Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mars Polar Lander Lost Again

Posted by samzenpus on from the alien-joy-ride dept.

IZ Reloaded writes "The Mars Global Surveyor during one of its latest scans of the area where the Mars Polar Lander was originally spotted, discovers that the spacecraft is no longer there! Space.com reports, "We conclude that our interpretation of these features was in error. This is not the location of the Mars Polar Lander. Because the landing uncertainty ellipse is so much larger than our images, and we do not have another candidate to which to target...we cannot continue to hunt for the lander," the MSSS site explains."

5 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. dust, frost? by Use+Psychology · · Score: 5, Interesting


    perhaps the lander could have been covered by dust, or c02 frost -- therefore eliminating the weak detection seen before?

  2. List of Mars Efforts by EuropeanGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    List of Mars Efforts, courtesy of Wikipedia

    Items with bullets represent full or partial failures.

    * 1960 -- Marsnik 1
    * 1960 -- Marsnik 2
    * 1962 -- Sputnik 29
    * 1962 -- Mars 1
    * 1962 -- Sputnik 31
    * 1964 -- Mariner 3
    1964 -- Mariner 4
    * 1964 -- Zond 2
    * 1965 -- Zond 3
    1969 -- Mariner 6
    1969 -- Mariner 7
    * 1969 -- Mars 1969A
    * 1969 -- Mars 1969B
    * 1971 -- Mariner 8
    * 1971 -- Cosmos 419
    * 1971 -- Mars 2
    1971 -- Mars 3
    1971 -- Mariner 9
    * 1973 -- Mars 4
    * 1973 -- Mars 5
    * 1973 -- Mars 6
    * 1973 -- Mars 7
    1975 -- Viking 1
    1975 -- Viking 2
    * 1988 -- Phobos 1
    * 1988 -- Phobos 2
    * 1992 -- Mars Observer
    1996 -- Mars Global Surveyor
    * 1996 -- Mars 96
    1996 -- Mars Pathfinder
    * 1998 -- Nozomi (Planet-B)
    * 1998 -- Mars Climate Orbiter
    * 1998 -- Mars Polar Lander
    * 1998 -- Deep Space 2 (part of Mars Polar Lander spacecraft)
    2001 -- Mars Odyssey
    2003 -- Mars Exploration Rovers
    * 2003 -- Mars Express

    1. Re:List of Mars Efforts by thermopile · · Score: 5, Interesting
      There's a much better and much funnier synopsis of Mars attempts and failures here, as well as a record of a few other planets.

      Overall, we're really only about 33% successful at it. Space Travel is Not Easy.

      --

      "Diplomacy is something you do until you find a rock." --Richard Pound

  3. Re:Misleading summary.. by GooberToo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Last I heard, ~4" resolution was available during the mid-80's. More current information on available resolutions is top secret and not available to the public.

    Chances are, resolutions available from modern spy sats provide better than 4" resolution...especially when you consider the improvements available in active optics (active mirrors, etc), radar, and IR technologies.

  4. Re:Misleading summary.. by alanh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do a search on the Rayleigh criterion as it pertains to optical telescopes. Take, for example, the 200" (5.8 m) telescope on Mount Palomar. Under optimal conditions, it has a resolution of about 0.2 arcseconds. Put it up in LEO at, say 200 miles, and that would be an equivalent of about 1.6 inches on the ground. The HST with it's 2.4 m mirror would be about 3 inches.

    Unless they're doing some fancy stuff with multiple satellites, the HST's resolution is about the limit of what you can expect with optical telescopes.

    --
    - AlanH