What Is NASA’s Human Spaceflight Plan?

Evolving

Sending human explorers to the surface of Mars represents one of the most complex and ambitious technological undertakings in history. It’s a goal that has captivated engineers, scientists, and the public for generations. As of late 2025, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is actively developing and testing the hardware and strategies needed to make this multi-planetary leap. The agency’s plan isn’t a single, monolithic mission but a long-term campaign.

This campaign, known as the “Moon to Mars” strategy, uses the Moon as a vital stepping stone. The logic is straightforward: before committing crews to a two-year round trip to a distant world, NASA will first practice, test, and validate its systems in a proving ground much closer to home. Cislunar space – the region between Earth and the Moon – provides a deep-space environment that is only a few days’ journey away.

The entire endeavor is built upon the Artemis program, which is already in motion. Artemis is the architecture intended to build a sustainable human presence on and around the Moon. This lunar experience is designed to directly inform and enable the first human expeditions to the Red Planet, which NASA leadership suggests could occur in the late 2030s or early 2040s.

However, the specific blueprint for this grand strategy is currently in a significant state of flux. As of late 2025, the agency is navigating major proposed changes to its foundational architecture, particularly concerning the Gateway lunar space station. These potential pivots, driven by budgetary and strategic reassessments, highlight the dynamic and challenging nature of planning a mission that spans decades, administrations, and immense technological hurdles. This article explores the current state of NASA’s human Mars exploration plan, from its foundational lunar architecture to the advanced technologies in development and the immense challenges that must be overcome.

The Red Horizon: Why Mars?

Before examining the “how” of a Mars mission, it’s important to understand the “why.” The motivations driving NASA and its international partners toward the Red Planet are manifold, blending scientific discovery, technological advancement, and a deeper human impulse for exploration.

Scientifically, Mars is a unique and compelling target. It’s the most Earth-like planet in our Solar System. Billions of years ago, it was a very different world. Evidence gathered by robotic orbiters and rovers, like Curiosity and Perseverance, points to a past where liquid water flowed freely across the surface, forming lakes, rivers, and possibly even a shallow northern ocean. This ancient environment may have had all the necessary ingredients for life to emerge.

This makes Mars a primary target in the field of astrobiology. The central question is whether life ever did arise on Mars, even in a simple microbial form. If it did, traces of that biosignature might be preserved in specific geological formations, such as ancient river deltas or subsurface deposits safe from surface radiation. While robotic rovers are powerful tools, human explorers bring an unparalleled capability for intuition, problem-solving, and adaptability. A human geologist on Mars could accomplish in days what a robot might take years to do, drilling deep core samples, analyzing complex terrain in real-time, and following scientific hunches. The search for past or present life on Mars is a quest to understand our own origins and whether life is a rare cosmic accident or a common phenomenon.

Beyond biology, Mars is a planetary laboratory. It provides a control case for understanding planetary evolution. Why did Earth remain a vibrant, water-filled world while Mars turned into a cold, dry desert with a thin atmosphere? Studying Martian geology, climate history, and its lack of a global magnetic field helps scientists refine their models of planetary habitability, which has direct implications for understanding Earth’s own climate and future.

From an exploration standpoint, Mars is the next logical frontier. It represents a challenge that pushes the boundaries of human capability. Accomplishing such a mission requires innovation in propulsion, life support, power generation, robotics, and human medicine. These technologies have broad applications back on Earth, from medical diagnostics to sustainable living systems. The mission also serves as a long-term focus for international cooperation, binding nations together in a complex, peaceful, and constructive endeavor. Finally, there is the long-term, almost philosophical, rationale: ensuring the survival of the species. Becoming a multi-planet species, with a self-sustaining presence on another world, would be a significant insurance policy against any catastrophe, natural or self-inflicted, that might threaten humanity’s future on Earth.

The “Moon to Mars” Doctrine: A Strategy of Steps

NASA’s approach to sending humans to Mars is not a direct dash to the Red Planet. The agency has adopted an objectives-based strategy known as “Moon to Mars.” This doctrine treats the Moon as an essential high-fidelity proving ground. The logic is that the challenges of a Mars mission are so immense and the transit times so long (six to nine months each way) that it would be reckless to attempt it without first validating every critical system in a more forgiving environment.

The Moon offers the perfect test bed. It’s in deep space, exposing crews and hardware to the harsh radiation environment they’ll face on the way to Mars. But it’s also only a three-day trip from home, meaning a crew in trouble could return to Earth relatively quickly. A Mars crew, by contrast, would be on their own for years. Any abort-to-Earth from Mars transit takes months, not days.

Under this doctrine, NASA is using the Artemis program to systematically test a list of “Mars-Forward Capabilities.” These are the specific technologies and operational techniques that must be mastered at the Moon before they can be packaged for a Mars mission.

Key Mars-forward capabilities being developed under Artemis include:

• Advanced Spacesuits: Astronauts on Mars will need next-generation suits. These suits must be far more durable and mobile than their Apollo-era predecessors, allowing for extensive geological fieldwork. They must protect against the harsh Martian dust and temperature swings and be easily maintainable by the crew far from home. These new suits, known as the Exploration Extravehicular Activity (xEVA) systems, are being developed by commercial partners like Axiom Space and will be tested on the lunar surface during Artemis missions.
• Surface Mobility: The first Mars expeditions will need to explore large areas. This requires robust mobility systems. NASA is developing pressurized rovers, which are essentially small mobile habitats. Crews can live inside them for days or weeks at a time, conducting long-range sorties from their main landing site without needing to wear a spacesuit. These pressurized rovers are planned for later Artemis missions and are considered a direct precursor to the vehicles crews will use on Mars.
• Power Systems: A Mars base will require a significant and continuous power source. Solar power on Mars is difficult, as the planet is farther from the Sun, has a thinner atmosphere, and is subject to global dust storms that can block sunlight for months. NASA has officially selected nuclear fission power as the primary technology for its Mars surface plans. A small, lightweight fission reactor system, building on the Kilopower project, can provide reliable, continuous power (on the order of 10 kilowatts) regardless of weather or time of day. This technology will be tested on the Moon first.
• In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU): This is one of the most important concepts for Mars exploration. ISRU means “living off the land.” Shipping everything from Earth, including water, oxygen, and rocket propellant, is prohibitively expensive. The Mars strategy depends on crews being able to manufacture what they need on-site. The key resource on Mars is water ice, which is abundant beneath the surface. Using electricity from the fission reactor, crews can split this water (H₂O) into hydrogen and oxygen. The oxygen can be used for life support, and when combined with carbon from the Martian atmosphere (which is 95% CO₂), it can be used to create methane (CH₄) – an excellent rocket propellant. This would allow a Mars Ascent Vehicle to be refueled on the surface for the trip home. The Perseverance rover’s MOXIE instrument has already successfully demonstrated a piece of this, generating oxygen from the Martian atmosphere. Artemis missions will practice the next step: extracting and processing water ice from the lunar poles.
• Long-Duration Deep Space Habitation: The International Space Station (ISS) has taught NASA how to keep humans healthy in microgravity for a year, but it’s in low Earth orbit, protected by Earth’s magnetic field. The lunar Gateway was intended to be the test bed for long-duration deep space habitation systems, including advanced life support, radiation shielding, and autonomous operations.

Current Status: A Plan in Flux

While the “Moon to Mars” philosophy remains NASA’s official strategy, the specific architectural path is facing its most significant uncertainty in years. The entire plan, as of late 2025, is balancing between its long-established architecture and a radical new proposal laid out in the President’s fiscal year 2026 budget request.

The original plan, developed over the past decade, was a linear progression: use the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft to build the Gateway lunar space station. This station would serve as the hub for the Human Landing System (HLS) (the lunar lander) and, eventually, as the assembly point for the Deep Space Transport vehicle to Mars.

In May 2025, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a FY2026 budget proposal that called for a dramatic pivot. This budget proposed the full cancellation of the Gateway program. The stated rationale was to “sunset” the program and its multi-billion dollar annual cost to free up funds for what it termed a “more streamlined focus on direct-to-surface exploration.”

This “direct-to-surface” model would eliminate the need for a lunar orbital hub. Instead, the components of a lunar mission – the crew on Orion and the lander – would launch separately and rendezvous in lunar orbit directly before descending to the surface. The budget proposal suggested reinvesting the significant savings from Gateway into accelerating the development of commercial lunar transportation services, advanced Mars-specific technologies (like propulsion and surface power), and surface mobility.

This proposal sent shockwaves through the aerospace community. It was met with immediate and strong opposition from many in Congress and from NASA’s international partners. The Canadian Space Agency (CSA), the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) had all invested heavily in Gateway, contributing key components like the Canadarm3 robotics, the I-Hab habitation module, and the ESPRIT refueling module. The proposed cancellation created significant diplomatic and programmatic tension.

As of November 2025, this budget is not law. It is a request. The final budget will be determined by Congress, and the political battle over Gateway’s future is ongoing. This leaves NASA’s Mars plan in a precarious position. Is the Gateway, the lynchpin of the original Mars strategy, still the path forward, or will the agency be directed to pivot to a new “direct” architecture? The answer to this question will define the shape of human space exploration for the next decade.

Artemis: The Lunar Proving Ground

Regardless of the fate of Gateway, the Artemis missions to the lunar surface remain the foundational element of the Mars plan. These are the missions that will flight-test the hardware and give astronauts the operational experience of working on another world.

The Artemis Missions: A Step-by-Step Campaign

The Artemis campaign is a series of increasingly complex missions.

• Artemis I: This was the uncrewed “shakedown cruise” for the entire system. It successfully launched in November 2022. The massive SLS rocket sent an uncrewed Orion capsule on a 25-day journey around the Moon and back, testing the spacecraft’s systems in deep space and validating its heat shield upon a high-speed reentry. The mission was a complete success.
• Artemis II: This will be the first crewed flight, currently scheduled for no earlier than April 2026. Four astronauts (three from NASA, one from the CSA) will pilot the Orion spacecraft on a lunar flyby mission. They will not land or enter lunar orbit but will loop around the far side of the Moon and return to Earth. This mission will test Orion’s life support systems and manual controls with humans on board, taking them farther from Earth than any human has ever been.
• Artemis III: This is the milestone mission: the return of humans to the lunar surface. Targeted for mid-2027, this mission will see four astronauts fly to the Moon on Orion. Two of them will transfer to a waiting Human Landing System – the Starship HLS developed by SpaceX – and descend to the lunar south pole. They will spend nearly a week on the surface, conducting spacewalks and scientific research, before ascending to Orion and returning to Earth. This mission will be the first real-world test of the surface suits, tools, and operational procedures.
• Artemis IV and V: Scheduled for September 2028 and March 2030, respectively, these missions were intended to be the first to utilize the Gateway. Artemis IV was planned to deliver the ESA-built I-Hab module, and Artemis V would deliver the ESPRIT refueling module and the pressurized rover. These missions would begin the “sustainable” phase of lunar exploration. Their profiles are now the most at-risk, as their primary objectives depend on the existence of Gateway. If the station is canceled, these missions will be completely re-planned, likely as more direct-to-surface expeditions.

The Hardware of Artemis

The Artemis program relies on two primary pieces of hardware that form the backbone of the Earth-to-Moon transportation system.

The Space Launch System (SLS) is NASA’s super-heavy-lift rocket. It is, by some metrics, the most powerful rocket ever built, designed specifically to launch the Orion spacecraft and its crew, along with heavy cargo, on a direct trajectory to the Moon. Its design is derived from Space Shuttle components (like the RS-25 main engines and solid rocket boosters), a decision made to utilize existing hardware and supply chains.

The Orion spacecraft is the human exploration vehicle. Built by Lockheed Martin, it’s a capsule-based system designed for deep space. It can support a crew of four for up to 21 days. Its primary role in the “Moon to Mars” plan is to act as the “ferry” from Earth to lunar orbit. It is not a lander; it’s the command ship and return vehicle that will safely bring the crew home, protected by its advanced heat shield.

Gateway: The Crossroads in Cislunar Space

No single element of the “Moon to Mars” architecture embodies the current uncertainty more than the Gateway space station. For nearly a decade, it was presented as the essential, non-negotiable hub for all deep space activities. Now, its very existence is in question.

The Original Vision: A Deep Space Waypoint

The Gateway was never intended to be another International Space Station. It’s much smaller – roughly the size of a studio apartment in its initial configuration, compared to the sprawling five-bedroom-house size of the ISS. Its purpose was to be a waypoint, a command center, and a research lab in a unique and strategic orbit.

It was designed to be placed in a Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO). This is a highly elliptical, seven-day orbit that takes the station close to the lunar north pole and then far out over the lunar south pole. This orbit was chosen for several reasons. It’s gravitationally stable, requiring minimal fuel to maintain. It offers continuous communication with Earth. And it provides excellent access to the entire lunar surface, especially the scientifically interesting south pole, where water ice is believed to be trapped in permanent shadow.

In the original plan, Gateway served multiple roles:

1. Staging Point: Orion would dock with Gateway. The HLS, launched separately, would also dock there. Astronauts would transfer to the HLS, descend to the surface, and return to Gateway to meet the Orion for the ride home.
2. Refueling Depot: The HLS lander could be refueled at Gateway, allowing it to be reused for multiple surface missions.
3. Command Center: During surface missions, astronauts on Gateway could support their colleagues on the Moon, potentially operating rovers or providing orbital reconnaissance.
4. Mars Assembly Point: This was its key Mars-facing role. The large Deep Space Transport (DST) vehicle, the ship for the Mars journey, would be too large to launch on a single rocket. Its pieces – propulsion, habitation, logistics – would be launched to Gateway and assembled there by astronauts over several missions. Once complete, the crew would board it at Gateway and depart for Mars from lunar orbit.

An Architecture Under Scrutiny

Even before the FY2026 budget proposal, Gateway was facing serious technical and programmatic headwinds. A July 2024 report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) highlighted significant concerns. The report noted that the first two modules – the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) – were experiencing mass overruns.

More seriously, the report raised questions about the PPE’s ability to control the station’s orientation. The PPE’s solar electric propulsion thrusters are high-efficiency but very low-thrust. The GAO found that NASA’s models for controllability did not fully account for the massive torque that would be applied when a vehicle as large as SpaceX’s Starship HLS (which is nearly 18 times more massive than the vehicle originally studied) docks with the station. This raised doubts about the station’s stability and its ability to stay pointed in the right direction.

These technical challenges, combined with schedule delays (the PPE and HALO launch was already pushed to late 2027), provided a technical justification for the budgetary re-evaluation. The 2025 budget proposal to cancel the program effectively seized on these existing concerns, arguing that a simpler, cheaper “direct” approach was more feasible.

The International Partnership

The proposed cancellation creates an immense diplomatic challenge. Gateway is a deeply international project. The Canadian Space Agency is building Canadarm3, an advanced robotic arm essential for maintaining the station and assembling modules. The European Space Agency is building the primary habitation module (I-Hab) and the ESPRIT refueling module. JAXA is contributing habitation components and logistics.

These partners committed resources based on NASA’s long-term plan. A unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the program would jeopardize these partnerships and could damage trust for future collaborations, including the Mars mission itself, which is envisioned as an international endeavor. This political and diplomatic fallout is a major factor in the ongoing congressional debate over Gateway’s fate.

Building the Mars Transit Vehicle

Assuming the lunar program, in one form or another, succeeds in testing the necessary systems, the next great hardware challenge is building the “Mars Transporter,” or Deep Space Transport (DST). This is the spaceship that will actually carry a crew of four on the long voyage between Earth orbit and Mars orbit.

The Tyranny of Distance

The trip to Mars is fundamentally different from a trip to the Moon. A mission to Mars is governed by orbital mechanics. The most efficient time to travel is during a launch window that occurs only once every 26 months, when Earth and Mars are in the proper alignment. Using conventional chemical rockets, like those that powered the Apollo missions, the one-way transit takes six to nine months.

This long transit time is the single greatest driver of mission risk. It exposes the crew to nearly a year of continuous deep-space radiation, the debilitating effects of microgravity, and the immense psychological strain of total isolation. Furthermore, the ship must carry all the food, water, oxygen, and supplies for a mission that could last two to three years in total (transit out, surface stay, transit back).

The primary goal in designing the DST is speed. Cutting the transit time from nine months to, say, four months would dramatically reduce all these risks. This is why NASA is investing heavily in advanced propulsion. The FY2026 budget proposal, for instance, set aside $350 million for a new Mars Technology program specifically to accelerate this work.

The Propulsion Contenders

There are several leading propulsion technologies under consideration for the crewed Mars vehicle.

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP)

This is widely considered the leading candidate for the first crewed missions. In a Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system, a compact nuclear fission reactor is used to heat a liquid propellant, typically liquid hydrogen, to extreme temperatures. The superheated hydrogen gas then expands and is expelled through a nozzle, generating thrust.

NTP is not a new idea; it was tested extensively in the 1960s under Project Rover. Its great advantage is its efficiency, which is about twice that of the best chemical rockets. This high efficiency means it can generate thrust for longer, continuously accelerating the spacecraft. An NTP-powered ship could potentially cut the Mars transit time in half, reducing the one-way journey to as little as three or four months. NASA, in partnership with DARPA, is actively working on the DRACO mission, a flight demonstration of an NTP system scheduled for the late 2020s.

Nuclear Electric and Solar Electric (NEP/SEP)

These systems are even more efficient but produce very low thrust. In a Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) system, a reactor generates a large amount of electricity, which is then used to power Hall thrusters or other ion engines. These engines accelerate and expel tiny amounts of propellant (like xenon gas) at extremely high speeds.

The thrust is gentle – often described as the force of a piece of paper resting on your hand – but it can be maintained for years. This “slow and steady” approach is highly efficient for cargo. The current plan envisions sending robotic cargo missions to Mars well ahead of the crew, using high-efficiency SEP or NEP systems. These precursor missions would deliver the surface habitat, the fission power plant, the ascent vehicle, and other supplies, all of which would be waiting for the astronauts when they arrive. While likely too slow for the crewed transit, this technology is essential for pre-positioning assets.

Chemical Propulsion

This is the “baseline” option. Using traditional liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen engines is well-understood and reliable. However, to make the trip to Mars quickly, a chemical rocket would require an astronomical amount of propellant, making the ship incredibly large and expensive to assemble in orbit. It remains an option, but it’s the least efficient and imposes the highest risk on the crew due to the long transit time.

The Deep Space Transport

The ship itself will be a multi-module spacecraft, likely assembled in orbit (either at Gateway or in Earth orbit, depending on the final architecture). It will consist of a habitation module, a logistics module for supplies, and the propulsion system. This habitat will be the crew’s home for the entire journey. It must be a closed-loop ecosystem, recycling nearly 100% of its air and water. It must also provide radiation protection, likely using its own water supplies, food, and propellant tanks as a shield to create a “storm shelter” for the crew to retreat to during intense solar particle events.

Living and Working on the Red Planet

Arriving at Mars is only half the battle. The crew must then descend to the surface and operate a base for over a year while they wait for the 26-month orbital alignment to reopen for the journey home.

Powering the Base: A Nuclear Decision

As mentioned, NASA has selected fission surface power as the baseline for Mars. A 10-kilowatt-class reactor, about the size of a tall filing cabinet, would be delivered by a robotic lander before the crew arrives. It would be buried in the Martian regolith (soil) a safe distance from the habitat, with cables running to the base. This single reactor could power the life support, ISRU propellant-production plant, and scientific instruments continuously for a decade, regardless of the season or the planet-encircling dust storms that periodically plague Mars.

Getting Around: Pressurized Rovers

The initial landing site will be a “base camp.” To conduct meaningful exploration, astronauts will need to travel hundreds of kilometers. The key to this is the pressurized rover. This vehicle will be a combination of a pickup truck, an RV, and a science lab. Astronauts can live inside it for weeks at a time, wearing normal clothes and sleeping in bunks, as they drive across the Martian landscape. They would only suit up when they arrive at a compelling geological site to go outside and collect samples.

Finding Water, Making Fuel

The entire Mars exploration strategy hinges on ISRU. The landing site will be chosen specifically for its access to subsurface water ice. Robotic systems, landed in advance, will drill and heat the regolith to extract this water. In the habitat’s ISRU plant, electrolysis will split the water into oxygen (for breathing) and hydrogen. The hydrogen will then be combined with carbon dioxide from the Martian atmosphere in a chemical process to create methane (propellant) and more water (which is recycled).

Before the crew even leaves Earth, the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) waiting for them on the surface will have already spent a year slowly filling its tanks with propellant manufactured entirely on Mars. This single technology is what makes a round trip feasible, as it eliminates the need to land a fully-fueled return rocket on the planet.

The Five Great Challenges of a Mars Mission

The “Moon to Mars” plan is an attempt to systematically solve a set of challenges that are orders ofmagnitude greater than any NASA has faced before.

The Radiation Gauntlet

This is arguably the greatest human health threat. Earth’s magnetic field and thick atmosphere protect us. In deep space and on Mars (which has no global magnetic field), astronauts are exposed to two types of radiation:

1. Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs): These are high-energy particles – atomic nuclei stripped of their electrons – that originate from supernovas far outside our Solar System. They are constant, pervasive, and extremely difficult to shield against. They can shred DNA and are known to cause cumulative damage to the central nervous system, increasing the long-term risk of cancer and degenerative diseases.
2. Solar Particle Events (SPEs): These are massive, unpredictable bursts of radiation from our own Sun. A large SPE can deliver a potentially lethal dose of radiation in a matter of hours.

The DST will have a heavily-shielded “storm shelter” for SPEs. But GCRs are a long-term, chronic exposure. NASA is researching advanced shielding materials and medical countermeasures, but this remains a top concern.

The Toll on the Human Body

Long-duration weightlessness is brutal on the human body. The ISS has provided a wealth of data on these effects. Astronauts experience rapid bone density loss, muscle atrophy, and a “fluid shift” where bodily fluids move to the head, putting pressure on the eyes. This can lead to Spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome (SANS), a condition that can permanently alter an astronaut’s vision.

On the ISS, these effects are managed with a grueling two-hour-per-day exercise regimen. A Mars crew will have to maintain this same regimen on a cramped ship. One potential solution being studied is a “centrifuge” that would create artificial gravity, but this adds immense complexity, mass, and cost to the vehicle.

The Psychological Frontier

A Mars crew will be more isolated than any humans in history. They will be confined to a small habitat with three other people for two to three years. As they travel away from Earth, it will shrink to a small blue dot, and eventually, it will be “out of view” on the other side of theSun.

Compounding this isolation is the communication delay. Light takes between 4 and 22 minutes to travel one-way between Earth and Mars. This means a real-time conversation with Mission Control is impossible. A crew member asking “Houston, we have a problem” would have to wait up to 44 minutes for a response. This necessitates a fundamental shift in mission operations, requiring the crew to be completely autonomous, able to handle any medical, technical, or interpersonal emergency on their own.

The Logistics of a New World

A Mars mission must be 100% reliable. There is no resupply and no rescue. Every spare part, every computer, every screw, and every meal for three years must be packed in advance or be manufacturable on-site with a 3D printer. The sheer amount of mass that must be launched from Earth and pre-positioned at Mars is staggering, measured in the hundreds of tons. This massive logistical chain is why powerful, cheap, and reusable rockets from commercial partners like SpaceX are so essential to the overall plan.

The Hostile Martian Surface

Mars itself is a hazardous place. The regolith is as fine as talcum powder and filled with toxic perchlorates, which could be a health hazard if tracked into the habitat. Planet-encircling dust storms can blot out the Sun and clog mechanisms. The atmosphere, while thin, is still thick enough to require a heat shield for landing but too thin to make landing with parachutes alone feasible. A massive, multi-ton habitat must use a complex system of powered descent (retro-propulsion) to land safely.

Eyes on the Sky: Paving the Way Today

Even as the high-level architecture is being debated in Washington, the scientific and robotic work to prepare for Mars continues. The data gathered today is actively shaping the design of tomorrow’s human missions.

The ESCAPADE Mission

A clear example is the ESCAPADE mission, which as of early November 2025, is scheduled to launch within days. ESCAPADE (Escape and Plasma Acceleration and Dynamics Explorers) is a NASA SIMPLEx mission, built by Rocket Lab, consisting of two identical twin spacecraft.

It’s set to launch on the second-ever flight of Blue Origin’s New Glenn heavy-lift rocket, marking that vehicle’s first interplanetary mission for NASA. The two probes will travel to Mars and enter orbit to study the planet’s unique hybrid magnetosphere. Their goal is to create the first-ever 3D map of how the solar wind interacts with Mars’s thin atmosphere and strips it away to space.

This mission is not just abstract science; it’s vital human exploration data. By mapping the radiation environment and particle flows around Mars, ESCAPADE provides the precise data engineers need to design the radiation shielding for orbital habitats and surface suits, helping to protect the first human explorers.

Robotic Precursors

The Perseverance rover continues its work in Jezero Crater, analyzing rocks for signs of ancient life and collecting a cache of pristine samples. These samples are the target of the ambitious, multi-spacecraft Mars Sample Return campaign, a joint project with ESA. Bringing these samples back to Earth will allow scientists to analyze them with instruments far too large to send to Mars, providing a definitive answer on the question of astrobiology and, just as important, identifying any potential hazards in the Martian soil that could affect human explorers.

Summary

NASA’s plan for sending humans to Mars is a complex, multi-decade strategy that is currently at a critical inflection point. The foundational “Moon to Mars” doctrine remains the agency’s guiding philosophy: use the Moon as a test bed to prove the technologies for power, mobility, life support, and resource utilization needed for the Red Planet. The Artemis missions are the first step in this process, with the return to the lunar surface planned for 2027.

However, the specific architecture to achieve this is in flux. The long-planned Gateway lunar space station – envisioned as the deep-space hub for lunar operations and the assembly point for the Mars-bound transport – faces an uncertain future, caught between technical challenges and a 2025 proposal to cancel it in favor of a more direct, commercially-focused lunar model.

While this high-level debate unfolds, work continues on the critical technologies that will be needed regardless of the final architecture. Development of nuclear thermal propulsion to shorten the months-long transit, fission surface reactors to power a base, and advanced rovers and spacesuits are all moving forward. At the same time, robotic missions like the newly-launching ESCAPADE are gathering the vital scientific data that will ensure the first human crew is safe, prepared, and ready for the historic challenge of setting foot on another world.