Rocket Lab says NASA lacks leadership on Mars Sample Return
- Reference: 1741779906
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/03/12/rocket_lab_mars_sample/
- Source link:
"We don't want to poke anyone in the eye," says Richard French, Vice President, Business Development and Strategy, Space Systems at Rocket Lab, "but it's clear that there's a lack of recognition that the technologies and the experience of the commercial sector are capable of doing these things."
French is talking about NASA's Mars Sample Return mission. The elaborate plans to return the samples scooped up by the rovers to Earth were attached to a ballooning budget and the project had to be revised. NASA whittled it down to two options [1]earlier in 2025 . One was a proposal from the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the other was from a commercial provider.
[2]
Rocket Lab's concept, which did not make the cut, came in under the $4 billion mark and would mean samples returned from Mars by 2031, [3]according to the company . The plan would involve three dedicated launches from Earth: an Earth Return Orbiter (ERO), a lander with an ascent vehicle, and a Mars Telecommunications Orbiter (MTO).
[4]
[5]
The MTO would launch first to provide a communication relay. Then the lander with the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) would reach the surface and stash the samples. The MAV, which would house the samples, would then be launched from Mars and rendezvous with the ERO. The samples would then be returned to Earth.
It sounds simple enough, and Rocket Lab reckons it has sufficient experience. For example, it demonstrated it can return payloads to Earth safely as part of the [6]Varda missions and has plenty of experience in building rockets and spacecraft. It also contributed hardware and software used by the successful [7]Firefly Blue Ghost lunar lander .
[8]
However, after a year of study, NASA elected to think about it for another year. "That's not leadership," says French.
Perhaps the issue is risk. While Rocket Lab has an enviable track record and has contributed to many missions, it is yet to demonstrate all the technology needed for a Mars Sample Return mission in one place.
French is, unsurprisingly, not convinced. "What's the threshold you're holding people to?" he asks. "For some reason, we decided to take a huge risk on human lives with human exploration, but we're not willing to do that with some Mars samples?
[9]50 launches, 1 knighthood – Rocket Lab CEO talks heavy-lift rockets, Venus, and Musk
[10]Biden admin fuels up Rocket Lab with $24M for space-grade solar cell chip shop
[11]Rocket Lab is a David among Goliaths in the space race
[12]Rocket Lab mission lost in the Paschen of the moment
"It's certainly the case that we've invested a lot into these samples, but we have to find a way to [transport the samples to Earth] affordably ... I would argue that the capabilities of Rocket Lab to do the mission as they stand today, relative to what SpaceX would have been judged to be able to do for human space flight when they were selected to do ... quite frankly, we're much further. It's unfortunate that that's not more obvious to people."
French is disappointed Rocket Lab didn't receive much feedback with regard to the company's proposal, although he noted that the way NASA Headquarters ran the study didn't mean there would be any. He also gives credit to the NASA centers, such as Ames and Goddard, with which Rocket Lab partnered on elements of its proposal.
[13]
Despite the apparent rejection, work carries on. French tells us that the company continues to improve its plans in the background with an eye on NASA's impending leadership change.
"We're asking for leadership," he says. French wants an open competition and a commercial procurement for Mars Sample Return.
"We're not even asking them to sole-source it to us. We're fine with an open competition. We think open competition is how the best ideas come about. So I'll just say that I'm hopeful." ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/08/nasa_whittles_down_mars_sample/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z9G9tFT_NBH7OIo9fHs5zgAAAdQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://x.com/RocketLab/status/1876878068918489409
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z9G9tFT_NBH7OIo9fHs5zgAAAdQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z9G9tFT_NBH7OIo9fHs5zgAAAdQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.rocketlabusa.com/updates/touchdown-for-in-space-manufacturing-mission-rocket-labs-pioneer-spacecraft-delivers-re-entry-for-vardas-in-space-manufacturing-capsule-in-south-australia/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/03/blue_ghost_private_moon_success/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z9G9tFT_NBH7OIo9fHs5zgAAAdQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/19/rocket_lab_peter_beck_interview/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/11/rocket_lab_chips_act/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/05/rocket_lab_peter_beck_interview/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/09/rocket_lab_investigation/
[13] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z9G9tFT_NBH7OIo9fHs5zgAAAdQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Size of problem
The approach they are taking is to send the rocket (Earth Return Orbiter) to be used for returning the samples to Earth to a martian orbit (it won't land on Mars). It won't need to be as powerful or need as much fuel as a rocket that has to land and take off from Mars before journying back to Earth.
Re: Size of problem
Surface gravity 38% of Earth. But an atmosphere roughly 1% of the pressure. Atmospheric drag would make a large difference.
Most of the problem is that the plans tend to assume that the fuel and oxygen is shipped from Earth. Which makes it an enormous problem.
Landing empty and generating the fuel and oxygen on Mars would make things much simpler. There's a lot of talk about that.
Re: Size of problem
Gravity is about 40%. But that's only part of your problem: you also have to take all your oxidation compound with you as there is no oxygen on Mars. But then again, you don't need to go anything like as high to be in orbit
Andy Weir's The Martian has some reasonably based pseudo-science on the kind of rocket that would be needed to escape the gravity well.
Re: Size of problem
Low Mars Orbit velocity is only 3.5km/s. The Lunar modules in the apollo missions had 2,2km/s of delta V in the ascent stages and they had lots of weight this mission wouldn't have, like humans and life support. So I think a single stage to orbit with a solid rocket motor is easily possible.
Re: Size of problem
"The whole manned mission to Mars is an even larger problem."
You're going to need a LEO staging post, a Lunar staging post and a Martian staging post.
Also plenty of comms sats around Mars.
Anything less than that will be a suicide mission.
No need to rush
The samples are important but not time critical. While scientists may be chomping at the bit to analyse them, they aren't going to deteriorate if left on the surface for another year.
Re: No need to rush
That's not the issue. NASA has long suffered from political interference, often making long term missions impossible whilst not saving any money. Things could be about to get a lot worse.
Rocket Lab has been getting a lot of things right and probably does deserve more credit than it gets. But, remember the successful Ariane 6 launch from last week? Thought not: didn't get a mention here while the most recent SpaceX failures did.
Why not just give the job of NASA boss to Elon? What could possibly go wrong?
I don't think NASA seriously considered anything other than the JPL option. They had to be able to say they had considered commercial options, so box ticked, but they didn't really want to use one - being plausible probably actually counted against Rocket Lab.
Size of problem
One thing I've often pondered, and never seen the maths on yet, but Mars is only about half the size of Earth. To launch anything significant into orbit from Earth needs a fairly BFR (Big Rocket), and I would assume that launching anything from Mars would need a rocket maybe a quarter the size if my fag-packet calculations are right. Assuming it's a Sputnik size launch from Mars, a rocket quarter the size/power of an Earth equivalent is still a multi-stage, 30-tonne rocket about 10m high - that in itself needs to be landed on Mars. I'm guessing my numbers must be way off, but right now I can't see any stories detailing what those engineering requirements might be.
The whole manned mission to Mars is an even larger problem.