New Mars Forums

Possibly the Cambrian explosion is connected to the global freezings that hypothetically occured on Earth; they have found more and more evidence that these events actually happens, and I would imagine on a wetter Mars such events occuring over longer durations.  I've read "Rare Earth" so its interesting to compare Mars to such circumstances.

The trouble is for all we know of Mars we're still left with alot of blanks.  Most of what we've learned on Earth's history is due to the fact we can physically examine the rock layers; there's a chance with the layers Opportunity found some of Martian history could be deciphered in the near future but we need more physical evidence.

The only thing I am certain about Mars is that, alive or dead, it has a geologic history that will no doubt differ radically from Earth.  No doubt it possessed water, certainly running river systems and seas for at least a few million years, and had its ice ages.

Stability of its climate is the chief factor one way or another: can Mars retain its water vapor, does the lack of a Moon and a wobbling axis shift its climate quickly?

I imagine this and the atmosphere's current condition suggests Martian life, if it appeared, developed alot differently than Earth's.  Maybe they never developed an oxygen-based metabolism.  Perhaps another mechanism was, or is, at work.

Omitting the failure with the '98 Mars Surveyors I trust the engineering with probes more than shuttle engineering myself.  Skycrane is bold, no denying that, but if we want access to more than safe-but-bland-as-hell terrain something like Skycrane would have innevitably been required.  Even the airbag missions were targeted for the relatiely smooth plains.  Also, with an RTG plugged in the rover will have power to support an active guidance system instead of worrying about conserving batteries until ol' Sol rises.  With the same altimeter and cameras onboard the previous rovers MSL could steer away from any trouble instead of hoping the airbags don't pop.

Thinking about it, a blimp probe might be the safest way to rove on Mars, or even deliver rovers to various sites.

Perhaps the next mission could send a blimp - somethink akin to a prototype of the fictional DaVinci and Issiac Newton probes on Discovery Channel's Alien Planet.  Instead of a lander for a base a future equivelant of Sojourner could be lowered and then retrieved periodically.  It would be one hell of a Mars probe.

Anyway, all we can do is hope they know they're wiring the skycrane properly...  :?

Some geologists say the moon hasn't changed dramatically within a billion years' time.

....something tells me 10 years won't be so bad. 

Although an improved geographic map won't hurt I'm more eager to hear what the other instruments can provide, including the situation with the polar ice and also radiation measurments.  With those 10 years you mention SpaceNut that would give us time to counter anything unexpected LRO would detect ahead of time for us.   Just think of it that way SpaceNut 

No offense but not all 7 operate the remote manipulator at once SpaceNut, nor does it take all 7 to hand-off cargo one by one.

I wholly agree.  Getting the government to approve a moon mission is like tipping a really really really huge cow - trying to change their mind again will be like the cow squashing you.

The one thing about the moon that you can't make a arguement about is that its close.  A week versus 6 months will always be voted for the shorter trip.

I'm all for Mars but one step at a time - trying to shove the Moon, Mars, and the whole solar system down NASA's throat will just kill it and you'll find yourselves boarding Challenger II and all I can say is...hope your space suit is lined with asbestos.

No offense but unless it was for the military historically I don't recall many government-built aircraft.  The shuttle has no comparison to aircraft of old.

The shuttle was built on compromise.  Keep in mind Nixion was in charge when the shuttle was designed and this was only after he killed Kennedy's Apollo program.

As I said before, if you're going to attempt to build a winged spacraft leave it to the commercial space companies, not NASA.  Encourage NASA if anything to fund contests to promote them but not a direct program to construct one.

The only destinations in space conceivable for winged applications beyond Earth are: Venus (somehow I doubt humans here within 100 years), Mars, and Titan (and given the billion-mile distance we'll be lucky to see a balloon or lander landed first - we'll be long dead before people get there).

....oh and to kill this debate bluntly space-bus my ass (pardon my French, even though I don't work for ESA or CNES    )

The MRO aerobraking seems to be progressing rather well, and even more smoothly than the MGS or Odessey even.  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13049645/

Its now down to under 20 hours which isn't half-bad.  That means it won't be long before the MRO makes 2 braking pases per day, then 3, 4, and so on with the braking burn lasting a bit longer each time - the article says near the end of aerobraking it will eventually spend as much as 20 minutes per brake which explains why engineers designed it to handle 175 degrees C even though its highest is -3 C for now.

I hope aerobraking ends soon so Shard can be deployed.  After HiRISE I'm betting Shard is the next most important intrument - it will be probing for actual water reserves deep in the crust.  It's great that this will be working in tandom with Marsis aboard Mars Express - each has different capabilities that complement each other.

Waiting for the results is like waiting for christmas isn't it? 

Ambitious I agree, but many thought the same for Pathfinder's airbags originally.

I've heard the airbag landing technique, while clearly proven and hopefully will be tried again on smaller missions, is too small to handle something of MSL's mass.

I'm not an engineer (or at least not yet    ) so all I can really do is just hope they're crunching their numbers correctly...and hopefully not making those metric-English mistakes that doomed the Mars Climate Orbiter.

I'm more interested in what landing site they decide on.  I hope if not Valles Marineris itself then one of the larger, spectacular channels like Kasie Vallis or Mangala Valles; I can always recognize a picture of Mars not just by the volcanoes or Valles Marineris but by the long streak of Kasie running down to Echus Chasm.

Technical details aside, I think in the long rong NASA's choice of the RS-68 over the SSME solved more problems than it created.

A simple engine capable of burning for the 10 or so minutes of flight will be far better to use than the SSME designed for repetative use on an already complicated and overrated vehicle.  If its a desposable booster like the shuttle ET (new modification aside) then the engines should also be desposable, and focused on lasting long enough to get the job done - ensure maybe a small margin but nothing excessive.

*watching a replay of the space shuttle Columbia coming down in flames*

I dunno, what I found ridiculous myself was the fact that some of the lab worms Columbia had onboard survived while 14 men and women died...

If you want another shuttlecraft, do it commercially and do it for transport, not research.  A test tube full of worms can be sent up and autonomous monitored - critics and myself agree that 99% of what was done on the shuttle could have been done autonomously - literally about the only function left reserved for the crew to do a computer couldn't was to lower the landing gear...and that was only because the shuttle was wired that way.

I dunno...how about discovering their bank account numbers? 

Welcome to the wonderful world of the professional hacker...  8)

The space shuttle itself was pretty much an aerobraking vehicle.  It also was a working testbed - the temperatures its design put on its tiles is easily as great if not greater than any experienced by an incoming aerobrake craft.

Its more a matter of geometry than actual materials required gaet, and in the vicinity of Earth with TDRES and all kinds of tracking satellites you won't get a better, safer place in the solar system (which can't be said for Mars if you want something to really complain about) for aerobraking.

Oh...and btw the first use of aerobraking was done by Magellean at Venus in the mid 90s...so there's your 10 years.