum chamber occupied, right?

[@robstamm60]

As long as everything is dried and degassed i do not really see the problem in getting a coarse vacuum. Am I missing something?

[@kricketflyd111]

Dirt and rocks are porous so it would take a undetermined amount of time. We did the test with solids. 💩

[@kricketflyd111]

@@absalomdraconis Yep they were scratching thier heads. 😃

[@kricketflyd111]

I can't help but to think about Earth itself and it's surface being porous with space/ vacuum surrounding it. Is our atmosphere the result of outgassing? 🌎

[@hermanrobak1285]

16:15 Seven billions dollars in total? That's just one sixth of a Twitter aquisition!

[@Electronics-Rocks]

With dust storms won't these sample vessels be covered up after the dust storms. So how do they find these sample vessels must have a high degree of coverage?

[@justinbarion2269]

I wondered this myself!

[@WebWraith]

Scott, you are almost getting your face into the magic 1/3 upper portion of this video. Congratulations.

[@SailboatDiaries]

Could you do a video on the failed Phobos mission? I’d love to know more about its goals and what went wrong

[@chmeee9562]

Agreed, The Phobos missions were very ambitious, its a shame they failed.

[@benjaminhanke79]

It was stuck in earth orbit and decayed.

[@chmeee9562]

@@benjaminhanke79 You are thinking of the Mars 96 mission. The Phobos missions did arrive at Mars, I believe in 1988, but failed for other reasons.

[@ErickSoares3]

@@chmeee9562 Phobos Grunt (2011) was stuck in Earth orbit and then decayed. I remember that it was the first space mission that I followed and I'm only 22.

[@fratercontenduntocculta8161]

I can only imagine how closely guarded those samples will be! The remaining Moon rocks have their own special storage vault.

[@ProlificInvention]

My greatest wish is for NASA to drill down over 20 feet deep on Mars, Venus, and the moon. I have always wondered if a temperate zone (50-55°f) similar to Earth's just below the surface or maybe it's different. It would be great to know with surety whether there could be an entire habitable zone or area not previously considered or tested for.

[@justinbarion2269]

My greatest wish is that either astronauts or robots can find a fossil somewhere on the surface or slightly under it😁

[@mikakettunen7939]

My eyes start to tear a little bit every time I hear your theme song in end credits - such an adorably beautiful melancholical atmosphere in it for 'flying safe in deep cosmos' 💙💛

[@deusexaethera]

All I can say is the sample return mission had better have cameras all over the damn place, because I want to see the lander yeet the return rocket into the air before it lights off.

[@kukulroukul4698]

what if...they decide to keep it secret ?

[@incognitoburrito6020]

@@kukulroukul4698 Why would they?

[@stefanschneider3681]

Informative, well researched and perfectly presented - AS ALWAYS! Thanks 😊!

[@TheZoltan-42]

2033 sample return plan means that there is a fair chance that SpaceX will send "something" there before that. Imagine an Elon type approach: - Spaceship lands in 2027. - Places a small electric excavator on the ground. - Collects a few tons of random dust and rocks and dumps it into a container. - Returns with it as a "possibly useful mass simulator".

[@benjaminshropshire2900]

I can just see it now: Chapter 1, where SpaceX's HLS test crew does a "final dress rehearsal": some employees land on the moon, ride the elevator down, snap some picture (but don't get any dust on their boots) and go back into space before telling NASA all's good and they will be ready as soon as NASA gets it's parts built. Chapter 2, where SpaceX lands a manned Starship on Mars and offer to go pick up the samples for NASA because "their already in the neighborhood".

[@steveaustin2686]

MOXIE on Perseverence is making a few grams of propellant. Starship needs 1,200 tons of propellant. It is very doubtful that process will be in place for Starship to make it to Mars and back by 2027.

[@PObermanns]

Scott - thank you for yet another fascinating episode!

[@slothomatic]

Because Mars is far, rocks are heavy, fuel is heavy, and it's an entirely different animal to send a vehicle capable of a one way mission vs. one capable of autonomously landing, collecting samples, then relaunching back to earth.

[@deusexaethera]

Rocks are only 38% as heavy on Mars -- as is everything else. That's why such a small rocket could hoist the rock samples into orbit -- there's less gravity and atmosphere to fight against, and a stable orbit is at a much lower altitude than it would be on Earth. Earth is actually a pretty terrible place to launch rockets from; Earth is almost too heavy for rockets to work at all. Rocket launches from other planets would be much easier and require much simpler rockets.

[@TheSkystrider]

This plan is so awesome and mind blowing! I freaking love it that the mars rocket is going to launch like a missile and that the return vehicle is going to simply do a Halo ODST drop to Earth!

[@jaykillgore2205]

Thank you Scott! It is great to see content uploaded today that isn't about the current news cycle. You are an intellectual island in an ocean of ignorance. Thanks You!

[@onataltn4596]

oh man this is awesome ive been reading and wondering about this topic for the past few days! thank you Scott!

[@layzabullit]

We could learn so much by collecting cores from other planets. I can imagine that one part of space colonization will be examining extraterrestrial core samples.

[@AndrewBlucher]

We already have one planet core. Where would you keep another one?

[@andersjjensen]

@@AndrewBlucher I assume you're joking, but in case you're not: a sample made with a hollow drill (like a cup saw) is called "a core".

[@mastershooter64]

@@AndrewBlucher just stick it near our core

[@AndrewBlucher]

@@mastershooter64 Should only take a few billion years to settle in 😕

[@mastershooter64]

@@AndrewBlucher haha yeah

[@JamesOKeefe-US]

I liked the picture of the team celebrating after throwing the test rocket, it just reminds me how many people are working on so many parts of this.

[@squeaksquawk4255]

"This stuff isn't rocket science. If it was, it'd have a better explanation" We need this on a t-shirt.

[@steveaustin2686]

LOL

[@aviovintage]

Thanks Scott!! Looks incredible complex.

[@iivin4233]

We're putting a lot of cultural emphasis on an aspect of space utilization that is not resource efficient: that is, the colonization of barren planets.

[@absalomdraconis]

True, but the Earth-launch rockets developed will be very useful for everything else.

[@steveaustin2686]

Considering there is only one planet like Earth in the solar system, there really isn't any other choice.

[@HalNordmann]

We need people there to to do science. To have enough people there means a colony.

[@justinbarion2269]

Right?!

[@atlas4733]

@@HalNordmann Meh. Just put them all in a relatively large station and do rare missions down to the surface. Robots would be able to be operated in real time. You could maybe use vr headsets bc intuitive hand controls plus stereoscopic vision is cool.

[@RustyorBroken]

As always, well done, sir.

[@fuzzysubjects]

Obviously there is a generation of engineers at nasa, who first learned their craft on ksp. Now they start lithobreaking return capsules.

[@wgoulding]

KSP (among a few things) got me into aerospace engineering, and now I'm actually working on the first stage solid rocket motor of the Mars Ascent Vehicle!

[@jamesrussell7760]

You stuffed a lot of info into a video that ran just under 19 minutes, Scott. Much appreciated!!! I'm a wee bit nervous about the last leg, landing in Nevada, though. The sample capsule will be entering Earth's atmosphere at around 20 km/sec. Granted it will be slowed down by atmospheric drag, but with no parachute it will hit the ground with a hell of a wallop. What if it hits a big rock instead of relatively softer sand? Hey! Maybe you could simulate it with Kerbal?

[@a.bergantini4129]

For the 1/8 of the cost of Twitter we can have a Mar's sample return mission

[@wgoulding]

An accurate statement

[@kazioo2]

Or 1/1000th of that price (per kg) if you give that money to Elon Musk instead of those NASA bureaucrats designing absurd archaic missions like it's still 1960s...

[@laurogarza4953]

Another excellent, well researched, and very informative report. Well done.

[@fellknight]

I look forward to this mission because it's Kerbal as heck

[@steveaustin2686]

LoL

[@frankgulla2335]

Thanks for the quick summary of hte plans for Mars sample return. Thank you, again. Great story.

[@Henchman1977]

Interesting that we could be running into a Wait Calculation situation with sample return from Mars. With a minimum decade timescale for sample return it's not inconceivable that we complete a manned mission inside that window, making obsolete the sample return mission.

[@CascadiaAviation]

I predict a human Mars landing is 30 years out

[@Thros1]

Just depends where funding goes

[@Michiellovietsj]

I was also thinking like that. Or more and 6 months later the first scientists come back with 30 metric ton of martian rock samples

[@alrightydave]

Very cool video as always! Thoroughly enjoyed this and this is why I love this channel

[@jasonmushersee]

the satellite that went to pluto came close to collecting rock samples

[@BoildownAH]

@10:30 40m ellipse? Really? Or 40km? Also why don't they just return the sample to the ISS? The 6 inside can be the canaries if there's any bad microbes on it, and you get the benefit of having an orbiting geologist take a look at it before sending it down into the atmosphere and crash landing. And if it clears those hurdles, which it almost certainly will, then you can send the samples down for a soft landing instead of pulverizing them into the ground somewhere random.

[@the18thdoctor3]

The amount of fuel needed to slow down into a low orbit, instead of letting the atmosphere do all the work, would be huge, and that would compound by requiring a bigger injection stage and a much, much bigger launch vehicle. Utterly inefficient and wasteful.

[@simongeard4824]

Entering Earth orbit from Mars is *much* harder than going straight to the surface, for exactly the same reason that things go directly to the Martian surface without entering orbit first... aerobraking. Using the destination atmosphere to slow down doesn't require you to carry any fuel to do it.

[@steveaustin2686]

@@the18thdoctor3 Not only that, but it would have to dock to the ISS. Much easier to aerobrake and lithobrake to Earth.

[@jimmyzhao2673]

14:20 That whole sequence of catching the sample container and stowing it away looks so fiddly

[@chmeee9562]

I agree, strangely over complex. Certainly there is a much simpler way to do this? After all, the best part is 'no part'

[@anthoneyking6572]

Great Vlog Scott really interesting Thank you Did you see the Axion Presentation they showed the Real SKYLAB that was really Cool to see after your Lego Build

[@mumiemonstret]

I still can't see what the sample fetch rover does that Perseverance couldn't have done by itself. It seems to store the samples in a rack on its exterior and if Perseverance had done that, they had been accessible by another rover even after a failure.

[@vneve]

Nasa is most worried about sand dunes since it already almost lost Opportunity to it. If this would happen to Perseverance which is carrying the samples, they would need to send a rover with even bigger wheels than the already big Perseverance or even a rover with tracks. Getting the small sample fetch rover stuck in the same sand dune in the way for other rovers would result in a failed mission and a big embarressment. Placing the samples on known easy reachable locations solves this. But: These are no facts, just own thoughts

[@vneve]

Plus this allows Perseverance to go to more diffucult to reach terrain when it has filled all of the containers. Than Perseverance' mission planners do not have to worry anymore about the sample return mission and they can try to make more riskier discoveries. Again: own thoughts, not verrified

[@Edge-wx7hv]

if Perseverance and the Sample Retrieval rover continue to function, would they need to be resupplied with sample capsules and collection racks or whatever to potentially be able to repeat sample retrieval?

[@Tiwack01]

Perseverance wasn't built with this in mind but the Sample Retrieval rover could potentially do a repeat if still running and in range of new samples.

[@nightjarflying]

No.

[@S1nwar]

doesnt sound too unrealistic to throw the rocket into the air since gravity is lower also for a bigger timewindow to start the thing

[@wgoulding]

The reason it's thrown up into the air is because the rocket must be packaged horizontally, but obviously can't just be launched straight out horizontally. When it gets thrown up, it also gets rotated upwards.

[@alasdairwhyte6616]

"it will be embarrissing if it fails" what an epitaph.

[@pavel9652]

I knew it.

[@juriteller3688]

Will be interesting to see with what missions NASA will come up in the next 10 years. With chinas massive push into space, NASA budget is basically set to increase consistently over the next years.

[@davesomeone4059]

Takes a good economy to fund NASA. Let's see if these budget increases even match inflation..

[@serronserron1320]

You would think so but Congress is making a slow move to increase the budget, and much of the percentage is locked down in bureaucratic nightmares like SLS

[@Thethyck4445]

What about the propose Chinese Mars sample return mission that supposed to launch around the same time as this one.

[@RCAvhstape]

Last time I was this early, early jokes weren't stale yet.

[@jimjohnson394]

I would like to see them retrieve gas from Uranus.

[@spinmaster4348]

1:27 So what’s the thing about the process? Isn’t nickel catalysts enough or?

[@CraneArmy]

I feel like every time a robot arm is involved, its a declaration of "we're not really sure what we have to do, and we might need versatility at the expense of complexity" 1st - I get it 2nd - probably didnt need that one 3rd - yall dont even actually know what youre doing yet

[@absalomdraconis]

In the case of e.g. the ISS it makes sense, sometimes it's lighter-weight to go with the generic option.

[@CraneArmy]

@@absalomdraconis for sure. and I'd think one on the ISS is exactly the place and role youd want one. the ISS a long term mission, which will serve many other missions that wernt even conceived of when the ISS and the canadarm were designed. you take the trade off in that case every time.

[@carl8703]

The samples collected by perseverance are stored in cylindrical canisters. It seems like they could be pretty easily scooped off of the ground. I'm picturing a cross between a bulldozer and pooper scooper.

[@deusexaethera]

The exact same thing can be said for _human_ arms, and we've done pretty well with those.

[@CraneArmy]

@@deusexaethera 1st - hey this is great 2nd - the other one is dominant, I guess bilateral symmetry, fine keep it... 3rd - we're here to test your water it checks out

[@catfish552]

So there'd be two rovers watching the first rocket launch on Mars from a safe distance. I like that.

[@tertiaryobjective]

I hope the return missions aren't a casualty of the eternal NASA budget troubles. I always feel like success is a Tertiary Objective for NASA and pleasing subcontractors and politicians are the primary and secondary objectives. I bet they launch the return mission, but there's a problem and a manned mission enabled from SpaceX Starship saves it. Calling it now, my credentials: I write space music. (lol)

[@EdwardMcClung]

sounds like an awesome movie I'd watch

[@tertiaryobjective]

@@EdwardMcClung Starring Matt Damon, hehe.

[@asandax6]

Going to Mars is a long time away mission. We first need to go to the moon. Build a base and mine for resources there. Then after that we can start thinking about going to mars maybe in the next 40 years. When we have better tech. Also The moon could be a great place to build a station if we can refine the minerals there and build spaceships there we could launch more heavier payloads with less fuel for the trip to Mars.

[@the18thdoctor3]

Crewed Martian Starship is decades away, calling it now. Heck, we won't see crewed _orbital_ Starship for many years, let alone interplanetary. NASA really isn't the problem. If NASA was better funded, it wouldn't have to go through back channels and hook up with lobbyists and bulk-discount military contractors. But instead, its starvation-ration budget makes sure everything has to be built by the lowest, scummiest bidder.

[@bbgun061]

Congress likes big, expensive, highly visible prestige projects. So Congress will probably make sure the return mission is funded.

[@Ice_Karma]

16:13 A good idea, I guess, after the sample return mission that smashed into the Utah desert, contaminating all the samples...

[@danmacben]

Is there any possibility of a SpaceX astronaut getting there first and picking up the samples by hand?

[@sidb9540]

won't happen... FAA

[@the18thdoctor3]

No, if we're being honest and realistic.

[@the18thdoctor3]

@@sidb9540 lol no, nothing to do with the FAA

[@wgoulding]

Extremely unlikely

[@pigbenis8366]

I'd go. If they'd let me go, I'd go to Mars in a heartbeat.

[@unvergebeneid]

17:20 "Dubstorm" I like that :D

[@OzoneTheLynx]

With that landing approach, lets just hope it will land in an intended area XD

[@MonkeyJedi99]

And if not, at least no animal casualties. (including humans in the animal category)

[@nsmith0723]

Kerbal gives a tip of the iceberg perspective in terms of how difficult this is to do anything away from earth

[@chmeee9562]

Just have humans in Starship bring the samples back. Of course, in that case they would just bring a hammer and a shovel, go outside, and collect their own samples. 😀

[@the18thdoctor3]

"Just" lmao, that's the biggest understatement I've seen in a long time

[@greeneggsandsam2014]

wouldn't the landing without a parachute damage the samples? unless they're already dust as opposed to little core samples

[@brianorca]

It's rock. And a lot of it. This is not like the fragile collectors of the Genesis probe sample return, which only contained tiny particles of solar wind. (And even then, they did manage to salvage most of the samples for useful science.) Edit: aerogel was a different mission, which did not crash when landing.

[@greeneggsandsam2014]

@@brianorca well if they're looking for microscopic fossils, you wouldn't want the samples cracking. I guess I'm thinking of the impact velocity being high. Also there might be a shock absorption mechanism inside the landing vehicle.

[@badgerello]

I really don’t understand why they are still considering the sample return option when it is proven to be far more cost effective and less risky to just keep sending fit for purpose remote science tools that don’t need to deal with the challenges of the return mission.

[@nagualdesign]

Yup. They want to bring samples into the lab to what; Look at under a microscope? Put into a gas chromatograph? It would surely be more fruitful to spend the research grants on miniaturising and sending the lab equipment to Mars and operating them remotely. Same goes for the idea of sending geologists to Mars. It's pretty preposterous when you think about it.

[@xmtxx]

Why is that? Once you get your samples back, you can test for everything. Even thing you didn't thought beforehand. And the budget is not that high for a mission. Pretty sure it will be very beneficial in the long run.

[@absalomdraconis]

Because there will always be better equipment on Earth.

[@807800]

15:12 is this animation correct? Seems to be too far to get to an accurate landing location.

[@ozan1234561]

I wonder if something like an orbital skyhook is possible on a weak atmosphere planet like mars, given that the sample is small, atmosphere density is low and gravity is weak it doesnt sound that impossible i think

[@nagualdesign]

It would require a cable at least 250 kilometres long. By my reckoning it would take over 40 seconds for any force to travel from one end of the cable to the other, so it would have to be a pretty amazing cable to survive the impulse, yet still be lightweight enough to be feasible. TL;DR _Skyhooks aren't possible with current technology._

[@absalomdraconis]

@@nagualdesign : As I recall, studies say that Martian space elevators _are_ possible with current technology. Lunar space elevators _absolutely_ are possible.

[@adrianf.5847]

12:20 But I thought the rover is being sent separately? What's going on?

[@clarkkent7973]

I always wonder how missions will change if/when Starship reduces the cost of launches and increases the mass.

[@steveaustin2686]

At the current $2.94B HLS Option a contact and expected up to 20 launches (2 landings), that puts Starship's per launch price at a rough $147M. Current launchers for around that price take around 20t to 63.8t to LEO in much smaller fairings. With a larger payload area and more mass margin for the launcher, will you need to make sats and probes out of expensive, super light materials to be light and small? That may be a big change I think.

[@bentonjackson8698]

This is going to get us so many "Science!" points!

[@menotyou1234]

By the time NASA gets samples back from Mars, SpaceX will be taxing the exports, and negotiating interplanetary treaties...

[@-danR]

It recalls no end of classic SF stories of millennia-long journeys to the stars, and when they get there they find hundreds-year-old (human) civilizations and the inhabitants scratching their heads with "...we always heard stories of your mission but passed them off as ancient myths..."

[@the18thdoctor3]

Lmao okay sure, if that's what you want to tell yourself

[@milehunter227]

awesome content Scott, Thank you.

[@Jason-gq8fo]

Honestly believe that a starship mission with people will bring stuff back before nasas current plan happens

[@omfghai2u]

That I highly doubt. My bet is at least 25 years before a human mission to mars, assuming we don't do anything mindbogglingly stupid before that.

[@Jason-gq8fo]

@@omfghai2u 25 is crazy negative lol

[@Syritis]

imho i think starship will get to mars and back before this sample return mission but definitely not with people

[@donjones4719]

@@Syritis Yeah, I figure a return by 2030. Not with people, but with Tesla bots. They can go as a "crew" in a human-rated starship and limit themselves to what humans can do. Move around in the ship's architecture, etc. At Mars they can use their full robot capabilities if needed and, among other things, grab the return samples.

[@the18thdoctor3]

@@Jason-gq8fo No, not negative at all. Just realistic, assuming that you care about such things as crew safety. We know close to nothing about long-term exposure to the interplanetary environment. The only deep-space health data we have are from the week-long Apollo missions, which is practically inapplicable for a multi-year trip.

[@bloodgulchpatrick]

You really nailed the pronounciation of "grunt". Satisfying.

[@-danR]

0:30 "look at it with microscopes" You can if you put one on it; but they didn't. Given the central preoccupation with detecting life on Mars, I'd have thought a real --high power--biology microscope ~1 micron resolution would be a priority over mass spectrometers and the like. What are the chances of actually seeing an unequivocal microbe in sample after sample of fine-crushed sedimentary rock? Welp, the chances of seeing one if you _don't_ send a microscope are... zero. Fact is, by the time they get a sample-return rocket to Mars and back, SpaceX will have already sent an unmanned probe, with tons of instruments, including mass spectrometers, gas chromatographs, seismometers, a complete microchemistry lab, microscopes, electron microscopes, scanning electron microscopes, X-ray microscopes...

[@absalomdraconis]

We don't know what we should look for, and thus we don't know how to look. Particularly, an optical microscope would only really be useful if we knew what sorts of stains to use (because we can expect that nothing "large" is where we're currently looking, so it would all be too small); and scanning electron microscopes are both slow enough that it's only worth it if you've settled on already interesting samples, _and_ as previous false detections demonstrate they offer _no_ actual certainty even then.

[@the18thdoctor3]

Lol SpaceX design a scientific probe? Sure lmao

[@GameArchiver]

The samples will undoubtedly be of great value to scientists.

[@SMHman666]

T G Archiver There's nothing better than having physical samples to work with. Much better than just transferred data.

[@donjones4719]

Starship will be an immediate success at every step. We should cancel every space program in existence because Starship will supersede them. NOT! I'm tremendously excited about what Elon & SpaceX have done with F9 and even more excited by Starship - but It has many steps to prove itself.

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

Yup. And it will take time and there will be failures on the way.

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

Great video, Scott...👍

[@PotentiallyAndy]

I’d say NASA’s budget should go on little rovers and core drills and containment canisters. Bundle all that inside a payload module and stick it inside Starship. Let SpaceX do the rocketry and NASA do the high tech science part.

[@eddecook9252]

Elon may get there and bring back samples by the ton before this Rube Goldberg scheme is realized.

[@stormhawk4277]

10:08 "I look forward to adding your surface samples to my collection!"

[@TheUglyGnome]

No need to get rocks back. Elon The Miracle Man will send thousands of scientists to Mars any year now. They can study rocks there.

[@dogwalker666]

Ha ha ha yes any century now, 🤣🤦🏻‍♂️

[@badgerello]

Irony still lives I see.

[@spookmineer]

My God that shirt you are wearing is powerful "you are here". You may have worn it before, but I just noticed it. It's great.