Slashdot Mirror
Mars Rovers Alive Until 2005?
maggeth writes "The BBC is reporting that negotiations are under way to extending funding for the Mars rovers beyond this September. Originally designed to work for 90 Martian days, they now predict they may last well beyond the 250 Martian days they had announced previously." hoferbr writes "A new analysis by Phil Berardelli at the United Press International quotes Steve Squyres, chief scientist for the Mars rover mission, in which he says that the Mars rovers '... could go into 2005'. Spirit and Opportunity will complete six months on the Martian surface on July."
That is good engineering!
Kodos to the designers !
/b
|f(x)dx = F(b) - F(a)
This is another example of NASA doing the technical stuff right (rovers that can last much longer than the original project speicifications required), but bad budgeting. They pay huge amounts to build the rovers and rocket them to Mars, but then they have to negotiate whether they can fund continuing to use them once they're already there?
The real headline here is "NASA considers turning off working rovers because they project budget was exeeded."
Why didn't they use them instead?
Even if the mechanical elements of the rovers were to break or become unusable and they couldn't drive around or dig, it would still be very valuable to have functioning cameras and other sensors on Mars for some time to come.
It just seems odd to spend so much money and take so many chances flying something to Mars to not do everything possible to ensure that the device worked for a long, long time.
They might not have for a simple reason. It may originally have been decided that the parts on the rover had a very limited lifespan due to problems like the temperature swing throughout the day. Given the existence of these problems it was probably assumed that the lifespan limitation due to dust collection would never come into play. Now that we realize that the parts have lasted it may be an error, admittedly with hindsight, not to have dealt with the dust.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
I'm very impressed with the Rover program, but I don't believe their engineers really expected the rovers to just die shortly after 90 days. At this point, that seems to be too big of an "error" in their calculations. However, in successful business and successful PR ventures, you promise low and then deliver high, so to speak, to impress. I'm guessing that NASA has been promising below their internally known ability to guarantee restored public confidence in their operations and organization. The new announcement may have been a surprise for them... but I'm guessing not. NASA needs a bevy of widely known successes to convince the American public that it should be kept afloat. So far, so good!
200 MPH winds at 0.01 atmosphere aren't that big a deal. There's some dust. Here are Viking lander pictures taken during a Martian dust storm in 1976.
One would think that it does get windy on Mars. Couldn't you time a series of 'jiggle' menuevers with the panels facing into the win? It would be like shaking sand out of your bathing suit on a windy day.
I would think that the next rover type deployment would make better use of the landing pad. I'd also like to see missions to Mars to potentially recycle machinery there.
Imagine a space tow-truck that can go and 'jump' previously expired machines?
Sometimes one pays most for the things one gets for nothing. -- Albert Einstein
Originally they predicted 3 months, extended to 8... now they're talking about over a year of operational time. Is anyone else concerned about the extreme miscalculations that must have taken place to result in such a poor estimation and re-estimation? I realize this IS NASA, that these scientists are brilliant and that there are many factors that I do not know that come into play, but I also realize this is a group who smashed millions of dollars of equipment due to use of improper units. The end result is great, but we really should wonder whey the initial estimates were so bad.
I read about it too, and they also mentioned the mean size of the dust particles was on the order of 2 microns. This means that the dust is very, very fine.
Fine dust is difficult to get rid of with normal means like mechanical removal; you have to suspend the dust in a solvent (like atmosphere in the case of a blower) and then shunt it away, right?
So, yes, a blower on an arm might be a good idea. I was concerned that the blower itself might clog, or it wouldn't function properly. Funny, NASA is supposed to have a bunch of brainiacs, you'd think they could come up with a mechanism to clean the panels of this size dust particle... Maybe it isn't really as simple as a broom or blower...
Or, maybe it's just that we need an unwashed, stinky guy with a squeegee that can come by when the rover's stopped at a stoplight... (grin). I know some volunteers who are willing to be homeless on Mars...
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
Ok, this isn't founded on anything but wild speculation, so here goes:
What if the NASA managers told engineers to design rovers meant to last for 2 Martian years, but only told public/congress/funding agencies they were meant for 90 days or whatever? They could go in the hole for a short while on costs, and then "miraculously" extend the life of the rovers and get people to be impressed with their technical savvy. A new funding cycle is approved because the NASA folk "outperformed" their projections, and the real project costs get covered, with some extra money not otherwise available.
Tin foil hat-ish, I know, but given how many stories have come out criticizing the fiscal irresponsibility of NASA, is this completely far fetched?
I don't think designing the rover is expensive, most of the costs are in developing the underlying technologies - putting them all together is simplier. Even if you don't send the same rover to Europa, you will still save huge amounts of money, if you don't need to constantly reinvent the wheel, so to speak. :)
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Maybe this sounds childish, but I'm really amazed what now is out of earth's orbit and (still) working:
- The 2 rovers and numerous orbiters @ Mars
- Cassini/Huygens @ Saturn
- Both Voyager missions at the edge of the solar system
- Rosetta
etc.pp.!
NASA couldn't get funding for the "Grand Tour" of hitting all of the outer planets (except for Pluto)... all they could get approval for was Jupiter and Saturn.
And so design of the probes and trajectories were done for the full "Grand Tour", but the engineers only published trajectories for the abbreviated mission. Once they got past Saturn (already on the trajectory they needed for the rest of the tour) they started talking about how they just happened to be on course and suddenly the money appeared.
--Rob