ESA's 2030+ roadmap envisions Europeans on the Moon and Mars
- Reference: 1657029614
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/07/05/esa_terrae_novae/
- Source link:
The [1]publication comes on the eve of much-anticipated images from the James Webb Space Telescope, on which ESA partnered with NASA and others, but that makes one of the themes of the roadmap all the more stark – ESA needs more autonomy.
"As recent events have shown," the document begins, "the geopolitical context can unexpectedly become unstable."
[2]
The ExoMars Rosalind Franklin rover is a prime example – due for launch this year on a Russian rocket, ESA's Terrae Novae roadmap has moved the departure date to no earlier than 2026 with a landing in 2027.
[3]
[4]
The rover, according to the document, doesn't even have a lander at present (the Russian-built original is currently not an option). And 2026 seems highly optimistic – The Register understands that 2028 is more likely, assuming the mission is not cancelled before then. Even the follow-up Mars Sample-Return mission is in jeopardy.
"Not having autonomous capabilities is indeed a hard lesson learned," the document goes on, "developing major scientific instrumentation or technological demonstration capabilities without mastering the delivery to their destination bears a high programmatic and financial risk."
[5]City-killing asteroid won't hit Earth in 2052 after all
[6]Returning to the Moon on the European Service Module
[7]Mars Express orbiter to get code update after 19 years
[8]AI to help study first images from James Webb Space Telescope
That said, ESA will not be averse to international partnerships going forwards. It will simply think a bit harder about redundancy should things take an abrupt and unexpected turn.
The document both looks forward to the future (with impressive renderings of ESA logos adorning lunar landers and missions to Mars) while also showing open regret over some of the missteps of the past. "A decision or lack thereof has long-lasting consequences," ESA writes, "for example the rejection of the Hermes programme, the discontinuation of the ATV or the missed decision in 2012 of developing capability for precision robotic lunar landings."
[9]
The ATV was ESA's cargo freighter. Some of the lessons learned from the project found their way into the European Service Module (ESM.) Hermes was an ambitious spaceplane project finally abandoned when ESA signed up with NASA and Roscosmos to build and operate the ISS and the immediate need for a European crew transport system evaporated.
Still, ESA continues to aim high, with Europeans estimated to be on the Moon by 2030, on Mars by 2040, and plans for the agency to utilize its own cargo and crew transportation. The roadmap is, however, a sign that the agency fully intends to learn from past missteps and take a more thoughtful approach to partnerships, international or otherwise. ®
Get our [10]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Earth_orbit_Moon_Mars_ESA_s_ambitious_roadmap
[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=2YsRgHiGWBNl9q0x63jb@fgAAAMk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] 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=44YsRgHiGWBNl9q0x63jb@fgAAAMk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] 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=33YsRgHiGWBNl9q0x63jb@fgAAAMk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/29/asteroid_earth_impact_esa/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/28/airbus_esm/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/22/mars_express_orbiter_upgrade/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/09/ai_jwst_morpheus/
[9] 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=44YsRgHiGWBNl9q0x63jb@fgAAAMk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: If ESA was smart
I beg to differ. They already have access to a perfectly good launch in French Guiana which has the advantage of being only a couple degrees of the equator, and hence gets the maximum boost from the Earth's rotation as well as having a safe location to dump the spent stage 1 boosters. Using a Spanish launch site looses a lot of the former benefits, while the Mediterranean is too crowded to allow a spent booster to splash down safely (plus there is a risk that an overshoot would result in the booster landing in Turkey).
ESA is smart - I've worked with them enough to know that.
Re: If ESA was smart
Superheavy boosters will not splash down - they will return to the launch site and land again for re-use. Apart from that, I agree that French Guiana is an excellent launch site.
Long term plans for Starship includes becoming a competitor to long-haul air travel. The noise level would restrict landing to ~20km away from the coast. Not sure if French Guiana is a popular enough tourist destination to get one of the early landing sites but coastal European cities are like a fairly high priority.
Mixed blessings
The private part of the public/private partnership that funds Ariane 6 based their investment on getting returns from commercial missions. When Falcon 9 ate those l[a]unches there was panic about the financial viability of Ariane 6. Bob Smith rescued the project by screwing up New Glenn so badly that Jeff had to buy Kuiper launches from everyone else (except SpaceX). With Ariane 6 brought back from the brink, the [1]Eurpean Large Logistical Lander has a launch vehicle again. E3L will get 1500kg to the Moon and 15kg back again.
If Bob had not come to the rescue, think of what else could be done with the money instead. NASA has bought two rides to the Moon and back on Starship HLS for $3B. Bob has helped out again by advocating US funding for a "competitor" to Starship that will cost at least $6B and has under 5% of the payload capacity of a Starship. NASA will not have the funding to build any payloads in the 100,000kg range that Starship can take to the Moon (and back). That $3B is mostly R&D. We do not have a direct price for a Starship HLS ride but we can get an estimate from Dear Moon. Plan A for Dear Moon was a crew Dragon launched on a Falcon Heavy - probably about $250M (based on prices for Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon). Plan B will send Starship (not HLS) around the Moon, probably at a lower cost to SpaceX.
ESA could fund Starship sized payloads and have them delivered to the Moon for something like $100M-$200M. They would be able to achieve things that NASA could not because whatever funding NASA gets will be earmarked by congress to the companies with the loudest lobbyists. On the other hand it looks like ESA has exactly the same problem: the [2]Terrae Novae road map reads like a "jobs" program advert aimed at politicians.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HERACLES_(spacecraft)
[2] https://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/HRE/Terrae_Novae_2030+strategy_roadmap.pdf
If ESA was smart
They'd give SpaceX a pile of money to build a rocket factory and launch & recovery facility someplace within the EU. Maybe the launch facility in Spain to launch eastward over the Mediterranean.