NASA Plans On Bringing Back Martian Rocks

FortKnox writes: "In this Y! article, NASA is planning on sending a robotic mission to Mars in an attempt to bring back Martian stuff (rocks, soil, etc...). Looks like its a tough mission to plan for; they are calling it 'Apollo without the astronauts.'" I would like to go to Mars in person, but if they're spending my money already, I'd like them to please use robots for a while.

Comments

Smaller, Cheaper, Better

[pgrote]

I like NASA's new approach to things. My primary concerns about the mission though are the following:

1) What can we do by inspecting the rocks in person we can't do remotely? We should be able to do everything except touch it.

2) What other benefits do we get out of the mission?

3) Will there be additional scientific study accomplished on the ground? I mean NASA's track record on landing things on Mars hasn't been great ... this doesn't even include shooting things back.

Re:Smaller, Cheaper, Better

[astroboy]

What can we do by inspecting the rocks in person we can't do remotely? We should be able to do everything except touch it.

There's a limit to how much experimental equipment you can shove onto a Mars probe. Some amazingly cool things have been done, but once you get the rocks back to Earth, you can unleash everything you've got in the lab on 'em.

What other benefits do we get out of the mission?

Anything which pushes the boundaries of the engineering -- getting the unmanned probe to launch itself back to Earth -- will have great impact on both the Space program and terrestrial spin-offs. And that's quite apart from the science.

More Information...

[robbyjo]

Here is the lab of Jet propulsion labs that does the robot thingie. This is the software to test the robustness of the robots. NASA has learnt from several failures apparently.

A picture of martian rock with some explanations, if you're interested. Along with some interesting rock with bug patterns!

Re:Motto

[ivan256]

People today don't have the stomach for what it would take to set up a sustainable colony on Mars with today's technology. In the 1700's when europeans crossed the Atlantic they lost numerous colonists and expiditions before one took. And that was going to a place on the same planet where they know had to potential to sustain life. Without further information do you really think we could make a perminantly sustainable Mars colony with todays technology, and not loose a single person? Imagine how fast people of today would can the project after they saw the deaths of the colonists on TV a few hours later.

Misleading Article Title

[PingXao]

This should be "NASA Would Like to Bring Back Martian Rocks". NASA would like to do a lot of things. Draconian budget cuts in recent years have put a major crimp in their style, however. They are currently not "planning" to do anything of the sort. They are simply groping about for a project that will let some of them keep their jobs by hitting on something that will engender public and Congressional support (and dollars). That's about as far in advance as their "planning" allows these days.

It seems like every 6 months now they some out with some new "discovery" that turns out to be just a rehash of old science with a new twist. Truth is, if you think along the lines of timothy here, you could also say that:

• NASA Plans on Sending Astronauts Back to the Moon
• NASA Plans on Sending Satellite Fleet to Jupiter
• NASA Plans on Searching For Life on Titan's Oceans
• NASA Plans on Tripling Space Station Size
• NASA Plans on New Hubble Replacement

The list goes on and on. I love NASA, don't get me wrong, but the only serious stories worth looking at are the ones that start with NASA Receives Budgetary Committment From Congress For [insert project here]. That's the point where any serious planning really starts.