Second MSL Landing Site Workshop, October 23-25, 2007 Options

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

SECOND LANDING SITE WORKSHOP FOR THE 2009 MARS SCIENCE LABORATORY
October 23-25, 2007
Pasadena, CA

Announcement (MS Word)
Information to Presenters (MS Word)

Note also the two August 2007 updates for MSL Landing Site Selection: User’s Guide to Engineering Constraints.

[dvandorn]

In my humble opinion, the phyllosilicates are a number one priority. These clays seem to be the only things that preserve traces of a Mars which differs significantly from the current planet.

They may have been formed as early as at the very end of the LHB, but these clays were formed before sulphuric acids began pouring out of the interior and the entire outer surface of the planet was coated with sulphates. This is likely the only period in the history of Mars when conditions were truly favorable for life to develop, and as such are most interesting to me. (It has always seemed to me that we need to study extraterrestrial life before we can truly understand how life actually works. Until then, we're stuck behind assumptions that we can't see beyond.)

There seems to be precious little of this phyllosilicate material exposed on the surface. The question is, was there not much to begin with? Or was it more ubiquitous but now has been covered with lavas and/or coated with basaltic dust cemented together by sulphate salts? Investigations of the clays, and of the contact between them and the surrounding terrains, will go a long way towards painting a picture of very early conditions on Mars.

Now, if Meridiani shows significant clay exposures, I'd be all for landing there. We already know how benign the surface conditions are, and how likely it'll be that we can land MSL there safely. But the more we can place clay exposures into a geologically significant context, the more we learn. I'm not positive how much context we'll be able to derive in such a flat location -- you'd be almost totally dependent on entering medium- to large-sized craters to get your drill holes into the stratigraphy.

I'd rather find places we can land safely and then approach outcrops on cliff faces and hillsides. Seems a little more likely to show us context. Of course, I could be wrong...

-the other Doug