This article only obliquely mentions in the last paragraphs, but there's a parallel Chinese program that recently brought back samples from the moon, and will attempt Mars sample return, launching in 2028,
The NASA/ESA MSR was of substantially higher quality, mind you. The M2020 rover specifically picked up samples of high scientific value to be returned. The Chinese return mission will only return what it finds from its direct landing site.
Also they’re no where near each other. These Chinese rover cannot get there.
Also also, if China were to create a new mission to collect them, they would see their costs balloon to unsustainable levels as well, as the issue is how the mission is designed. The samples are all over the place and would need a rover specifically designed to collect them and return them to a launcher.
The US Mars sample return project was always half baked in the hopes that doing something would garner funding for the rest of the mission.
Not true - only ten samples were dropped off at a “depot” close to each other. The rest are on-board Perseverance and can be picked up all at once, which was always the primary plan.
Interesting question. Article VIII of the Outer Space Treaty [1] states:
> A State Party to the Treaty on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return.
It is clear, then, that the sample containers are still the property of the US, and that if the Chinese brought them back to Earth, they would be required to give them to the US.
They should do that anyways, plus their own, and then they can be like, “when America couldn’t afford it, we stepped in for them because were good people” and it would be strictly a PR win. As long as America didn’t just destroy the sample out of spite later, they could also act nicely and maybe we’re could all get along better.
Right - because the best engineering is done in a high stakes big bang of upmost complexity rather than iterative improvement?
Not only are political officers making science decisions, but nasa lost its way in the depths of over engineered missions due to requiring a senator to be bribed by the quantity of home stage work.
peri-cl · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianwen-3" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianwen-3
lukeify · · focus · HN ↗
XorNot · · focus · HN ↗
ok_dad · · focus · HN ↗
duskwuff · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Amendment" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Amendment
junofan · · focus · HN ↗
Sounds like they blew it. What a shame.
someothherguyy · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/03/23/world/asia/23nsa-docs.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/03/23/world/asia/23...
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/nsa-breached-chinese-servers-seen-as-spy-peril.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/nsa-breached-c...
Gagarin1917 · · focus · HN ↗
Also also, if China were to create a new mission to collect them, they would see their costs balloon to unsustainable levels as well, as the issue is how the mission is designed. The samples are all over the place and would need a rover specifically designed to collect them and return them to a launcher.
The US Mars sample return project was always half baked in the hopes that doing something would garner funding for the rest of the mission.
NetMageSCW · · focus · HN ↗
Gagarin1917 · · focus · HN ↗
That alone is a separate multibillion dollar program just to do that.
joelthelion · · focus · HN ↗
Meneth · · focus · HN ↗
> A State Party to the Treaty on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return.
It is clear, then, that the sample containers are still the property of the US, and that if the Chinese brought them back to Earth, they would be required to give them to the US.
[1] <a href="https://www.unoosa.org/unoosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/outerspacetreaty.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.unoosa.org/unoosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/o...
ok_dad · · focus · HN ↗
tim333 · · focus · HN ↗
fnordpiglet · · focus · HN ↗
Not only are political officers making science decisions, but nasa lost its way in the depths of over engineered missions due to requiring a senator to be bribed by the quantity of home stage work.
thinkcontext · · focus · HN ↗
If it doesn't happen then its of worse quality.