Discovery Program 2006 and Missions Of Opportunity |
Discovery Program 2006 and Missions Of Opportunity |
Guest_AlexBlackwell_* |
Jan 3 2006, 10:19 PM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
I'm not sure exactly which forum this fits in but NASA has just released the AO for Discovery Program 2006 and Missions of Opportunity. See the Discovery Program Acquisition Home Page for more details. Click on the "Discovery AO" link to download the PDF.
|
|
|
Guest_BruceMoomaw_* |
Jan 26 2006, 01:49 AM
Post
#2
|
Guests |
Faith Vilas, Discovery Program Scientist at the July 2002 "Discovery Program Lessons Learned Workshop" ( http://discovery.larc.nasa.gov/PDF_FILES/DiscoMinutes3.pdf , pg. 5):
"Q: Are there any major changes from the last AO [for the next one in 2003]? "A: Mars, Phobos, and Deimos will now be in Mars Scout -- so they are no longer in Discovery." I've seen no indication that they have changed this back since. Jeff Bell -- who was associated with the "Gulliver" Deimos sampling mission -- has been bitching about it to me for some time. I will agree with him and you that it doesn't make any sense; but then, that fact means that it fits in very well with the US space program in general. |
|
|
Guest_AlexBlackwell_* |
Jan 26 2006, 07:22 PM
Post
#3
|
Guests |
QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Jan 26 2006, 01:49 AM) Jeff Bell -- who was associated with the "Gulliver" Deimos sampling mission -- has been bitching about it to me for some time. I will agree with him and you that it doesn't make any sense... It does make perfect sense, however, if NASA has no intention of flying a dedicated Phobos/Deimos mission. Moving "jurisdiction" for any such mission to the Mars Scout line, for all intents and purposes, is a death knell since Mars Scout proposals must be responsive to MEP scientific goals. Neither Phobos nor Deimos rate high (if at all) under MEP. At least in the Discovery Program, missions like Aladdin and Gulliver had a chance, so, in this rare instance, I'll have to agree with your example of Bell's "bitching."
This post has been edited by AlexBlackwell: Jan 26 2006, 07:23 PM |
|
|
Jan 26 2006, 11:30 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 688 Joined: 20-April 05 From: Sweden Member No.: 273 |
QUOTE (AlexBlackwell @ Jan 26 2006, 09:22 PM) It does make perfect sense, however, if NASA has no intention of flying a dedicated Phobos/Deimos mission. Moving "jurisdiction" for any such mission to the Mars Scout line, for all intents and purposes, is a death knell since Mars Scout proposals must be responsive to MEP scientific goals. Neither Phobos nor Deimos rate high (if at all) under MEP. At least in the Discovery Program, missions like Aladdin and Gulliver had a chance, so, in this rare instance, I'll have to agree with your example of Bell's "bitching." It seems to me that the fastest and simplest way to obtain a varied sample of Martian material would be on Phobos. Rocks from every major impact on Mars must have ended up there and You don't have to go nearly as deep into the gravity well as for the surface of Mars. Perhaps a mission for a future improved Haybusa? tty |
|
|
Guest_AlexBlackwell_* |
Jan 26 2006, 11:36 PM
Post
#5
|
Guests |
QUOTE (tty @ Jan 26 2006, 11:30 PM) It seems to me that the fastest and simplest way to obtain a varied sample of Martian material would be on Phobos. Rocks from every major impact on Mars must have ended up there and You don't have to go nearly as deep into the gravity well as for the surface of Mars. Perhaps a mission for a future improved Haybusa? Actually, perhaps a better case can be made for Deimos, as Britt et al. do with the Gulliver Deimos Sample Return mission concept (e.g., Abstract 1, Abstract 2, Abstract 3). This post has been edited by AlexBlackwell: Jan 26 2006, 11:47 PM |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:13 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |