After Biosignature Announcement, Mars Sample Return Remains in Limbo

Ambitious plans by NASA and the European Space Agency to return samples of the Martian surface to Earth continue to remain in limbo even as the Agency has announced the collection of a potentially biosignature-containing sample aboard the Perseverance rover. In a paper published September 10th in Nature, the rover team announced that the Sapphire Canyon sample taken from the Bright Angel formation in Mars’ Jezero Crater in July of 2024 bears signs of chemical processes associated with the presence of life. This sample, stored in a tube inside the rover, is intended for return to earth on a future Mars Sample Return mission. This tantalizing discovery may provide a renewed sense of urgency for Martian exploration within the second Trump administration. While Mars has been a point of some focus for the administration, with President Donald Trump notably vowing to “plant the American Flag on the planet Mars” in his inaugural address, the administration has thus far mostly focused on eventual crewed missions to Mars while emphasizing a return to the Moon with Artemis as a more immediate priority.

Meanwhile, robotic exploration of the red planet appears to have taken a back seat in the Trump administration’s priorities. The administration’s FY2026 NASA Budget calls for ending the Mars Sample Return (MSR) program entirely, citing high costs and the possibility of future missions accomplishing MSR’s goals. However, this proposed cancellation faces an uphill battle in Congress, where the House Appropriations Committee has earmarked $300 million for continued development of Mars Sample Return for FY2026. The announcement on the nature of the Sapphire Canyon sample will likely further steel Congress’ resolve in maintaining funding for the program. 

As the funding fight plays out in Washington, however, progress on the mission has stalled. As Space Scout reported in 2023, NASA paused work on MSR in November of that year to assess new paths forward in the face of mounting costs and delays. The agency announced in June of 2024 that they had enlisted several commercial partners to conduct studies on commercializing various elements of the mission architecture. NASA declined in January, however, to make a final decision on the approach to be taken, deferring to the incoming Trump administration. In that announcement, former Administrator Bill Nelson indicated that the agency would require about $300 million in funding to continue development on Mars Sample Return for FY2026, in line with the House’s proposed funding for the program. 

In the meantime, multiple commercial providers have announced their proposed architectures to execute the goals for MSR outlined by NASA. In January, Rocket Lab announced their proposal to deliver MSR, envisioning a three-launch architecture with a blocky, liquid fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle under a sub-4-billion-dollar firm-fixed-price contract. Similarly, Lockheed Martin in June announced their firm-fixed-price proposal for a streamlined Mars Sample Return architecture that would come in at under three billion dollars. The Lockheed proposal calls for a slimmed down lander, ascent vehicle, and Earth return vehicle, building off that company’s extensive heritage building Mars spacecraft (including, most recently, the InSIGHT spacecraft which operated on the Martian surface from 2018 to 2022). While it is unclear if Lockheed’s proposal intends to utilize the European Earth Return Orbiter planned in the original architecture, Rocket Lab’s proposal does away with that spacecraft entirely, replacing it with a Rocket Lab-built orbiter. This proposal is indicative of the expanded appetite for leveraging commercial partners for deep space missions. Rocket Lab’s architecture, if accepted, would represent a considerable shift towards commercialization compared to previous Mars missions. 

Europe, meanwhile, appears intent on further developing its own Martian capabilities, regardless of the outcome of the Mars Sample Return collaboration. As Space Scout recently reported, in addition to ongoing work on the Rosalind Franklin rover slated for a 2028 launch, ESA is proceeding with development on the LightShip concept to demonstrate the foundations of a Mars telecommunications constellation, an essential piece of infrastructure for expanded presence on the Red Planet, with or without humans present. ESA work on Martian communications presents an additional opportunity for collaboration with the United States, as the administration has earmarked $700 million for a Mars Telecommunications Orbiter in its signature spending package passed through reconciliation in June. Such an opportunity could provide a chance to make up for any potential cancellation of the European Earth Return Orbiter, as ESA has already begun construction on that spacecraft, meaning that a cancellation at this point would deal a significant blow to US/EU collaboration for deep space missions. 

The potentially game-changing nature of the Sapphire Canyon sample adds new urgency to the future of the Mars Sample Return program. While the House seems keen on maintaining funding for MSR, the funding package proposed by the Senate makes no mention of the program. Across the Pacific, China has announced plans to launch their own Mars sample return mission as early as 2028. While China’s approach differs from the US/EU proposal in lacking a yearslong sample identification and collection campaign, with a highly interesting sample site already identified, it is conceivable that China could alter their mission to collect material from the same Cheyava Falls rock where the Sapphire Canyon sample originated. While conducting launch and landing operations in such close proximity to an American spacecraft would be a situation for which very little legal or international precedent exists, as is the case on the Moon, the confirmed existence and location of such a high value object certainly presents an appealing possibility for Chinese mission planners. Given China’s ambitions, the likelihood of CNSA conducting such a mission before the US remains high – adding all the more uncertainty to Mars Sample Return’s future.

Edited by Nik Alexander