IPB
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

NASA to revise Mars program
Cugel
post Jul 6 2006, 02:00 PM
Post #1


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 153
Joined: 11-December 04
Member No.: 120



http://www.space.com/news/060706_mars_report.html

quote:

The review group also flagged “the extraordinary resilience” of the Spirit and Opportunity rovers still at work on the red planet. Success of that Mars machinery “strongly suggests that a prudent, risk-reduction strategy is to use their design as a basis for the proposed Mid Rovers,” the committee stated.

RIGHT!
Would you believe it. We're going to do it all over again!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
djellison
post Jul 6 2006, 09:42 PM
Post #2


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14457
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



I can see where you are coming from.

Science Comittee's should outline the priority science, the order of how they'd like things to be investigated.

Engineers should then examine that, and propose a series of missions to do those investigations

Then politicians given them 10th as much money as any of it needs. wink.gif

BUT - Are the engineers going to be guilty of designing the things they WANT to design instead of the 'best' (be that quickest, cheapest or whatever ) way to go and do those investigations. That's the ever-present tensions - engineers and scientists, questions and answers, ying and yang blah blah blah

I think MER has produced an orgy or people wanting to reuse the platform, but even Squyres admits that it's not ideal. There's a certain fondness for the platform, a belief that because two of them have worked, that if you sent two more you would get another 2 x 800+ sols of exploration.

I think two of everything makes sense, historically it's made sense as well. Viking, Voyager, Mariner, Viking, MER. I'm dissapointed that NH2 was not selected, and I'd have thought that an MSL2 would have made quite a lot of sense as well....but as ever, the money just isn't there.

There are situation when many copies of a vehicle make sense. Comms sats, weather sats, and obviously something like a netlander mission would justify many copies of the same probe...ditto impactors etc.

But more MER's, 5,6 years after they started building the first two, wouldn't make as much sense as say, investing the same cash in doing 2 MSL's.

The current problem I guess is that we have a load of questions, but don't really know where to go to get the answers.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th December 2024 - 07:25 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.