Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

SpaceNut · 2005-03-28 11:18:15

Speaking of the future it is becoming more clear that the roadmap to Mars has some bumps along the way in it.

NASA Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) #13 Chairman's Report of the meeting held in Arlington, VA, on 16-17 February 2005.

The possibility was raised that a Scout or Scout-class mission might be developed for 2009 launch to fill a possible gap in the program in the event of a delay of the 2009 Mars Science Laboratory mission to 2011. Concerns were raised about the very short timescale and the difficulty of putting together a credible Scout mission proposal that would be based on sound science on that timescale; one alternative would be to include a Scout-class mission as part of the core program, although there are concerns here as well about developing the science theme in such a short period. While we would hate to lose the opportunity for a science-based mission to be inserted in this decade, we want to ensure that it has an adequate and appropriate science basis and that there is sufficient time to develop it to maximize the chances for success.

I am wondering if another set of rovers for the polar regions would be warranted to fills this gap before the next generation mission is launched.

Lots of concern for insitu materials research was another item that was voiced.

The next MEPAG meeting is tentatively planned for 2-3 November 2005, at or near JPL.

Palomar · 2005-03-31 09:41:19

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … .html]Oppy inspecting "Yuri"

*Oppy at Vostok crater (lots of history in these names, as most folks here know). On Sols 401 and 402 Oppy used its rock abrasion tool on "Gagarin," a target on "Yuri." The image is a mosaic.

The circle from which the tool's wire brush has scoured dust off the rock surface is about 5 centimeters (2 inches) in diameter.

More information on the http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/spotligh … 1.html]two asteroids named in honor of the MERs.

That news item broke last year; this article includes more information and asteroid orbit animations.

--Cindy

aldo12xu · 2005-04-04 13:09:49

Thanks for transcribing the CBC interview from a few posts back, dicktice. It was a good discussion. One of the last questions concerning the longevity of the rovers was answered today: the goal is 1000 sols for each rover!

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f … ...9B1.DTL

I have my fingers crossed that Spirit might make it all the way to a contact between volcanic flows and layered mesa-type topography just to the south of Thira Crater. It's a long, long shot but we can always dream, no??

http://www.marsgeo.com/Photos/Orbiters/ … Interp.jpg

Stephen · 2005-04-04 18:09:25

I am wondering if another set of rovers for the polar regions would be warranted to fills this gap before the next generation mission is launched.

You mean another (solar-powered) set of MERs like Spirit & Opportunity?

So what happens when winter comes and there is no sunlight in those regions at all? Clearly there would be little possibility such a MER would be able to survive through winter as the present two have done.

Moreover, even at the height of summer the sun would be fairly low on the horizon, which in turn would doubtless impact on the amount of power a MER's solar panels (which lie flat on its deck) would be able to collect. To gather enough sunlight you would probably have to instead use the sort of inclined ones that MPL had. That in turn would presumably require a certain amount of redesign. The antennas, for example, may need to be repositioned. Those changes in their own turn may impact in other ways. Eg moving a MER's centre of gravity.

dicktice · 2005-04-04 19:15:49

What a great idea: Tiltable panels might've occurred to the designer, and been shot down on account of the extra weight not being worth the short time the rovers were expected to remain active!

SpaceNut · 2005-04-05 06:27:38

My thought was to get more science done from an existing design but the slight modification of the solar panels ability to angle would be an improvement for the region to be explored, use a counter balance wieght inside the center of gravity to keep the rovers balanced as the panel is moved.

Palomar · 2005-04-05 06:40:12

Spirits]http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status.html]Spirit's slip limit increased to 60%

*From 40%. It's having trouble as it continues moving towards the summit of "Husband Hill." Apparently the ground there is sandier than anticipated. Spirit is "preservering to reach the target." You go, Spirit!

Spirit's been taking images of areas called "Cottontail" and "Blanket." (Who names these areas anyway? Grumble, grumble...)

It's also been on the lookout for dust devils and clouds, took a sky survey and atmospheric opacity measurement.

Update on Oppy, too.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2005-04-05 20:35:09

http://www.space.com/news/050405_mars_rovers.html]S & O get another mission extension: 18 more months!

:band:

Provided, of course, they remain operational. It sure would be awesome if they make it into 2006!

Oppy's outdone Spirit in driving distance: More than 3 miles covered, which is 8 times the original goal. Oppy's solar panels are dustier than Spirit's (maybe another dust devil will do Oppy the favor Spirit recently got), but it still manages more than 3 hours' driving time on good Sols.

Mentions wear and tear on the MERs, including Spirit's rock abrasion tool.

And speaking of the dust devil which whirred over Spirit:

With Mars now beginning southern-hemisphere spring, the Sun is farther south in the sky each day. If not for panel-cleaning, Spirit might be facing the prospect of becoming critically short of power if still on the north-facing slope by early June.
"We still want to get to the summit of Husband Hill and then head down into the 'Inner Basin' on the other side," Squyres said. "But now we have more flexibility in how we carry out the plan. Before, it was climb or die."

The article also mentions the MERs' successes encouraging NASA to further missions...including *manned* missions to Mars.

Manned mission by 2020, right NASA?

RIGHT, NASA??

:;):

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2005-04-06 05:28:07

I am just curious as to the planned path to which they will drive each rover forward during this added time and to what expected science that each might find along the way?

Palomar · 2005-04-06 08:19:39

I am just curious as to the planned path to which they will drive each rover forward during this added time and to what expected science that each might find along the way?

*Perhaps the mission planners don't even know that at this point in time. Of course both MERs have goals already planned and yet to accomplish, and hopefully those will be fufilled without a hitch.

Even if one or both MERs becomes immobile (Spirit's wheels have been problematic in the past 6 months especially), they could -- I suppose -- continue observing for clouds, dust devils, etc., where they're permanently parked.

Will be interesting to follow all this as it unfolds. So wonderful that we've had them this long. Impossible to believe that within a month of Spirit rolling onto Marsian ground, they thought we might have lost it. And all these months later Spirit is still going strong. The child who named these MERs did her job well. :up:

Will certainly be on the lookout for upcoming plans (beyond what they're already slated to do).

--Cindy

Rxke · 2005-04-06 09:19:00

18 months... 18 months!

isn't that longer than the projected lifetime of the follow-up rover?

Impressive to say the least.
They should licence the design, build more of them, with different sciencepackages etc... Woohoo!

Michael Bloxham · 2005-04-07 18:52:56

I wonder what it would cost to build another set, considering the design work (the largest expense) has already been done?

GregM · 2005-04-10 22:13:31

It's all about money baby, money. Rockets don't burn kerosene, hydrazine, or aluminium powder - they use cash for fuel.

What would it cost to do a second set of MER rovers??

Just to do a very quick ballpark calc for starters: a launch service will cost at least 120 million for two launches. Spacecraft fabrication (two flight models+spares+test beds) at least 100-150 million. Mission ops 25-75 million (150 staff X $60,000 X 5 years = 45 million). Other expenses include DSN time etc. So let's say between 250 and 400 million, maybe more. That's a big chunk of change. Not a showstopper, but it would mean sacrificing another mid-class planetary mission, or a major Earth orbital science mission. What would folks here propose killing off as a trade? A Cassini extended mission? Pluto-Kuiper?

Another comment about NASA getting folks to Mars by 2020?

A wonderful suggestion indeed – accelerating Bush’s Vision For Space Exploration. No one around here is gonna argue with that suggestion. The decision however lies with the US government. Just getting the current plan of a new human spacecraft flying by 2014, return to the moon by 2018, permanent lunar bases by 2020-2024, and a human flight to Mars (not necessarily a landing) by 2030 - will be a monumental task of 25 budget cycles. NASA is going to need all the help it can get to steer the existing plan through multiple presidential administrations and congresses. A single future president hostile to the new VSE plan could effectively scuttle the whole thing, and with it American human spaceflight. (some more cynical analysts in face believe that the real intent of the VSE is to do just that). To get future administrations and congresses to endorse an accelerated plan is not impossible by any means, but it would require a massive change in the sentiment of the US government toward space exploration (give more money to the cause), and/or wholesale cancelling of many existing and proposed NASA programs (and divert the money to VSE), and/or very significant alternate funding from significant sources (other governments or the private sector).

Start lobbying your congressman!

If the cash is available, almost anything is possible.

Palomar · 2005-04-11 11:03:42

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-mer … tml]Spirit Switchbacking Uphill

*Brings to mind a Simon & Garfunkel song (Slip Slidin' Away)...teehee. But Spirit forges ahead regardless! Wooo-hooo! They're using switchbacking technique and also creating a zigzag course.

On Sol 442 it drove uphill 41.3 feet. Initially it experienced aprox 42% slippage, but for the last 10 feet of the climb the slippage dropped to aprox 14%. It drove another 29 feet on Sol 444.

Also has been doing targeted remote sensing and taking images.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2005-04-12 06:43:58

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050412.html]Seeing Double

*Don't read the caption until you've guessed which photo was taken on Earth, and which was taken by Spirit.

--Cindy

aldo12xu · 2005-04-12 11:09:48

I think it says a lot about the accuracy of NASA's "approximate true colour" renderings.

dicktice · 2005-04-12 11:35:04

The smog is a dead giveaway.

Palomar · 2005-04-12 11:57:26

The smog is a dead giveaway.

*Sorry, dicktice, that's -not- smog. I live in the Chihuahuan Desert. The sky looks that way (naturally) during the hottest times of the year. No blue sky, but rather a pearly white sky. It's natural (small city, no smog in this area).

Look at the GROUND you guys. :-\ The soil, the rocks -- they look identical.

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2005-04-12 12:05:23

The giveaway for me was actually in the size of earth rocks which are smaller and are less jagged or sharp edged.

dicktice · 2005-04-13 11:37:05

I wouldn't wish smog on anybody. If not smog, what is it and why is it there?

Palomar · 2005-04-13 11:42:56

I wouldn't wish smog on anybody. If not smog, what is it and why is it there?

*I'm not sure. The meterologists around here have explained it in the past, once or twice, but I can't recall the specifics. Perhaps searching on Google might yield up an answer (but I haven't time for that right now).

I just know it's natural. The notion of clear and crisply blue skies in a desert *summer*...just doesn't happen, at least not the desert I live in and apparently the same goes for that in the photo. However, during other seasons that pearly-white sky is gone and it's normal blue. It's only in the summer and with the heat that the skies become "smoggy" looking.

But this is getting a bit off-topic...

--Cindy

Palomar · 2005-04-14 12:49:38

*Update on Oppy, from NASA/JPL Homepage, for Sols 421-429. Oppy visited Viking crater and Voyager crater (358 feet apart, it seems). Panoramic shots were taken.

Oppy had a few Sols' worth of low-volume remote sensing while MO was in stow mode.

Resumed driving on Sol 428. Total odometry for Oppy as of report date is 3.13 miles.

--Cindy

atomoid · 2005-04-15 00:28:47

http://mars.lyle.org/imagery/1N16663631 … ml]Whatsit?? Ant Lions on Mars?? Lest we slumber waiting for the coveted etched terrain, theres still boggling surprises in the dunes. This is truly new, something unexpected that I havent seen on Mars images yet.

In case your wondering if its really what you think it is, you can get a little better sense of the geometry by looking at http://mars.lyle.org/imagery/1N16663631 … G.html]the stereo anaglyph

You can see a 'degraded' one a few feet behind it... how come there are only two and they are so near each other? how fast did it get degraded. Are they:

- Sinkholes? (Like Anatolia karst cracks drying and cracking opening in the summer to take in a gulp of sand? in that case the funnel shoudl be much wider, this gap must be only a few inches deep to make this sharp a funnel)
-or maybe shifting sand covered a rock over the centuries and just recently it collapsed a pocket of air that had been buried alongside one of the notches or spared under a duracrust until that duracrust finally collpased and let the sand fall in forming hole.
- two small dense pieces of the EDL package pyro stage-release bolts? fell made craters and are buried at the base of the pits. we shoudl see em if we look, but why one more 'degraded' crater, or maybe its actually not that degraded after all...
- natural micrometeoroid craters in the sand.
- miniature explosion craters from buried Hoffman-esque CO2 nuggets, like snowballs from hell that melted as Oppy struts near.

Theyre so new (judging with a flawed expectation of how fast sand should blow around and degrade features such as this on Mars), that something would have to be actively making these holes. im guessing the age difference is about 3 months, but then again for that matter it could be three days, or three years... anyone? Sand didnt seem to pile up too much on the heatshield wreckage in the two seasons it sat there... but then this might be the 'windy' season?

But then look at the lower lip, does it seem to rise slightly above the surrounding dne surface as if it was piled due to impact crater or ant lion action rather than a sink hole? need a coser look.

Are there analogs to this on Earth that can serve as a plausible hypothesis? I sure hope they check out whats under there...

aldo12xu · 2005-04-15 11:16:52

Atomoid, I think we're seeing crests and valleys of some sand dunes which happen to be bigger (higher amplitude) than any Opportunity has seen before. The small circular depression does have a slightly raised rim, so in my opinion, it's likely a minor impact crater.

Palomar · 2005-04-17 07:52:54

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-mers-05zk.html]Oppy has broken wheel motor

*Has been considered a "significant breakdown." Apparently Oppy is still driveable -- even if they can't fix the problem. Oppy initially experienced a stalling of its right front steering actuator on Sol 433. Says Oppy began driving again on Sol 428, and Oppy is in excellent health otherwise.

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2005-03-28 11:18:15

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#77 2005-03-31 09:41:19

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#78 2005-04-04 13:09:49

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#79 2005-04-04 18:09:25

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#80 2005-04-04 19:15:49

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#81 2005-04-05 06:27:38

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#82 2005-04-05 06:40:12

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#83 2005-04-05 20:35:09

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#84 2005-04-06 05:28:07

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#85 2005-04-06 08:19:39

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#86 2005-04-06 09:19:00

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#87 2005-04-07 18:52:56

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#88 2005-04-10 22:13:31

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#89 2005-04-11 11:03:42

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#90 2005-04-12 06:43:58

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#91 2005-04-12 11:09:48

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#92 2005-04-12 11:35:04

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#93 2005-04-12 11:57:26

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#94 2005-04-12 12:05:23

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#95 2005-04-13 11:37:05

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#96 2005-04-13 11:42:56

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#97 2005-04-14 12:49:38

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#98 2005-04-15 00:28:47

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#99 2005-04-15 11:16:52

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#100 2005-04-17 07:52:54

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

Board footer