[X] My Assistant

[Cugel]

BigDog

Imagine this thing with a pancam on the front and a low gain antenna at the rear....
It's a Martian Lama!

[Floyd]

Simon--Welcome and nice to have your contributions to the forum. I like your idea, have had it myself, but the hard reality is Doug's question of "Who's paying". Space budgets are really hurting everywhere, so while multiple MER's seems very attractive, mission selection is ultra competative. Maybe we can get Bill Gates, or someone with deep pockets to help support Mars exploration.
-Floyd

[Simon_Frazier]

Hi Floyd:

Thanks - it's good to be here!

Doug's question is a good one, I agree. So in an attempt to respond, I'll pitch two possible scenarios about who might want to pay for MER Mk.2s. I'll let you tell me how far-fetched these possbilities are...

Scenario 1: Cheap MER Mk.2s make it possible for little space nations to fund a Mars rover mission (a.k.a. "reduced costs opens up a larger potential market"...)

If I think happy thoughts, I could just about imagine an agreement through which the US agrees to build a fleet of MER Mk.2 rovers (lots of space jobs), a good proportion of which are funded by "small" space nations like my own (Canada) that don't have the budgets to pay for an original mission of their own. Others possible co-funders might be the UK, other ESA countries, or India. Let's assume that with the cost discounts that come from "mass production," even Canada could find its way to funding a rover of its own. I'll get really creative and surmise that ESA might even pay in-kind if they have rockets with a bit more capacity than the Delta 2 (which means space jobs for them too).

What would a country like Canada get out of this? Well, the Canadian Space Agency would get to be the lead agency on an honest-to-god Mars rover mission which would otherwise have been utterly unaffordable for them. Canadians would get to see "their" rover on Mars, and I think we all recognize how much the prospect of national prestige can influence space exploration budgets (as an aside, I think CSA might want its rover to go to Athabaska Vallis, given the namesake for this bit of Mars is located in Alberta...). And it's not unreasonable to think that the "little" space agencies like CSA could also contribute modest instrumentation packages to some or all of the other rovers as well. In line with the Canadian role on Phoenix, maybe a number of the MER Mk.2 rovers could incorporate little Canadian met packages. The Brits could have another instrument on a number of the rovers, as might the Indians, etc. So these little space powers would get to be the prime agency for their one rover, and could play a subsidiary role on a number of other countries' rovers.

As a Canadian, would I be willing to pay tax dollars for be a part of this? Oh yes! And I think a large number of my compatriots would too - at least during good economic times.

So what's in it for the Americans? I assume they would be able to pick and choose what missions they wanted to lead, and which to participate in. And which to avoid. Which is to say, the Americans would likely be able to lead those missions with the best science opportunities / lowest risks / nicest scenery or any desired combination of these. In doing so, the Americans would get the benefits of lower per unit rover costs, even if they didn't actually pay for more than half of them themselves. The Americans would get most of the jobs for building the rovers, and I assume JPL would still the natural place for mission operations and overall coordination. Plus there's the very real prestige of developing the Model T of extraplanetary rovers! Maybe the Canadians/British/Indians would be controlling individual rovers, but it would always be clear who fundamentally made these missions possible...


Scenario 2: NASA plays it safe following the morale-bruising failure of a more innovative misison. This scenario is a lot less cheery, but I believe there have already been instances where NASA has reacted to the failure of an expensive, innovative mission by following up with a cheaper, lower-risk mission, that in addition to its science objectives aims to restore public confidence in the agency's space exploration prowess. The MER Mk.2s would seem to fit the bill for a relatively safe, popular mission.

Those are my thoughts, but I imagine there are some even better scenarios regarding who might want to pay and why...

(BTW, I apologize if these scenarios are a little heavy heavy on "political" considerations - I trust I haven't crossed the line here.)