Slashdot Mirror
NASA Launching Two Mars Rovers in June
shaniber writes "NASA is planning the launch of the Mars Exploration Rovers this month. The rovers are scheduled for two two separate launches, between June 5th and July 15th. These rovers will both work as robotic geologists, including a human-eye height panoramic camera and a miniature thermal emmision spectrometer amongst their scientific equipment. NASA plans on webcasting the launches, as well. A press kit, with many more details, is also available as a pdf."
The science payload's page is on Cornell's site here.
I think it would be great to see some real color 3-D imagery from beyond Earth. They say human-eye height panoramic camera, but how about having two lenses to capture a 3D image? I'd pay $10 for a little View-Master with real 3D pictures from Mars, wouldn't you?
Oh dear. More cute rovers buzzing along the surface only to be abandaned later.
I felt sorry for that one a few years back. Kind of like leaving a puppy when you move.
My studio - www.graylands.ca
In the past, I would have been adamant in defending the shuttle program/ISS, but lately I've been wondering why so many billions have been spent on manned missions when that 500 million (USD) per launch could have been better spent (IMHO) on space probes.
FYI, these probes cost about 400 million (USD) each, and promise to return more science value than
all Shuttle missions combined (IMHO).
Granted, it was said of the very valuable (scientifically speaking) Apollo missions that 90 seconds of human-on-alien-world visual observation was more valuable than weeks or months of robot observations.
Still, given their cost and advancing robotic/computer technology, I would be very disappointed if NASA continued to spend so much on manned space "exploration."
Spacecraft
Cruise vehicle dimensions: 2.65 meters (8.7 feet) diameter, 1.6 meters (5.2 feet) tall
Rover dimensions: 1.5 meter (4.9 feet) high by 2.3 meters (7.5 feet) wide by 1.6 meter (5.2 feet) long
Weight: 1,062 kilograms (2,341 pounds) total at launch, consisting of 174-kilogram (384-pound) rover, 365-kilogram (805-pound) lander, 198-kilogram (436-pound) backshell and parachute, 90-kilogram (198-pound) heat shield and 183-kilogram (403-pound) cruise stage, plus 52 kilograms (115 pounds) of propellant
Power: Solar panel and lithium-ion battery system providing 140 watts on Mars surface
Science instruments: Panoramic cameras, miniature thermal emission spectrometer, MÃssbauer spectrometer, alpha particle X-ray spectrometer, microscopic imager, rock abrasion tool, magnet arrays
Rover A Mission
Launch vehicle: Delta II 7925
Launch period: June 8-24, 2003
Earth-Mars distance at launch: 105 million kilometers (65 million miles)
Mars landing: Jan. 4, 2004, at about 2 p.m. local Mars time (8:11 p.m. Jan. 3 PST)
Landing site: Gusev Crater, possible former lake in giant impact crater
Earth-Mars distance on landing day: 170.2 million kilometers (105.7 million miles)
One-way speed-of-light time Mars-to-Earth on landing day: 9.46 minutes
Total distance traveled Earth to Mars (approximate): 500 million kilometers (311 million miles)
Near-surface atmospheric temperature at landing site: -100 C (-148 F) to 0 C (32 F)
Primary mission: 90 Mars days, or "sols" (equivalent to 92 Earth days)
Rover B Mission
Launch vehicle: Delta II 7925H (larger solid-fuel boosters than 7925)
Launch period: June 25-July 15, 2003
Earth-Mars distance at launch: 89 million kilometers (55 million miles)
Mars landing: Jan. 25, 2004, at about 1:15 p.m. local Mars time (8:56 p.m. Jan. 24 PST)
Landing site: Meridiani Planum, where mineral deposits suggest wet past
Landing time: Approximately 1:15 p.m. local Mars time (8:56 p.m. PST)
Earth-Mars distance on landing day: 198.7 million kilometers (123.5 million miles)
One-way speed-of-light time Mars-to-Earth on landing day: 11 minutes
Total distance traveled Earth to Mars (approximate): 491 million kilometers (305 million miles)
Near-surface atmospheric temperature at landing site: -100 C (-148 F) to 0 C (32 F)
Primary mission: 90 Mars days, or "sols" (equivalent to 92 Earth days)
Program
Cost: Approximately $800 million total, consisting approximately of $625 million spacecraft development and science instruments; $100 million launch; $75 million mission operations and science processing
A previous generation had the Apollo moon landing as a life defining moment, for me it was the Mars rover. I distinctly remember being glued to the life tv broadcast, watching the first images of mars being beamed back to earth, in full colour, high-res, 360 degree glory. Is there anything else that has come closer to bring humanity closer together than the wonder of space exploration? I don't think so. I hope for success for all the landers and probes. We need them to succeed if we are to achieve the next stage of humanity. You know, the Startrek stage. ;)
ESA launched their Mars probe on June 2nd. So, in about half a year there will be three different probes landing on Mars if everything goes as planned.
"I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy"
I never had you guys down as nationalist but I have been disapointed by many of the recent comments on /.
You never saw americans as nationalist? You must already have been on Mars for the past few years then.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
NASA really needs this to be a success, especially after the Columbia.
Given the past performaces of Mars expeditions, NASA is taking a big risk.
Of course, technology has improved, but is this a prudent bet for NASA?
Sorry about the big letters part. You could always move out into the desert and dedicate your life to digging mile-high letters in the sand, spelling "FUCK YOU" for the next shuttle crew that passes by. ;-)
Money for nothing, pix for free
Why does it really matter who makes an important discovery? Is the world scientific community somehow enriched more because Uwe in Vienna or Piet in Den Haag made the discovery before Steve in Alamogordo? Or is it more accurate to say that you hate America?
Your first sentence seems to lean toward the latter explanation, as you seem to be upset about U.S. "space dominance," despite the fact that a look at the STS mission crew bios is more multicultural than a Rainbow Coalition rally. Aboard the ill-fated Columbia mission, for the first example that comes to mind, we had the first Israeli in space; I believe his name was Ilian Ramon (although I could be wrong about his first name). Additionally, Kalpana Chawla was born in India. Granted, she was a U.S. citizen at the time of her death, but I'd still say that on the whole, the goodwill extended by NASA in offering to take up scientists of so many nations stands as an eloquent counterargument to your belief in some sort of American doctrine of "Manifest Space Destiny." Were I you, I'd worry more about my own demagoguery than the perceived dangers of American astronautical hegemony.
In my travels to Europe, South America, and the Pacific Rim, I've met hundreds of intelligent, friendly, and generally cool people. I can only hope that when they read such ill-informed and sneeringly smug commentary as yours, that they are as horrified as I am when I see an American behaving rudely towards someone from another country.
They that would sacrifice their
Just let us assume for one moment that the European Mars Express with its Beagle 2 lander does find something they claim is a sure sign of life on Mars. It would mean that the first European planetary mission ever finds something that NASA has been looking for for decades. Somebody in Congress is going to take that as a personal insult and push the space program some more -- while the Europeans will find funding their probes a lot more interesting. More space exploration for all...
But this is just chicken feed. Can you imagine the U.S. watching China build and man a moon base? Even having Chinese astronauts ("taikonauts", I believe they are called) walking on the moon will make them nervous enough to push funding.
There is nothing like space exploration for a nation's scientific prestige. This hasn't been apparent for the last few decades because the U.S. and the Soviet Union both decided not to get into that kind of arms race again, and after the fall of communism, the U.S. has had a monopoly. If that is challenged, it is a good thing -- certainly better than trying to build the largest navy, the most atom bombs, or some of the other things we've had in the past.