Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: InSight mission
Unmanned Spaceflight.com > Mars & Missions > Past and Future
Pages: 1, 2, 3
climber
QUOTE (NickF @ Aug 22 2012, 04:38 AM) *
I suppose that (re)flying the Planetary Society's Mars mike is out of the question?

May be not: http://www.planetary.org/blogs/bill-nye/we...rs-in-2016.html
Read last Bill Nye sentence
smile.gif
Paolo
cool video on the German heat probe
http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/Portaldata/1/Reso...hp3_640x320.mp4
Mongo
QUOTE (briv1016 @ Aug 22 2012, 07:46 AM) *
Any word on a launch vehicle? An Atlas V seems kind of overkill.

It occurs to me that the Falcon 9 has a TMI mass capability of approximately 2,500 kg. Given the Mars InSight lander mass of 350 kg (and maybe double that amount for the cruse stage plus EDL hardware plus lander), you could launch 3 Mars InSight spacecraft to Mars for $50 million. How much extra would it cost to produce two extra flight-ready copies of the InSight spacecraft? (Remember that you just saved $50 million in launch costs over a Delta IV.)

I am sure that it would cost more than $50 million to manufacture and test two extra copies, but it still sounds like a bargain to me. I imagine that the total cost would still exceed the Discovery cost cap, though.

But even if you only send one copy, you would still have an extra $50 million saved by moving from Delta IV to Falcon 9, which could be used to upgrade the spacecraft.
SFJCody
QUOTE (Mongo @ Aug 23 2012, 02:32 AM) *
It occurs to me that the Falcon 9 has a TMI mass capability of approximately 2,500 kg. Given the Mars InSight lander mass of 350 kg (and maybe double that amount for the cruse stage plus EDL hardware plus lander), you could launch 3 Mars InSight spacecraft to Mars for $50 million.


Or one copy of InSight... and a really big lump of copper to thwack Mars with. blink.gif
dvandorn
Remember too, if you start saying "Hey, with a bigger booster we can add..." and go down that road, then you're getting into unproven EDL realms, you have to re-do your parachute, your landing strategies, etc., etc.

And then your proven, lowest-risk bid of "We already know the Phoenix architecture works, so we'll just duplicate it" becomes something entirely different.

I hear they are still building Delta II's...

-the other Doug
climber
Yep, I guess that the TPS microphone would be the only extra they could afford since it was already on MPL i.e. Phoenix concept... and this will not require a rocket change laugh.gif
briv1016
Taking another look at the animation video it appears that like Phoenix, InSight will not have a high gain antenna and will be completely reliant on orbiter relay for telecommunications. It has already been mentioned up thread that we shouldn't rely on MRO for landing location identification, should we really rely on it for data?
centsworth_II
QUOTE (briv1016 @ Aug 23 2012, 03:53 AM) *
...It has already been mentioned up thread that we shouldn't rely on MRO for landing location identification, should we really rely on it for data?

The only reason not to rely on MRO for locating the lander is the possibility that MRO may no longer be functioning. In the (likely) event that MRO is still functioning, of course we can expect it to image InSight on the surface.
stevesliva
QUOTE (briv1016 @ Aug 23 2012, 03:53 AM) *
Taking another look at the animation video it appears that like Phoenix, InSight will not have a high gain antenna and will be completely reliant on orbiter relay for telecommunications. It has already been mentioned up thread that we shouldn't rely on MRO for landing location identification, should we really rely on it for data?


MAVEN will have a data relay capability as well.
antipode
QUOTE
Any word on a launch vehicle? An Atlas V seems kind of overkill.


NASA just bought 3 Delta II launches after most people though it was all over for that vehicle.
I believe there are still 2 left, so I guess its possible that InSight might find a ride on a DII.

SFJCody
Following on from the earlier active seismic experiment suggestion, would the following idea have any merit whatsoever?


By the time InSight has landed on Mars the Falcon Heavy should have started operations. Falcon Heavy has a TMI capability of approx 17 tonnes
(mininum energy). Let's say that you want something better than minimum energy (as the aim is to maximize the velocity with which the impactor spacecraft intercepts Mars) and restrict the spacecraft to a mere 10 tonnes. Maybe a shorter direct flight would be best to set this up, maybe something more intricate involving multiple Venus & Earth 'gravity assists' would be preferable. Anyway, the capability exists, what about the spacecraft? I suppose it must be the opposite of most EDL designs. By this I mean that the aim is not to safely decelerate your vehicle but to smash into the ground with as much of the velocity you entered the atmosphere with as possible. Rather than a wide gumdrop shape you would want a sleek aerodynamic cylindrical shape like a rocket. You would want to enter the atmosphere perpendicular to the surface of the planet. You would favour high altitude regions over low altitude ones. Lastly, you would want a vehicle that is as dense as can be achieved. I suggest making the impactor out of depleted uranium because it's much cheaper than tungsten. So, a ten tonne metal cylinder hitting the surface of Mars at tens of km/s. Should make a nice bang!

For a twofer, the spacecraft could be targeted to mid-latitude areas suspected of having ice within metres of the surface and the resultant impact crater could be examined by HiRISE.
nprev
Couple things here to keep in mind:

1. F9 Heavy hasn't even flown yet.

2. F9 non-heavy hasn't been contracted to fly any NASA UMSF missions at all to date.

3. Anything intentionally landing or impacting on Mars has to comply with PPP (planetary protection protocols). Sterilizing an upper booster stage to this degree in probably not at all practical.

Not trying to rain on the parade, just think that we should confine this discussion to what InSight is really going to be capable of doing.
SFJCody
QUOTE (nprev @ Aug 25 2012, 03:17 PM) *
Not trying to rain on the parade, just think that we should confine this discussion to what InSight is really going to be capable of doing.

Of course. Just speculating a little. Wasn't trying to derail the main conversation.
djellison
We already know from the fresh craters found by CTX et.al. that we don't have to wait long for mother nature to do exactly that anyway.
climber
There is something confusing to me. On January 17th 2007 (as I've said in another topic) I ran into (MER and) MSL EDL team in LAX. I spoke with Miguel San Martin as follows:
- So, how everything’s going?
- Well, we’re working on the next one (he sew through my eyes that I was not sure of which next one he was talking about)
- That’s MSL.
This was 7 months before Phoenix Launched and 16 months before it landed on Mars. So I assumed at this time that this team (Adam Steltzner’s) was NOT in charge of Phoenix EDL.
Now my understanding is that, after Curiosity landing, this very team has no longer any work…but this information came before InSight selection... but the above conversation make me think they are not involved.
So my basic question is: does somebody know who’s in charge of InSight EDL?
JRehling
There are a lot of issues on the deliberate-thump and impact sounding of Mars.

Impacts are part of the plan (not like we could do anything to stop them!) and one mission objective is to determine the impactor flux at Mars. Of course, many impacts are filtered out by the atmosphere. Perhaps nearby impacts that don't reach the ground will be detected (that kinetic energy goes somewhere).

Deliberate-thump is not part of the plan. One issue is that the landed hardware has to be set up in time for the thump, and previous landers' moving parts usually haven't gotten moving in the minutes after landing. So there'd be a bit of complexity in getting the thumper to arrive where you want it but after a delay, OR force the seismometer to be deployed very rapidly (which is subject to error; Spirit and Phoenix both had hiccoughs).

Note that Phobos tides will be another form of known stress. These will be much weaker than lunar tides on Earth, but they expect to detect them. Tidal stress is generally reckoned to follow the inverse cube of distance, and Phobos is very close to Mars. However, the equations I've seen may have been derived assuming distance >> planetary radius, which is not the case for Phobos and Mars. In any event, the tides are non-negligible.
tolis
Hi All,

On the subject of Phobos tides, one factor that should promote their detectability is that
they occur at a precisely known frequency (since the location of the source - Phobos -
as a function of time and the period of its orbit is known). If one then stacks up the data
over time at the same frequency, the signal would eventually rise out of the noise.

Of course, "eventually" may be a month, a year or longer.

Tolis.
JRehling
Here's a piece about the seismometer which will fly on InSight. Given the >4 decade interval, it may not be surprising that it is more sensitive than the lunar seismometers in the ALSEPs. The Viking seismometer was less sensitive than the ALSEPs, as Viking had much more severe mass limits than Apollo.

http://www.kit.edu/visit/pi_2012_11447.php

I suppose that any metrics of the equipment also depend on the planet. How well the local regolith allows the seismometer to couple, and how well the planet propagates waves are factors beyond our control. Also, winds will blow against InSight, which was no concern on the Moon.
Paolo
a few (small) pics of the seismometer on the blog of the French team that is developing it
http://ganymede.ipgp.jussieu.fr/gsp-blog/
scroll down to the 1 June (1 juin) entry
Yooper
Hi!

Does anyone have a link to the August 20 phone conference when InSight was announced?

Thanks!
arachnitect
QUOTE (Yooper @ Sep 5 2012, 08:52 AM) *
Hi!

Does anyone have a link to the August 20 phone conference when InSight was announced?

Thanks!


NASA does not, apparently, maintain a public archive of media teleconferences. Thankfully, there appears to be an MP3 here:

http://spaceref.com/podcasts/spacetalk.xml
rlorenz
QUOTE (Drkskywxlt @ Aug 21 2012, 06:45 PM) *
Thanks for confirming that. That met data is basically engineering data aka "noise". But, hopefully it can be useful scientifically as well.




Even with the seismometer sitting on the ground with a wind shield, wind will couple some energy into the ground as it pushes on the lander. Additionally, ground deformations occur as pressure systems migrate across the surface. So ancillary meteorology data is vital to make sense of the seismic measurements (as well as being of interest in its own right). For a review of these issues (and if you want to know the ground motions produced by a Leopard 1 main battle tank...) see http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~rlorenz/seismology.pdf
Yooper
QUOTE (arachnitect @ Sep 8 2012, 11:01 AM) *
NASA does not, apparently, maintain a public archive of media teleconferences. Thankfully, there appears to be an MP3 here:

http://spaceref.com/podcasts/spacetalk.xml


I'm listening to it now...THANKS a bunch!
Greg.
Yooper
Hello – two layperson questions about InSight’s seismometer:

One, will the instrument be able to collect data at night? Or, will the craft’s power budget rule that out?

Two, can someone offer a sense of how sensitive will the seismometer be? How small a Marsquake could it measure (could that measurement be expressed in the Richer scale?)?

Thanks!

JRehling
QUOTE (Yooper @ Sep 14 2012, 09:34 AM) *
how sensitive will the seismometer be?


This depends quite a bit on Mars itself, both the planet overall, the regolith where the seismometer is emplaced, and how close to the landing site any events happen to be.

The seismometer stories from ALSEP are interesting as a possible comparison. Here, it's written up in quite an accessible form:

http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/msfn_missi...P/hl_alsep.html

The performance of a seismometer is multidimensional: One measures the frequency range, dynamic range, and sensitivity.

Here's some information about InSight's seismometer:

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2012/pdf/1983.pdf

An interesting point there is that they hope to detect impact events with the seismometer, then use orbiters to subsequently identify the precise impact location. That's a very powerful combination if that works.
rlorenz
QUOTE (Yooper @ Sep 14 2012, 12:34 PM) *
Two, can someone offer a sense of how sensitive will the seismometer be? How small a Marsquake could it measure (could that measurement be expressed in the Richer scale?)?


There is a graph and equation of ground motion vs distance for events of different magnitude in my paper above.... (it took me a long time to find that information succinctly expressed..) So given the sensitivity in nm or nm/s or nm/s2 (depending on whether it it displacement or velocity or acceleration that the instrument measures) you can figure out how large an event is detectable at a given distance. Of course with Viking it wasnt instrument sensitivity that was the limiting factor most of the time, but the wind noise background. That was actually pretty low at night, though.

There was one possible Magnitude 3.5 event detected in the Viking data (if that's what it was, it was a couple of hundred km away), although there were not contemporaneous meteorological measurements so a wind gust or dust devil or similar event cannot be excluded. (and of course since the VL-1 seismometer didnt uncage, the event couldnt be confirmed by an independent detection which presumably would not have a wind gust at just the same time - in fact the lack of 2 or more stations was considered the major deficiency of the Viking investigation)
Yooper
Thanks! BTW, in a odd twist of timing, I just finished "Titan Unveiled" this morning! A very enjoyable read, and very cool timing with your reply!
Explorer1
Apparently the general region for landing has been narrowed down, Elysium Planitia, though the 16 candidate sites need to be narrowed down
according to the PI.

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1303/30insight

Hopefully whichever has a volcano on the horizon is the one, for those of us who like topography wink.gif

Edit: should've searched the previous pages. I thought the article was more than just a rehash, sorry for the bump.
Explorer1
From 16 down to 4. More detail on the exact requirements.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2013-269
Phil Stooke
Unfortunately they don't mention which four ellipses have been chosen. For more information you might like to look at this presentation (penultimate slide) from the recent MEPAG virtual meeting:

http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meeting/jul-13/f...732%20MEPAG.pdf

(rest of the meeting is here):

http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meeting/jul-13/index.html


Phil

MahFL
Why does the JPL article use "yards" ?
Phil Stooke
Because they are written for Americans. The original text probably said 'meters' and it was translated into the nearest non-metric equivalent. Usually they add a metric equivalent as well, as they did for ellipse sizes.

Phil
SFJCody
I expect competition between UMSF regulars to see who can produce the best colourization of the imagery! :-)
Explorer1
Launch vehicle + site chosen: An Atlas 5 from Vandenburg! Apparently going to be the first California launch to Mars...

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1312/19insight
Paolo
a Vandenberg launch was also initially planned for the Mars Surveyor Orbiter 2001 (later renamed Mars Odyssey). it had something to do with the required high inclination of the parking orbit. IIRC Mars Odyssey passed over the UK after launch and the third stage fired over Italy (45 North).
Insight is launching 15 years after that, and the relative positions of Earth and Mars repeat every 15-17 years (for example "great oppositions" in 1971, 1988, 2003 and 2018), so I think that the reason for the Vandenberg launch is the same.
Greenish
I know there are others who know the orbital mechanics far better, and I'm sure this is documented elsewhere on the web, but I was curious. So I used the tools from here to create some porkchop plots centered on the nominal departure/arrival dates for InSight. Sure enough, there is a high declination (DLA of ~45 deg) for the departure.
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment
Paolo
the French space agency CNES has just published this cool video (mostly in French) on their seismometer for InSight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3IOKszmnyo
machi
It looks that InSight is now planned with color camera on the arm!
Source (page 9): The 2016 InSight Mission & L/S Process
mcaplinger
QUOTE (machi @ May 17 2014, 10:23 AM) *
It looks that InSight is now planned with color camera on the arm!

"If this program is successful and on time" is well short of "planned".
machi
Yes, that's more accurate but isn't "If this program is successful and on time" true for every planned mission after all? smile.gif

EDIT: BTW, Thanks for correction. I wrote this news in hurry, because I was too excited about this.
I hope that they will be successful with this "plan".
mcaplinger
QUOTE (machi @ May 17 2014, 10:41 AM) *
isn't "If this program is successful and on time" true for every planned mission after all? smile.gif

True, but usually if they explicitly say this, it's code for "probably won't happen."
Blue Sky
InSight appears to be focussed on deep structures and the core. All the other landers look down only a few centimeters.

Is anything in planning to examine the top few tens of meters, perhaps by ground penetrating radar? I am not so interested in how Mars got the way it is, but in locating good spots for human development. For example, empty lava tubes or accessible aquifers.
Phil Stooke
For that you really want a mobile vehicle, not a static lander. So not on Insight, but I think GPR has been considered for future missions. One day we'll probably see it.

Phil
James Sorenson
The ExoMars rover will have a GPR called WISDOM. Although DAN on Curiosity isn't a GPR, AFAIK it kind of acts like one, exploring the water content in hydrated minerals as well as observing it in the liquid or ice states to a depth of a few feet as the rover drives.
B Bernatchez
InSight mission enters ATLO phase: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4377
Astro0
Landing site evaluation and spacecraft development... update

http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/insight/single-sit...r/#.VPe6TbEWK_Q


Paolo
the French space agency has delivered the qualification model of its seismometer to JPL (in French) http://www.cnes.fr/web/CNES-fr/6115-commun...e.php?item=9796
Paolo
lots of nice hardware pictures of InSight undergoing tests
http://insight.jpl.nasa.gov/newsdisplay.cf...e_News_ID=37975
Explorer1
There's been no news about the Planetary Society managing to getting that microphone on board, has there?
djellison
It's not onboard.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.