NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

Josh Cryer · 2003-04-11 19:17:07

Surprised this hasn't been posted (it may have been posted in the New Discovery's thread by Cindy, I just got here!).

NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers

PASADENA, Calif - NASA unveiled the landing sites Friday where it hopes to land twin rovers on Mars next January to look for geological evidence that the Red Planet was once a warmer, wetter place hospitable to life.

Data gathered from NASA satellites orbiting the planet suggest both sites once abounded in water.

One is a crater into which a now-dry river apparently once emptied, perhaps filling the basin with a brimming lake. The other is a plain rich in hematite, an iron mineral that typically forms in standing water.

The sites, both near the equator in the southern hemisphere of Mars, are halfway around the planet from each other. They are each 60 miles to 120 miles long and roughly 12 miles wide.

LBN link may break after a few weeks: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....ars&e=2

NASA link (shouldn't break): http://www.nasa.gov/home/HP_news_03137.html

Palomar · 2003-04-11 19:41:08

Surprised this hasn't been posted (it may have been posted in the New Discovery's thread by Cindy, I just got here!).
NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers

*You got this before I did, Josh. It came over the wire, apparently, after I had logged off the internet for nearly 4 hours.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2003-04-17 10:58:33

*Mission to Mars ::delayed:: to fix robots:

http://www.spacedaily.com/2003/03041601 … d9uij.html

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2003-04-17 16:26:45

Crap.

At least they caught the problem before-hand. You can tell this is the result of a lack of communication between teams. If all the teams were communicating properly, all the systems could have been designed without these kinds of problems.

dicktice · 2003-04-18 07:58:57

Too bad NASA has had to ration space exploration since Apollo ... because once the old guard was gone, the lack of overlapping in-house expertise since then has forced inexperienced newcomers to "re-invent the wheel," with all the proneness for first-time errors according to Murphy's Law. We humans just don't live long enough ... to be able to afford the luxury of waiting for the right political climate a generation-or-more, between space programmes....

TJohn · 2003-04-18 08:25:26

I agreee, dicktice. Whether you like the current administration or not, you have to wonder how the upcoming nuclear propulsion system will fair in the next administration.

dicktice · 2003-04-18 12:09:30

I agreee, dicktice. Whether you like the current administration or not, you have to wonder how the upcoming nuclear propulsion system will fair in the next administration.

Please define "next administration."

rgcarnes · 2003-04-18 12:45:52

Is anyone else troubled by the selection of instruments on the two rovers?

My point is that other than improved imaging capabilities with 14 wavelength selection filters on their stereo camera, there is little else than a selection of instruments designed to find ONLY evidence of PAST life and/or water. Seems geologist-centric.

I picture their rock surface abrader, designed to remove surface dust from the rocks to get at virgin interior material, merrily grinding off a layer of something like lichen to get to something which may or may not show evidence of life megayears or gigayears ago with nobody the wiser.

Shaun Barrett · 2003-06-29 01:29:55

I'm with you, Rex.
It honestly looks to me like NASA's higher echelons simply don't want to know about extant life on Mars (if there is any). It looks like they're trying to stick their heads in the sand and pretend there's no case to answer as regards a possible near-surface Martian biota.
Not very scientific - more likely political.

Shaun Barrett · 2003-06-29 01:38:52

I don't believe it!!!

It looks like some half-***ed fisherman has delayed the launch of the second Mars Rover!
:angry:

Check it out at this site.

TJohn · 2003-06-30 06:48:43

What a bonehead this person was!! So the weather didn't actually have anything to do with the delay???

Shaun Barrett · 2003-06-30 07:42:46

Hi TJohn!
After they escorted the offending vessel out of the restricted area, they rescheduled the launch for yesterday. But the fine conditions which prevailed when Captain Headinasling was breaking all the rules had deteriorated by then - causing yet another delay!!

Palomar · 2003-06-30 14:49:05

Hi TJohn!
After they escorted the offending vessel out of the restricted area, they rescheduled the launch for yesterday. But the fine conditions which prevailed when Captain Headinasling was breaking all the rules had deteriorated by then - causing yet another delay!!

*I don't mean to sound glib, but you know what they say: "Sh*t happens."

Captain Lipoencephaly should be fined, though.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2003-07-01 11:38:38

...and yet another delay; this time it's Mother Nature

*Yes, Shaun, I feel your pain! :angry:

--Cindy

Palomar · 2003-07-01 11:49:29

...and yet more bad news

*Well damn it. Maybe 4th time will be a charm?

--Cindy

Free Spirit · 2003-07-01 14:33:53

*I don't mean to sound glib, but you know what they say: "Sh*t happens."
Captain Lipoencephaly should be fined, though.
--Cindy

Or maybe we should show our gratitude to the good captain since the delay he caused gave NASA time to find a serious problem with the cork lining in the rocket.

Shaun Barrett · 2003-07-01 20:23:08

Don't bother me with all that fair-minded logic, Free Spirit.
I'm having too good a time sticking pins into this little effigy of Rear Admiral Scheisskopf!!

[The 'good' fisherman may have saved the mission from disaster but he didn't do it for that reason. He was driving that boat whilst under the influence ... of a brain that doesn't function!
Damn! There I go again ... seeing the funny side. And I tried so hard to stay mad at that crazy bast***, too!! ]

Free Spirit · 2003-07-02 12:17:05

LOL! I'll take this as a warning to shut up about the captain before I start feeling the pinpricks being inflicted on a little doll halfway 'round the world.

Palomar · 2003-07-02 14:50:11

LOL! I'll take this as a warning to shut up about the captain before I start feeling the pinpricks being inflicted on a little doll halfway 'round the world.

*Yeah...I didn't know Shaun was a voodoo kind of guy.

Hey Shaun, I think you're really nice, swell, wonderful, terrific, fantastic, the greatest guy in the world! Yes, I'll definitely stay on your GOOD side; I don't want any psychic pins stabbing me.

But hey, can I ask you a question? Do you go for THE EYES? :laugh:

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2003-07-02 19:17:09

It's OK. Eye was only kidding!

Palomar · 2003-07-06 09:12:42

"Mars Rover Launch Pushed Back to Monday"

*Well hopefully THIS time!

"NASA set July 15 as a deadline to launch Opportunity, but it is studying whether it could extend that by two days before Mars and Earth move too far apart for the spacecraft to reach Red Planet.

If it misses the launch opportunity, it will have to wait until at least November 2004."

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2003-07-08 13:37:53

Managed to catch the launch of Opportunity last night.

It was held at the first launch window do to a faltering release valve, but after they cycled it several times, it was totally ready to go.

Good luck both Spirit and Opportunity!

I suspect, like Viking 2, Opportunity will be my favorite probe. Just, well, just because.

Palomar · 2003-12-05 15:10:12

Little Red Planet, Here We Come!

*"NASA begins preparations for landings! Yippee!

--Cindy ::crosses fingers for good, good luck::

---

EDIT: I don't like that comment by Mr. Weiler. Not good PR.

Mad Grad Student · 2003-12-10 20:47:21

I'm optimistic about the MER missoins, but you never know. Sure, both Viking landers fuctioned flawlessly, but lately NASA's had some downright embarrasing failures happen to them. For example, the Mars Climate Orbiter was lost from a failure to convert from metrics to English units, perhaps a case for the US to switch. Two thrids out of all missions to Mars have been failures, so I think we should look to the Russians.

Venera Program

As you can see, though virtually every attempt the Soviets made to Mars ended in nasty luck, they had a wildly succesful program exploring Venus. The Americans have succesfully landed three probes, by contrast, almost every Russian probe landing has been a success, only marred by a few failed Mars lander. Is Mars the Bermuda Triangle of the solar system? ???

Unfortunately, the Russian space agency has such anemic funding they can't possibly hope to launch a planetary mission anytime soon. I think the ESA and NASA could learn a thing or two by examining their track record, which also includes the Luna series and Lunkhod, the first unmanned rover mission. If it weren't for their often terrible luck, the Russians would unquestionably own the solar system.

Rxke · 2003-12-11 03:31:12

What I'm a bit concerned about...

*Suppose* that the administration IS planning for a manned Mars mission in the future (not very likely, reading recent news, but... let's suppose this anyway)

AND Bush gives that "We are going to Mars" speech on Dec 17.

...Only to see 2 out of 3 landings fail miserably (given past failure rates, that's a real possibility)

What would Nasa's-govnmnt reaction be?

Or even worse, Bush waiting to announce the "Big Plan" *after* scheduled landings...

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2003-04-11 19:17:07

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#2 2003-04-11 19:41:08

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#3 2003-04-17 10:58:33

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#4 2003-04-17 16:26:45

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#5 2003-04-18 07:58:57

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#6 2003-04-18 08:25:26

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#7 2003-04-18 12:09:30

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#8 2003-04-18 12:45:52

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#9 2003-06-29 01:29:55

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#10 2003-06-29 01:38:52

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#11 2003-06-30 06:48:43

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#12 2003-06-30 07:42:46

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#13 2003-06-30 14:49:05

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#14 2003-07-01 11:38:38

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#15 2003-07-01 11:49:29

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#16 2003-07-01 14:33:53

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#17 2003-07-01 20:23:08

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#18 2003-07-02 12:17:05

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#19 2003-07-02 14:50:11

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#20 2003-07-02 19:17:09

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#21 2003-07-06 09:12:42

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#22 2003-07-08 13:37:53

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#23 2003-12-05 15:10:12

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#24 2003-12-10 20:47:21

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

#25 2003-12-11 03:31:12

Re: NASA Picks Landing Sites for Twin Rovers - Heheh! :)

Board footer