Slashdot Mirror


Mars Odyssey Begins Overtime

thhamm writes "NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter begins working overtime today after completing a prime mission that discovered vast supplies of frozen water, ran a safety check for future astronauts, and mapped surface textures and minerals all over Mars, among other feats. An extended Mission until 2006 has been approved, and I hope it will last that long, maybe doing more safety checks for astronauts :)"

122 comments

  1. Doom??? by elasticwings · · Score: 5, Funny

    Umm, isn't this the first step towards the Doom 3 premise? I mean do we really want to start exploring Mars? It'll just eventually lead up to colonization via the Union Aerospace Corporation. Please somebody think of the poor Doom space marine that will have to go through this.

    1. Re:Doom??? by wpanderson · · Score: 3, Funny

      I wouldn't worry about it - with the level of hardware on Mars Odyssey, they'll be lucky to get a Doom 3 framerate of anything more than 1fpd (frames per day). With the quality set low. At 640x480. And not moving.

      --
      neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
    2. Re:Doom??? by thhamm · · Score: 5, Funny

      "monsters? demons? what the hell are you talking about? we did the safety checks years ago with mars odyssey. its perfectly safe there!"

    3. Re:Doom??? by Nakkel · · Score: 3, Funny

      No worries mate, just press CTRL + ALT + ~ and type "God". That should ease the job a bit.

    4. Re:Doom??? by tomee · · Score: 4, Funny

      What do you mean "poor" space marine? Everyone is already training for that day using professional simulation software. We'll have no trouble finding a volunteer.

    5. Re:Doom??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that's with FSAAx16 right?

    6. Re:Doom??? by EpsCylonB · · Score: 2, Funny

      And think about the latency as well, it's a 20 minute round trip.

    7. Re:Doom??? by kfg · · Score: 3, Funny

      Mars Needs WomenH^H^H^H^H^Flashlight Batteries.

      KFG

    8. Re:Doom??? by ShadowXOmega · · Score: 1

      mmmm no martian OverLord post??

      ok
      I, for One, give the welcome to our martian Cyberdemon OverLord

    9. Re:Doom??? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's because the rovers run predominantly on solar power, and the monsters mostly come at night. Mostly...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Doom??? by retinaburn · · Score: 1

      Actually its much faster, all they have to render is black.

    11. Re:Doom??? by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      Plus, we haven't dug down deep enough to find Site 3, the Soul Cube, and the Portal to Hell. . . . . . besides, we already have that portal: we call it "the Beltway". . .

    12. Re:Doom??? by Pentagram · · Score: 1

      "A" volunteer? We'll have an army of millions. It'll be like Doom 3, only in reverse. Pity the poor imps - with marines jumping out of closets, teleporting in all over the place...

    13. Re:Doom??? by BrokenStructure · · Score: 1

      where do I sign up?

    14. Re:Doom??? by snake_dad · · Score: 1

      Getting telefragged sux :)

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
  2. But where's the IPN? by wpanderson · · Score: 1

    Roll on .mars

    --
    neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
    1. Re:But where's the IPN? by pilgrim23 · · Score: 1

      Mars? I thought we were exploring Barsoom...

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
  3. /. now on Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    And we are the only ones here... spooky.

  4. Unfortunately... by mikeophile · · Score: 4, Funny

    It will not be eligible for overtime pay.

  5. intermediaries for human travel. by bagel2ooo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While I think a manned mission to Mars would be a wonderful idea. I ponder if we would be able to collect enough data to see if using "greenhouse" gases to supply Mars with a more human-suitable atmosphere would also be a good long-term goal. I know that would probably negatively impact our manned missions there for quite some time until the "incubation" is well underway or finished, but I think that with what resources we've been able to find Mars may be more viable for a station or colony than mars.

    --
    ( o ) one could say I'm rather baked
    1. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by Zen+Punk · · Score: 2, Funny
      but I think that with what resources we've been able to find Mars may be more viable for a station or colony than mars.

      I don't think I understand what you're trying to say here.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
    2. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      I personally think that robotic missions are still the best value. What I would like to see is an atempt to establish earth plant life on mars.

      Apparently around the equator of mars there are places that reach 0 degress celsius, and there is supposedly algae at the earths poles that can survive those kind of temperatures.

      So why not send a robot that will heat a small basin of water to keep it liquid and try and grow something ?. The first small step towards terraforming.

    3. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by kippy · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to Chris McKay from NASA they will be. He's a big terraforming proponent and he outlined a near future mission in which a rover will scoop up some dirt into a bell jar, and they will attempt to grow a mustard plant. He said they'll probably have to do it on the moon first for political reasons but it's on the works.

      I don't have a link of anything but he gave this talk at the Mars Soceity's convention last week.

    4. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by kippy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Landing on an earthlike Mars would be nice but not totally necessary for early astronauts. I'm about at pro-terraforming as it gets but even I think that landing humans on an un-terraformed Mars is best for science.

      At a talk given by Chris McKay this weekend, he was asked something like "when do we give up the search for life and start terraforming?" That's kind of a sticky question because it's kind of like proving a negative. However he pointed out a region in the southern hemisphere which is older than the north, still has an earth-strength magnetosphere and is Siberian in nature. He said that once a kilometer deep core is drilled, checked for life and nothing is found that there is almost certainly no life on Mars nor was there ever.

      It will take people to do that investigation. My personal hope is that nothing is found and terraforming can begin.

      For a good treatment of terraforming, read Robert Zubrin's "The Case For Mars".

    5. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      My personal hope is that we begin terraforming whether we find life or not, but that we would delay it slightly so we could do a good sampling of surveys to find out if we find life in places in which we really don't expect it. Whatever we do to mars' surface will have only a limited effect on its interior for some time, so we can start on top and work our way down and still get some useful science accomplished. Sorry, but Ann Clayborne can bite me.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by kippy · · Score: 1

      Word.

      And I'll follow General Sax into the gates of Hell.

    7. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by howardjw · · Score: 1

      I agree that robotic missions are of great value. However, I don't think NASA will try to establish plant life on Mars anytime soon. NASA, specifically JPL, spends millions of dollars every mission to make sure the spacecraft is as clean as possible, controlling the number of bugs per square meter very precisly. They want to prevent "forward contamination" - that is wrecking the Martian ecosystem. I suppose it is possible to design an instrument that keeps a plant seen inside an internal jar, somehow preventing any possibility of organisms getting out, and then adding some dirt (and water?). But I don't see it happening soon. Some places on the equator get about 0 degrees C during the day, but most get quite cold at night. There is another problem though. If you expose water to the atmosphere of Mars, it will not freeze into ice. Yes, it is cold enough, if the pressure were the same as it was on Earth. But it is much lower. The water will actually evaporate. You would have to lower the temperature to get the water into a liquid form. Makes growing a plant tough.

    8. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by EEgopher · · Score: 1

      I did read Zubrin's Book, and even he is open to suggestions for one critical problem: getting the humans to Mars without full-body 3rd degree sunburn (from radiation). Lead-plated space capsules will be too heavy for an affordable approach, as they will affect payload, fuel, and Hoffman transfers.
      Human transport needs to be solved before teraforming becomes worthwhile. (Unless we just want to grow crops out there and let robots pick them.)

      --
      hi, I like pancakes -.-- -.-- --..
    9. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by kippy · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you've read the book, you'll remember that the radiation in transit is far less dangerous than smoking. One quote of his I like is that if you put smokers on a trip to Mars, their chances of cancer go down.

      Also, by designing the craft such that the water and whatnot are on the outside you can mitigate the solar wind and cosmic ray threat. For solar flares, a small coffin/safehouse can be used for a few hours. One thing he didn't mention but that could be used is to generate a baby magnetic field to bounce solar wind.

      it's just an engineering problem and not insurmountable at all.

    10. Re:intermediaries for human travel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One quote of his I like is that if you put smokers on a trip to Mars, their chances of cancer go down.

      Not if the captain turns off the "no smoking" light.

  6. Wow must have been gone for a long time by Zakabog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter begins working overtime today after completing a prime mission that discovered vast supplies of frozen water

    So when did that happen? I remember checking in on slashdot all the time and there would always be some thing about the mars rovers almost discovering water, but always missing some piece of evicende or something. I don't remember anything about an orbiter finding huge amounts of water (well I was on vacation for a month but I figured it would be pretty big on the news or something.)

    1. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by noselasd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Mars Rovers != Mars Odyssey.

      Ice on Mars
      Odyssey Mission to Mars

    2. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by dragonp12 · · Score: 3, Informative
      http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/newsroom/pressrelea ses/20040302a.html

      There's a link to a water on Mars press release from a few months back.

      --
      This is me. Don't like it? That's unlucky.
    3. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      That actually shows strong evidence that a plain on Mars was once wet. Not really the discovery of ice on Mars - just something to stoke the fires of hope, wouldn't you say?

    4. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by dragonp12 · · Score: 1

      All the same so far as I'm concerned :-P If there's strong evidence that a plain on Mars was once wet, then that can only lend more credence to the theory that there's a whole load of ice under the poles.

      --
      This is me. Don't like it? That's unlucky.
    5. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by snake_dad · · Score: 4, Informative
      The fact that Mars has frozen water is one of the biggest discoveries of Odyssey. That is great to know, but it doesn't tell you much, only that a lot of water is currently on Mars in a frozen state.

      The rovers' task is to find out how exactly that water influenced Mars in the past (and maybe even present). Long lasting huge oceans? Short wet periods? Or maybe only moist periods, not really wet at all? These science results will then be used to give a future mission a better chance of finding life, or proof of past life. If there ever was life on Mars, of course.

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    6. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am aware of that, I never used the names to mean the same thing. I just thought that they were looking for signs of water on mars, wouldn't frozen water be a sign of water on mars?

    7. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by noselasd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Indeed, though most water were found on the poles, wheras the rovers
      are not that far from the equator.

    8. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by TheCyko1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You really missed out on some big news then. I guess i should also inform you about the alien machine discovered on mars near one of these vast supplies of frozen water and a life form that appears to be a woman with three tits.

      --
      This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
    9. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're looking for liquid water.

      Any old planet can have ice, that's not so impressive.

      Water at a temperature between 0 and 100 centigrade? That's impressive, then all you need to do is put 15% oxygen in the atmosphere and it's Class M!

    10. Re:Wow must have been gone for a long time by thhamm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The scientist, that claimed the Viking Probes showed signs of microbial life, now has a new theory.
      He seems to see signs of water on recent Rover images, squished out by the wheels and the RAT tool.

      Even if there is/ever was no life, interesting find though, that liquid water exists on such a world. I think this raises the odds of finding life somewhere else quit a bit. Maybe Europa?

  7. Next stop, South Polar region? by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since they found indications of lots of frozen water near the surface in the south polar region, I wonder if there are any plans to send a probe/rover there?

    They found "copius hydrogen" in the area, and "Researchers interpret the hydrogen as frozen water", but can we be sure without taking a look on the ground?

    Seems like the next logical step...

    --
    A house divided against itself cannot stand.
    1. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by thhamm · · Score: 5, Informative

      they tried this already, with the Mars Polar Lander. but they lost it.

      dont know if they will try again though.

    2. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      If they find it, it has my name on it; I call dibs on the wreckage!

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by sadler121 · · Score: 1

      Partially on topic (its about Mars) but wasn't that the one NASA screw up because one team was working with "Imprieal" measurements and the other team was working with Metric measurements, and they kinda got confused??

    4. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by snake_dad · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, this is the lander where the cause of the crash was thought to be "spurious interrrupts" from the sensors in the landing legs, during landing. Apparently that made MPL conclude that it was already on the ground, and it cut off its engine. Boom. Also adding to the accident was bad management in the project, and too many inexperienced people on the team.

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    5. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by howardjw · · Score: 1

      Next stop in the North Polar region. Phoenix is a low cost mission baselining the crashed Mars Polar Lander. It is scheduled to launch in 2007.

    6. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by Polyzinha · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're going to try for a high-latitude landing again, but this time in the northern hemisphere. The Mars Phoenix lander is scheduled for 2008. You can read more about it here:
      http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/objectives.php

    7. Re:Next stop, South Polar region? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Already working on it... (other pole though)
      http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/future/phoenix.h tml/
      We're resurrecting (hence the name) the half-built Mars 2001 Lander and sending it to the northern latitudes, where it will dig for icy soil.

  8. outsourcing! by rozz · · Score: 5, Funny
    NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter begins working overtime today

    sending overtime-work to Mars is the kind of outsourcing we all love

    --
    "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
    1. Re:outsourcing! by IChris · · Score: 1

      My job went to Mars and all I got was this lousy Y-shirt!

  9. Working Overtime? by strook · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wow, the orbiter lasted even longer than the estimated lifetime. Is anyone else noticing the inevitable pattern? NASA launches some sort of mission, gets some positive press, then a few months later more great news! Turns out the mission is lasting even longer than the estimates!

    Like the Mars rovers for example:

    Mission engineers have analysed power data for both Spirit and Opportunity which shows the vehicles are performing much better than they had expected....

    But the mission team adds that its original estimates of Mars' environment and the rovers' performance were very conservative.

    If I was smart enough to be a NASA engineer I think I'd figure out that people are much happier with your performance when you exceed expectations. It's not like anyone knows what to expect from a Mars orbiter anyways. Nobody looks at the mission statement before launch and says "400 days? Gee, for 3.3 billion I expected more in the range of 550-580 days."

    Not anyone I know anyways. Maybe other people have more astrophysicist friends.

    --

    "TV is great! Every New Year's I make a resolution to watch more TV." - Ann Coulter

    1. Re:Working Overtime? by TCaM · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sounds like the Scotty symdrome.

      --

      Scotty: Do ye mind a little advice? Starfleet captains are like children. They want everything right now, and they want it their way. But the secret is to give only what they need, not what they want!

      LaForge: Yeah, well I told the captain I'd have this analysis done in an hour.

      Scotty: And how long would it really take?

      LaForge: An hour!

      Scotty: Oh, ye didn't tell him how long it would really take, did ye?

      LaForge: Well, of course I did.

      Scotty: Oh, laddie, ye've got a lot to learn if ye want people to think of ye as a miracle worker!

    2. Re:Working Overtime? by rherbert · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With things like satellites and rovers, whoever is paying for it says, "We want it to last 90 days / 2 years / 10 years." Then the company actually building the device charges them for it. If it's going to last 10 years, you'd better have a lot of backup in case of failure, which adds complexity to the software controlling the device... all of which rapidly escalate the price. So, when NASA says they want the rovers to last 90 days, they're built to last 90 days. Not less than 90 days, because then NASA will be mad. So inevitably, if you've done your job right, it's going to last a little bit longer. You don't just use the Mean Time to Failure, because that means that 50% of the time, you're going to fail before the mission end. So, things last longer than "expected." Then eventually things break, and because the device is so expensive, they pay people a bunch of money to sit around a table and try to figure out how to work around the thing that broke. You can't do this ahead of time because then you'd be spending a LOT of time trying to figure out how to work around EVERY possible failure, and you can't always do that. I wouldn't be surprised if the company that built the rover lost some sort of bonus because of the failure before mission end, but probably not the complete bonus because they were able to work around the problem.

    3. Re:Working Overtime? by rokzy · · Score: 0

      Mir lasted about 10 years past its estimated lifetime, so NASA still has some work to do to get the record

    4. Re:Working Overtime? by maharg · · Score: 1

      huh ? The Voyager craft were built for a 4 year mission, launched in 1977, and they'll be working into the next decade ! linky

      --

      $ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
      @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
    5. Re:Working Overtime? by wpanderson · · Score: 1

      Pioneer 10 was still ticking over 21 years after launch ...

      --
      neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
    6. Re:Working Overtime? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a link to an amateur satellite launched in 1974 that is still partially functioning!

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    7. Re:Working Overtime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      See. That's what was wrong with TNG. It was too unrealistic. Any good engineer already knows that you need to pad the numbers.

    8. Re:Working Overtime? by lobsterGun · · Score: 1

      Let's think about that for a second.

      Think about all the times the warp core nearly went critical. Think about all the blown relays and all of the power conduits that had to be rerouted.

      LaForge was not a good engineer. LaForge was a bad engineer.

    9. Re:Working Overtime? by howardjw · · Score: 1

      Actually design life factors in heavily to nearly all engineering decisions. Solar panels decay with time, they get covered with dust. Bearing lubrication has some lifetime. Batteries can only take so many charge cycles. And maybe most importantly, NASA only has so much money to spend and keeping spacecraft alive after they leave Earth takes a lot of it. It's true that the engineerings of MER don't know how long it will last. It could die tomorrow. They nearly died just a week after they got there with that memory glitch. When they are designing, the engineergs can calculate some expected life though, with a standard deviation. You want to garuntee the spacecraft/rovers will work past the primary mission phase with some probability (95%?). The expected lifetime is much more.

    10. Re:Working Overtime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree... If LaForge was any good like all of us, we would see him wasting his time posting on Slashdot or playing solitaire or something.
      Obviously, the guy is running around fixing all the screwups that he's been making.

    11. Re:Working Overtime? by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      And then there was Voyager 6, which we know will still be at least partly functional well into the 23rd Century. . . .

    12. Re:Working Overtime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not only do the /. "editors" dupe posts, but now the readers dupe comments!!!

      used numerous times for the rovers. and lots of other things.

      was fun once, but now its as exciting as "all your base" and "teh ghey". which it is.

  10. Odyssey Does Not Qualify For Overtime by bstarrfield · · Score: 5, Funny

    According to the newly revised FLSA, the Mars Odyssey would be considered a professional exempt robot, as it's carrying out highly technical, professional tasks. Don't be mean and get the little robot's hopes up!

    --
    /* Dang, I can't type that well. */
  11. mission performance by thhamm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    i think i once read, that Mars was the "target with highest failure rate".
    so this is a pretty good performance, with the two rovers still working (after doubling their designed lifetime?), Mars Odyssey, MSGS and Mars Express.
    and the biggest objective a huge success: yes there is/was water.

    no need to argue about the use of robotic missions for me. if you asked someone 10 years ago about water on mars: "yeah. water. mars. sure ..." :)

  12. Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Interesting

    An extended Mission until 2006 has been approved, and I hope it will last that long, maybe doing more safety checks for astronauts :)

    But surely the fact that Mars' surface gets 2 or 3 times what Earth's surface gets would stop any missions from happening anytime soon (as in, within the next 20 years)? Or is the radiation not actually a problem?

    1. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by dragonp12 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Surely, though, the radiation that hits Mars, even at 2 or 3 times what Earth's surface gets, would be far less than what hits the moon...

      --
      This is me. Don't like it? That's unlucky.
    2. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The radiation on mars will not be nearly as big a deal as the trip to mars will be. It is almost certain that initially, we will have to live underground rather than on top. If we do so, it protects us from Radiation, 300 MPH winds, Easier to insulate, etc.etc.

      I am in hopes that we will send a private mission to mars and not have them return. It would be far more useful to send a small mission on a one way trip, with a supply ship once a year. They could build a small base, expand our knowledge of Mars a million fold over what simple remote vehicles do today, just due to the fact that they would need all sorts of cpu power there. In addition, they would be able to control system there quickly.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by Glock27 · · Score: 1
      The radiation on mars will not be nearly as big a deal as the trip to mars will be. It is almost certain that initially, we will have to live underground rather than on top. If we do so, it protects us from Radiation, 300 MPH winds, Easier to insulate, etc.etc.

      Exactly. I'm mystified that NASA doesn't talk more about underground habitation. Hang a few plasma displays on the wall and you might just as well be in Hawaii (minus the 1/3 G gravity of course;). Regular centrifuge use may be necessary to prevent bone mass loss.

      The 300 MPH winds shouldn't be a very big deal though - the atmosphere is so thin you'd hardly feel anything.

      I am in hopes that we will send a private mission to mars and not have them return. It would be far more useful to send a small mission on a one way trip, with a supply ship once a year. They could build a small base, expand our knowledge of Mars a million fold over what simple remote vehicles do today, just due to the fact that they would need all sorts of cpu power there. In addition, they would be able to control system there quickly.

      The discovery of "vast" amounts of water on Mars should very much facilitate such a plan. A colony would need a high power energy source (read: nuclear reactor), and some reliable tools and artifacts - then it can start it's own "Biosphere" experiment. Martian tomatoes, anyone? :-)

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    4. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by general_re · · Score: 2, Funny
      I am in hopes that we will send a private mission to mars and not have them return.

      Me too. "Captain Darl McBride" has a nice ring to it.

      Feel free to add suggestions for the remainder of the crew ;)

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
    5. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      Test Chimp G.W.B. :)

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    6. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Let's send someone competent to Mars, and send Darl to Sol.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my father says send GWB, first. Besides, do you really want a new planet to be handed over to somebody like McBride or GWB or Kerry? People like these have screwed up this planet enough.

      But the planet will belong to those that first thrive there. I would gladly have gone to mars with just a 50% of surviving the first year. But I am already 45 and know full well that the first few sets of colonists will be in their early-late 30's.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    8. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by WindBourne · · Score: 1
      The 300 MPH winds shouldn't be a very big deal though - the atmosphere is so thin you'd hardly feel anything.

      IFF it is the atmosphere hitting you. Have a straw, a pebble, etc. hit you at 300 MPH (in the face plate, no less), and you may feel a bit different about that.

      Yeah, the I think that with those winds and the ability to have the sun blocked for months on end, that you really have only one possible power source - Nukes. And it should be as high as possible. I think that the first few settlers will need robots to do much of the building. In addition, the plants will need backup lighting for those long duration marsian dust storms. Finally, when you think about it, it will only be practical to send people iff they live off the planet. That means they will need the ability to produce all sorts of nice material. Here we look for the lowest cost material, but there, it will almost be certainly what ever is the clostest source of material.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    9. Re:Astronauts on Mars with this evidence? by howardjw · · Score: 1

      Winds on Mars will never get to 300 MPH. They might approach 30 m/s in a strong dust storm. That's about 70 MPH. They won't send a one way mission to Mars, NASA spends billions on safety, can you ever really imagine them doing that? Finally, although I am not against sending humans to Mars, I don't think they will be able to contribute that much new science over current rovers. What does additional CPU power get you? Maybe you can go a little furture each day, see some new rocks. But the current rovers have seen lots of rocks, and they take the best instruments available with them.

  13. Patent pending.. by riqnevala · · Score: 4, Funny

    How long does it take for Microsoft to get all patent rights for interplanetary email?

    There is also a new Microsoft innovation, called MS Solar time, method for keeping track of time on different planets. It is based on the microsoft scheduler and the office assistant "Kenny the Galactic Clock".

    --
    love slashdot. populate it. use it. abuse it. hate it. kill it. miss it. stop following links, they only kill servers.
    1. Re:Patent pending.. by rpbailey1642 · · Score: 1
      How long does it take for Microsoft to get all patent rights for interplanetary email?

      NASA is actually planning on something like this for their network. I hope they have a plan for dropped "packets".

    2. Re:Patent pending.. by DerWulf · · Score: 1

      well, TCP seems kinda out of the question anyways. Unless you have SO_TIMEOUT interpreted as days instead of milliseconds ;)

      --

      ___
      No power in the 'verse can stop me
  14. yay for Odyssey! by Guano_Jim · · Score: 5, Informative

    Odyssey was launched in 2001... here's the mission timeline for more details.

    The cute little bugger looks like this.

    1. Re:yay for Odyssey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that a gamma ray spectrometer in your framework or are you just happy to see me?

  15. Re:Euopeans ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, what's up with the european orbiter? They promised us lots of new science/facts, but I looked at the ESA homepage, and.... nothing. :( Are they asleep or just lacking in the PR department?

  16. Water on Mars by vivia · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Re:Water on Mars by kmmatthews · · Score: 1

      lol, nice picture. ;)

      --
      feh. stuff.
    2. Re:Water on Mars by thhamm · · Score: 5, Funny

      In other news, NASA, in cooperation with the IBBA (International Beer Brewing Association [no link]), has announced an extensive mission, as early as 2010, to determine the usability of recently discovered martian water for on-site brewing. "this will greatly influence our decision to go there in the first place", spokesman says.

  17. What if Odyssey becomes sentient? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 3, Funny

    A previous Slashdot story told us that Odyssey would be getting some new program featuring 'AI functions' so that it could do certain complex, but repetitive, tasks on its own without needing too much input.

    What would happen, however, it this made Odyssey sentient? Could it build more robots, develop further intelligence, and then end up populating all of Mars with robots? If this happened, we might be in trouble.

    1. Re:What if Odyssey becomes sentient? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No problem, we'll just nuke them then.

    2. Re:What if Odyssey becomes sentient? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, this happens all the time. Yesterday, while upgrading GPS software, my SUV became sentient. Right now, It's in the garage, spawning. Does anybody know what baby cars eat?

    3. Re:What if Odyssey becomes sentient? by Fizzl · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What would happen, however, it this made Odyssey sentient?

      What would happen, however, if monkeys flew out of my ass?

    4. Re:What if Odyssey becomes sentient? by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      Much like their parents, baby cars eat money. Lots and lots of money. Occasionally you can substitute engineering hunks of metal and plastic for the money, but pretty much they eat money.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    5. Re:What if Odyssey becomes sentient? by docbombay · · Score: 1

      At that point, I think it would be called "V'Ger" instead.

  18. Re:UAC by cheese_wallet · · Score: 1

    "It'll just eventually lead up to colonization via the Union Aerospace Corporation. "

    Don't you mean the Armadillo Aerospace Corporation?

  19. Surface textures by mr+breakfast · · Score: 5, Funny
    ... and mapped surface textures and minerals all over Mars...

    About time! for too long Mars has been a flat-shaded sphere.

    1. Re:Surface textures by Lord_Breetai · · Score: 1

      ... and mapped surface textures and minerals all over Mars...

      About time! for too long Mars has been a flat-shaded sphere.


      They had to. id needed those textures for Doom 3.

      --
      "You are only young once, but you can be immature forever." -www.animemusicvideos.org
  20. huh? by BigChigger · · Score: 1

    "discovered vast supplies of frozen water"

    I must have missed that. All I've heard about was some frost at best. Where was this found?

    BC

    1. Re:huh? by 09za+ · · Score: 1

      http://www.spacedaily.com/2004/040317180201.pmjpbp w4.html Do You know how to use google?

  21. NASA kills old probes early by peter303 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Both the Jupiter Gallileo and Venus Magellan projects went triple their design lifespans. However, they could have gone even longer, had NASA not canned them. Both were getting "creaky": insufficient propellant to do much, and instruments breaking down. Plus it costs a fair amount of money- up to 30% of the original mission cost per year- for a slice of the Deep Space Network and scientist to run and analyze the data.
    We'll probably see this debate about the Mars Rovers if they survive into 2005. Both are already 2.5x their design lifetimes, have some instrument failures (a sick wheel motor, a dead spectrograph), and are tying up a couple hundred engineer and scientists full time.

    1. Re:NASA kills old probes early by ToshiroOC · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Deep Space Network is probably one of the largest continuing costs of any mission, including the rovers. The rovers need the 70m antennae at Canberra/Madrid/Goldstone to do direct-to-earth low-bandwidth links, and running those 70m antennae is extremely expensive - and it comes out of the project's pockets. Fortunately, Odyssey has been working beautifully as a telecom relay, getting high bandwidth links to the rovers, and then getting a high bandwidth link DTE to send several dozen megabits of data back at a time. MEX (the ESA satellite) was used to send back some data earlier, too, because both MEX and MER (the rovers) use the same Proximity-1 connection protocol. Eventually, the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, which launches in a year, will be added to the set of potential telecom links, and several years down the line the Mars Telecom Orbiter should provide a very high speed connection back to earth.

      All of this is building up a network between Mars and Earth that eventually should be able to support even the most data-intensive *cough* missions.

      One of the cooler technologies being proposed now are line-of-sight laser comms - cheaper because you don't need a 210' dish for each link, and potentially faster. MTO is probably going to include these optical connections, though I don't know if they will be used for DTE connects as well as local connects.

  22. bogus info... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People that write stories seem to always exaggerate things quite a bit, and then people believe it without even thinking. This deal with the mars rover that it "mapped surface textures and minerals all over Mars" is totally bullXXXX. The rover just drove around a tiny little area smaller than a football field, yet the description sounds like it went all over the place, but people will believe what they read without even thinking. This is like when people come back from vacation saying that they went all over the place within a given area, lets say, Europe, when in reality they just went to Rome in Italy. Then they start explaining with all the authority in the world about the place, and will without remose provide everyone that listens with a full evaluation of the place, regardless if they don't know what the heck they are talking about.

    1. Re:bogus info... by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1, Redundant

      They're not talking about the rovers, jackass.

      Orbiter. Orbits the planet. The orbiter mapped all over Mars.

      Let me break it down further. Odyssey is an orbiter. Spirit and Discovery are rovers. Did you read the story? Did it even MENTION the rovers, or did it talk about Odyssey, the orbiter?

      And you have the nerve to call them exaggerators, when you're flat out WRONG.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
  23. OK, so I'm stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But without a stable magetic field, how are we going to get greenhouse gases to accumulate on Mars?

  24. Woohoo! First one to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MMMM... Mars mustard...

  25. Oh, I dunno ..... by gstoddart · · Score: 1
    It's not like anyone knows what to expect from a Mars orbiter anyways.


    I think you can start with the basic premise of actually reachine the destination, entering orbit, and sending back some data.

    There have been a few missions that haven't reached even that basic level of success. =)
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  26. "Other feats" by ScottMaxwell · · Score: 2, Informative
    Odyssey has been a great success in its own right, as well as providing critical support for MER. One of those "other feats" mentioned in the writeup included being the relay satellite for something like 90% of the Mars Exploration Rover downlink.

    It costs us a lot less energy to just uplink the data from MER to ODY and let them send it back to Earth than for us to send it all the way back to Earth directly. The energy we save that way, we can spend on driving around, doing science, and staying warm. ODY did such a great job relaying data for us that it soon became our preferred communication mode -- we haven't returned any significant amount of data through another path for months. (Though we did recently test that we can also return data via ESA's Mars Express.)

    To put it another way, without ODY, we'd have only about 10% of the pretty pictures you can find at the MER home page.

    So on behalf of all of us MERfolk: thanks, and congratulations, Odyssey!

    --

    ``Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators.'' -- Richard Dawkins
  27. but how much water? by goon · · Score: 1
    • after completing a prime mission that discovered vast supplies of frozen water ... As summer came to northern Mars and the north polar covering of frozen carbon dioxide shrank, Odyssey found abundant frozen water in the north, too.

    Anyone have any idea of the water quantities they are talking about here? If the surface has been mapped in the IR spectrum at 100m resolution then what is the surface coverage of water?

    --
    peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
  28. pr0n on mars by POTSandPANS · · Score: 1
    Maybe a bit off topic, but...
    http://www.rense.com/general48/stransge.htm


    The playboy bunny spotted on mars

  29. Garlic mustard, the vegetable that ate Wisconsin by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    I don't have any problems trying to grow a plant on Mars dirt. I do have problems if that plant is anything from the Brassica family (includes all the vegetables you were forced to eat as a kid: cabbage, Brussel sprouts, turnips, broccoli as well as the mustards, which include many highly invasive and hard-to-get-rid-of weed species).

    Don't know if many Slashdot people are dairy farmers, but their worst nightmare is having hay fields taken over with yellow mustard. And that isn't half as bad as garlic mustard, which is threatening to take over the entire forest undergrowth in the Great Lakes region.

    Do we really want to turn Mars from red to the yellow of a serious mustard infestation?

  30. Training engineers by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    I revised a lab course, and in one unit I asked them to time how long it takes to hook up a simple circuit on a Proto Board than then estimate how long it would take to implement a much more complex circuit that we implement with a FPGA because discrete TTL would take too long for the lab.

    The idea was to put some degree of industrial realism into a university course -- in industry you spend more time coming up with estimates and schedules than doing mathematical proofs of Fourier transform properties. But the students didn't seem to "get it" regarding why this "make work" exercise was added to the lab.

    Then one day I overheard a student tell his lab partners "We're engineers damnit! Whatever estimate we come up with, we double it!"

    That was a very proud moment for me as an engineering educator. Not only did that student understand the exercise, he learned the concept of padding an estimate so you have some engineering margin against the eventual schedule slippage.

  31. Re:Garlic mustard, the vegetable that ate Wisconsi by kippy · · Score: 1

    I don't think it will be that big of a concern. The particular strain of mustard has it's genome mapped so they will know for sure that it's earth life if it spreads. I'm also pretty sure that as tough as it is, it's can't survive Martian conditions in the open. Hell, we could send Kudzu and not have to worry about it spreading in subzero temperatures and near airless conditions with no oxygen and unchecked UV radiation.

    If it were anaerobic extreemophiles, it might be worrisome. Complex plant life as we know it should die unprotected.