Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NRC Recommends NASA Galileo Crash

Posted by emmett on from the the-prime-directive-is-really-boring dept.

Autonomous Crowhard writes: "An article on SpaceRef relays information that a National Research Council committee is suggesting that NASA crash Galileo at the end of its mission. The reason for this is to avoid potentially contaminating Europa or Io with a crash there. (As I understand it, Galileo didn't undergo the same stringent decontamination procedures that landers normally have to go through.) Two questions: 1) Would humans constitute too much of a risk of contamination, and 2) Wouldn't you like to be able to put "Planetary Protection Officer" on your resume?"

3 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. microbes in space by jeff_bond · · Score: 5
    There is a real risk of microbes on Galileo contaminating any planet or moon that it lands/crashes on.

    See this link to read how microbes survived on the moon after a lunar missions.

    Jeff

    --
    stty erase ^H
  2. And this is a bad thing? by Wellspring · · Score: 4

    OK, maybe I am missing something here, but isn't our highest duty to the Schizmatrix to bring another world up to the next Prigogenic Level of Complexity?

    Humor aside, I think that NASA is overreacting. Either Europa has life or it doesn't. If it doesn't, we should hope that it is 'contaminated'. If it does, I would put my money on a planetful of life specially evolved for that planet's conditions over a couple dozen carpet-bagging bacteria from a warm and comfy inner-system world like Earth.

    It is pathetic that the government's retreat from space is so complete that we are now trying to eradicating any evidence that we were even there.

    When I get my asteroid-mining operation off the ground, I'm throwing all the profits into expansion and terraforming research. ;)

  3. It's about money... by cybrpnk · · Score: 4

    Here we go again...crashing spacecraft, but on purpose for a change. In this case, Europa is surely a concern, but NASA and others have crashed plenty of spacecraft just to clear the slate and start on another project. Its about money, just check out this quote from the linked report: "The Io plus Amalthea option is not consistent with Galileo's current budget plan." There are many other examples. NASA allowed a functioning solar observing satellite to be destroyed in a Star Wars test even tho the satellite was observing a whole new category of sun-grazing comets it had discovered. The Magellan Venus orbiter was sent in an "aerobrake test" that burned it up - but what if it had detected changes on the surface of Venus on a second mapping run, which would have meant the HUGE discovery of active volcanism there. The recent Lunar Polar Orbiter was crashed on the day its money ran out, and while sending up a plume of steam after hitting an icepack (it didn't) would have been a spectacular home run, a better plan would have been to fund it long enough to drop the orbit and skim the supposed ice crater at close range as many times as possible. Motorola is ready to let the Iridium system become a $3 billion fireworks display. Back in the 80s NASA seriously considered shutting down Voyager 2 before it got to Uranus and Neptune as a cost cutting measure - the primary mission was only Jupiter and Saturn. Somehow an effort needs to be organized where functioning spacecraft get turned over to interested third parties when the Big Boys get tired of playing with them...