Red Eagle Finals Presentation - Note Summary

Jul 4, 2024

Red Eagle Finalist Presentation and Lecture Notes

Overview of the Red Eagle Competition

  • 15 teams were down-selected to 5 finalists: Red Movers (France), Argo Nova (Germany and Sweden), Gauhati (India and Italy), Icarus (USA), and Project Eagle (Poland).
  • Challenge: Design a lander that can deliver a 10-ton payload to the Martian surface starting from trans-Martian injection.
  • Judging Criteria: Cost (20 points), Technical Design (20 points), Minimizing Total Mass (20 points), Operational Simplicity (20 points), and Schedule (20 points). Expected completion by 2026.

Judges Panel

  • Paul Worcester: Principal Engineer at SpaceX.
  • Tony Muscatello: Longtime NASA Kennedy Space Center Contributor.
  • Tara Polsgrove: From Marshall Space Flight Center.
  • Hobby Price: Representing Jet Propulsion Lab.
  • Max Faget: Entrepreneurial space company Mating Space.

Presentation Format

  • 40 minutes per team: 30 minutes presentation and 10 minutes Q&A.

Team Presentations

Red Movers (France)

  • Team Composition: 3 aerospace engineering students from EPSA, Paris.
  • Design Concept: Two versions of the lander, with the large one capable of carrying 10 tons and a smaller one for 6 tons for cost flexibility.
  • **Technical Discussed: Weight distribution, propellant usage, and stability considerations. Multi-software simulation used (KSP, IOS, ANSYS).
  • EDL Method: Inflatable heat shield, air-braking maneuver, suicide burn at low altitude for a smooth landing. Aerobraking for fuel efficiency.
  • Cost Estimates: 1 billion for development and additional costs for launches (Falcon Heavy cheaper than SLS).
  • Risk & Limitations: Unproven technology (inflatable heat shield), simplified estimates, student-level tools and simulations used.

Argo Nova (Germany & Sweden)

  • Team Composition: 9 students from diverse backgrounds with a focus on space science and technology.
  • Mission Design Approach: Propulsive capture trajectory chosen for human safety, avoiding long exposure to radiation and weightlessness conditions.
  • Landers: Dual-stage design utilizing capture and lander stage; hypersonic inflatable decelerator (aid); SpaceX Super Draco thrusters for final descent.
  • Power Systems: Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators (ASRG) for power, low mass, and consistent energy supply.
  • Cost & Schedule: Estimated at 2.6 billion dollars. Schedule considered development and other technical risks.
  • Risk Analysis: Major concerns include the developmental readiness of the hid and landing legs.

Gauhati (India & Italy)

  • Mission Profile: Made use of an extensive literature review; primary source NASA-based documentation.
  • Trajectory: Aerocapture followed by propulsive maneuvers to descend and land.
  • Lander Integration: Comparatively large 15m diameter, weight considerations. Parachute and propulsion system considerations discussed.
  • Thermal Protection System: Phenolic impregnated carbon ablator (Pica) tiles; specific mass breakdown provided.
  • Costing: A mixture of estimates scaling existing NASA missions and future ambitions missions cost scenarios.

Icarus (USA)

  • Team Composition: Students from Cerritos High School and Cal State University, Long Beach.
  • Design & Concept: Large lander (25.9 meters tall, 9 meters diameter); three Vikas 4B engines selected for propulsion.
  • Subsystem Details: Detailed specs for power, navigation, communication systems, and protection systems (thermal and radiation).
  • EDL Method: Enter with an aerobraking maneuver, followed by powered descent.
  • Cost Estimate: $127 billion spread over 8 years, largely based on NASA calculators and historical mission costs.
  • Mission Schedule: Technical milestones from design to testing detailed.

Project Eagle (Poland)

  • Team Composition: 16 students from diverse fields: mechanics, electronics, biology, etc.
  • Design Structure: Single-body Lander with inflatable hypersonic decelerator; Titanium structure; emphasis on reducing mass.
  • Landing System: Employing an aerobraking module, rocket engines (methane and oxygen), and versatile landing gear.
  • Technology Used: Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators; printed electronics for reduced costs and space-efficient designs.
  • Mission Profile: Planned for launch by 2026 with estimates derived from other NASA missions.

Key Q&A Highlights

  • Technical Feasibility & Risks: Inflatable heat shields, long-term human missions, parachute effectiveness, radiation concerns.
  • Budget & Schedule Accuracy: Cross-examination of speculative costs, technological readiness levels, robustness of mass and power estimates.
  • Mission Critical Questions: Ensuring safe human landing conditions, reliability of untested technologies, stability under aerodynamic forces.