This paper analyzes the three major approaches to the Mars Sample Return mission; direct return using propellants transported from Earth, Mars orbit or interplanetary rendezvous with all propellants transported from Earth, and direct return from the Martian surface using in-situ propellants. It is found that the direct. return with terrestrial propellant fails on the basis of cost, while the orbital rendezvous approaches fail on the basis of risk. In contrast, the approach employing direct return utilizing indigenous propellants appears to be attractive on both a cost and risk basis. In addition, the in-situ propellant technology is found to offer maximum benefits for follow-on missions, including robotic Mars hopper science missions and human exploration missions.
A Comparison of Alternative Methods for the Mars Sample Return Mission
Fifth International Conference on Space ; 1996 ; Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
1996-07-19
Conference paper
Electronic Resource
English
Planets , Robotics , Space colonies , Mars , Remote sensing , Spacecraft , Space stations , Space construction , Sampling , Costs , Space exploration
A Comparison of Alternative Methods for Mars Sample Return Mission
British Library Conference Proceedings | 1996
|Mars Sample Return Mission Scenario
NTRS | 1999
|Mars Sample Return Mission Planning
NTRS | 2001
|MARS MULTI-SAMPLE RETURN MISSION
Online Contents | 1995
|Mars Rover Sample Return Mission
NTRS | 1988