SpaceX Starship can return from Mars without surface refilling

SpaceX Starship can return from Mars without surface refilling. Big claim huh? Today, we want to explore the logistics for the first possible Mars return missions with Starship. We will look into how and why we can tackle this before in-situ resource utilization has been established. We get us up to speed with the expected performance of Starship (as we know it so far) and assess the overall requirements for such a mission.

Like this shirt? Pick it up on any product you like here.
Also available in reverse.

You can support me on:

Support from the below is always massively appreciated:
The production crew - Brenton Myers, Brendan Lewis, Artzius, GameplayReviewUK, TiagoCruz, Aeneas

3D artist magicians:

[jonathaniszorro]

The amount of information in Marcus' videos, especially this one, is incredible. This is a constant stream of information and no wasted time. Many youtubers create 20 minute videos with 5 minutes of real information. These are extremely well done.

[CorwinPatrick]

You can shave a bit off requirements if you drop the requirement to have fuel to land on Earth. I know it's not much, but you've been carrying it all the way from earth. Any Starship that makes it to Earth Orbit can be Refueled again.

[thejesuschrist]

What an amazing time to be alive, again.

[AkantorJojo]

"We will not have enough fuel on board to do that!"
"What about we launch another StarShip to refuel?"
"OK"

[freedomspeech]

The "module" landing and keeping tankers in orbit, for resupply, makes the most sense, like it did for first Moon landings.

[CyberFitzy]

How inspiring it is that we're even speculating on the logistics of getting to Mars.. What an era to be alive Marcus!

[ChrisRaynorMD]

Lots of good technical info here Marcus!

[zopEnglandzip]

At this point, talking about Delta V without a Scottish accent just sounds wierd.

[maker_jds]

Another step up in content quality. The research is impressive as well as the imaginative speculation. So many possibilities. We will indeed live on Mars, and comfortably.

[lostpony]

Marcus, the way you frame numbers so we understand their size and explain the resource and acceleration demands so we understand how and how much, is most wonderful. Thank you!

[LunarDepression]

Another excellent video, Marcus! Well done! But, I think there may be some options that weren't addressed that would make this all more feasible. For instance, the most logical way to accomplish orbital refueling, for both the moon and Mars missions, is to develop an Orbital Propellant Depot version of Starship, without TPS or flaps or SL Raptors, that's equipped with solar power generation, boil-off mitigation, and bigger tanks, in the order of 1500 tons. One or more of these Depot Starships could burn for Mars with the "fleet", or be waiting in Mars orbit when they arrive. Having a surplus of propellants available will remedy a lot of problems.

[ignaciomartinchiaravalle]

Always nice to start my Sat-WAIT, IT'S TUESDAY!!! HELL, YEAH!

[David-yows]

After that intensive mass data surge, i'll take 2 Asprin's and report back in about 10 hours. I have a lot to think about.
My initial thought is it sounds feasible. 2033 and 2035 seem like the best years to travel to Mars, being closer to Earth in those years, so saving a bit on precious fuel.

[MrFarll]

18:24 Wasn't expecting this lmao. Very good.

[LukeTattersall]

This really is a great video. Thanks Marcus! Would love to see more videos at this standard - from all the NewSpace youtubers!

[lifeofjoel]

Awesome video! This is definitely something that needs to be talked about and you did a great job explaining it ( in my laymen's opinion!! )

[javeronh.]

I think a large station that a Super Heavy could still send up and a super tanker version as well would be useful. with a space station and super tanker variants I think it could help with weight reduction overall by taking advantage of the square-cube law helping with volume. I know this means that there would be something at a low volume production does hurt the cost effectiveness but I think with it being larger it gives more room for efficiency. which will be needed since aerobraking would likely get removed as an option.

the nice thing with a large enough station it is easier to spin to produce 'gravity'. though docking becomes harder. so maybe sending components to make a complex hub may be a worth while option. it would allow 'standard' starships to connection, spin producing 'gravity' but still be 'easy' to dock.

I forget who it was but they had an idea where a platform could be built to have multiple starships connected. I think this would be more complex and difficult than a larger version with aerobraking components removed but I could be wrong.

Having starships refuel in Mars orbit does mean they should greatly reduce 'wasted' fuel'. I like the idea of when a tanker is [nearly] empty it lands and becomes materials for building or new pressurized habitat.

no matter what I think spacex will continue to surprise us with ideas that we wouldn't have thought of for one reason or another

[chrislaclair]

I love the balance of weekly news update videos and deep dive videos.

[captaindaedalus]

Thank you for a peek into the complexity of a mission to Mars, and also thank you for an honest look at its likelihood of success.

[roijoi]

Thank you Marcus! You have responded, by intent or accident to my request for more on orbital mechanics in a very timely way!