Mars Rover Finds Unusual Rocks at 'Home Plate'

An anonymous reader writes "After several months of driving nearly a kilometer, the Mars Rover Spirit has reached the semicircular plateau dubbed 'Home Plate' in Gusev Crater and has unearthed a puzzle. Spirit first got a good view of Home Plate in late August from 'Husband Hill'. The layered appearance is unlike anything yet seen by the rovers."

Comments

Late Breaking News:

[TripMaster Monkey]

Outrage and disgust swept through the community today as the Council of Elders confirmed the rumours that one of the mechanized invaders from the sinister blue planet third from our star has defiled one of our holiest landmarks.

Recently declassified vision-waves from the elite team of warriors dispatched to track the invader's progress clearly shows the horrible automaton stretching out its spindly claw towards the Tracks Of The Founder, a most sacred site for G'loshnaks and Z'treems alike.

K'Breel, Speaker for the Council, stressed yet again that there was no cause for alarm:

"I assure you, this assault upon our holy sites will not go unpunished. For descrecrating the most holy Tracks Of The Founder, a site that no one is even permitted to look upon, the disgusting inhabitants of the Evil Blue Planet have forefited any possibility of mercy. The brave warriors who reported this outrage are even now ritualistically puncturing their gelsacs for inadvertently gazing upon the holy site, and their ichor will not spill in vain!"

When asked if citizens who viewed the sacrilige via the declassified vision-wave would also be required to satisfy the honor of the Founder by ritualistic gelsac puncture, K'breel replied,

"No, the Council of Elders has decreed that a light scourging will suffice. If you have witnessed this horrible act via the declassified vision-wave, please report to your nearest purification center immediately.

Keeps going, and going, and going...

[salemnic]

I'm simply amazed that this thing keeps moving. What was the original life expectancy? 3 months? How longs has it been going now? 2 years?

Unbelievable.

Yay engineers! Yay Science! Yay School!

s

Re:Keeps going, and going, and going...

[a803redman]

Yet I can't keep my car running for more than a few weeks. Damn you Honda!!!

Re:Keeps going, and going, and going...

[INeededALogin]

Simply amazing only because they advertised the bare minimum/worst case scenario as the life expectancy. Honestly, NASA couldn't chance another failure so they played it safe.

This is a machine... a very well built one. The fact that both are running just shows that many of the NASA assumptions were incorrect, such as how well a machine would function on the surface, the effects of the varying temperature on components and the overall dependability of a machine.

We should be thinking of the 3 months number as nothing more than a warranty. The engineers(whoever they were) gave a conservative number that these things would run for 3 months. Just as car makers give me a 2-3 year warranty, I still expect my car to work well after that warranty is up.

Anyways, it is amazing, but demonstrates a problem with goverment research projects and the importance of a tangible success/failure as opposed to just saying, it will run until it stops and we will collect as much data as possible. This is also the same problem with Hubble. While Hubble gives us tons of useful scientific research, it is a project without an end and without a tangible success to be stamp on a piece of paper to justify all those tax payers money. (Man... where did this rant come from:-/)

Re:Keeps going, and going, and going...

[TheSkepticalOptimist]

Actually, I think they just dramatically underestimated their performance and life cycle.

Lets face it, Nasa hasn't had a lot of success as of late. If they sent a couple of rovers to Mars and suggested they would last 3 years, and then they died 2 days into the mission, it would be egg on Nasa's face. Instead, they said the rovers had a 3 month life expectancy, and everyone is slapping Nasa on the back after 2 years into the mission. I think Nasa purposely make the 3 months comment just to reap the benefits of finally having a successful mission to mars.

Nasa over designs things, so I was dubious when they said the Mars rovers would only last 3 months. Barring any significant dust or wind storms, there is no reason why the rovers should not have lasted this long if they are solar powered and reasonably well engineered.

What is unbelievable is that Nasa designed something that didn't f*ck up in the first 3 months, or even on landing. But I would take the whole "only designed for a 3 month mission" with a big spoon full of sugar, internally the rovers were probably designed to last a decade. Your car would last a century if some company put 800+ million into creating it, I would expect the same from a couple of 400 million dollar platforms with wheels on them. Remember, the mars rovers we over budget and delayed, so lowering expectations is Nasa's typical method for covering up budget overruns and delays. Once something demonstrates apparently unexpected success, everybody forgets about the price tag.

Re:Keeps going, and going, and going...

[vsprintf]

Instead, they said the rovers had a 3 month life expectancy, and everyone is slapping Nasa on the back after 2 years into the mission. I think Nasa purposely make the 3 months comment just to reap the benefits of finally having a successful mission to mars.

Then you would be wrong. The 3-month designed life expectancy is the period it takes to accomplish the mission's primary goals. If the primary goals are accomplished, the mission is a success, if not it is considered a failure. Anything after that is gravy. Generally, mission operations are initially approved/funded only for the designed life expectancy, and any operations after that requires additional approval and funding. Try to remember that the satellite in space or a rover on another planet is only a part of a mission's costs.

Barring any significant dust or wind storms, there is no reason why the rovers should not have lasted this long if they are solar powered and reasonably well engineered.

Stuff happens. Like when they unexpectedly found what appeared to be saline mud under the rover wheels that certainly weren't designed for it. Supposedly, the Titanic was "reasonably well engineered", and we had far more experience with ship building at the time than we do now with building semi-autonomous exploration vehicles for other planets.

What is unbelievable is that Nasa designed something that didn't f*ck up in the first 3 months, or even on landing.

Over twenty years ago, NASA launched a satellite with a 3-year mission. There have been 13 points of failure, but thanks to built in redundancy, some clever engineers, and the ability to reprogram (for lack of a better term) the craft, it is still doing its job. Some years back NASA sent up a satellite with an experimental sensor and a 1-year maximum mission. Due to scientific interest in the data being returned, it is still flying after more than 5 years although it is out of fuel. First, you claim NASA over-engineered the rovers and then claim that NASA can't engineer anything in the first place.

Your car would last a century if some company put 800+ million into creating it, I would expect the same from a couple of 400 million dollar platforms with wheels on them.

The actual cost of the vehicle is a small part of the mission cost. The satellite I just mentioned was built for under $500,000, while the cost of the mission has been much greater. Royal Caribbean is building a cruise ship for over a billion dollars. Even with people to service and repair it, I doubt it will still be sailing cruises in 100 years (and that doesn't include operations costs as long as we're comparing cruise ships to Mars rovers).

At home plate...

[mcsestretch]

Next up, the rover will extend its probe into home plate. If rebuffed at third base, the rover will revert back to trying to get under home plate's sweater.

/So sorry.
//Couldn't resist.
///Slashies are fun.

Insensitive Clod!

[Anonymous Coward]

has unearthed a puzzle

That's unmarsed a puzzle. Typical terran bias.

What a relief!

[MrFlibbs]

Just imagine if they'd found a set of wickets instead of home plate? Then we'd all be in danger from planet Krikkit!

Sediment?

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

I'm no geologist, by those layered rocks look like some kind of sendiment formation to me. Which would make sense if mars had water bodies of some kind.

Then again they could just be volcanic rocks.

Can any of Slashdot's resident geologists solve this mystery in three of less posts?

Looks like sedimentary rock to me.

[TheZorch]

ObsessiveMathsFreak has it right. That is fossilized sedimentary rock. You can find it all over places like China where several feathered dinosaurs were found recently directly linking dinos with birds.

Anyway, if there is at all a chance of proving that Mars might have once harbored life THIS IS THE PLACE to look. Because its within sedimentary rock that you find the greatest proliferation of fossils. Any self-respecting paleo-geek can tell you that.

Re:Looks like sedimentary rock to me.

[gEvil (beta)]

I disagree. While the rocks do have the appearance of a striated laminate, there are enough layer thickness inconsistences visible over very short distances that this may not be the case. You can get similar visible features from magma and volcanic flows. Also, some very serious uplift and tilting has occurred (the layers are visible along a horizontal surface) At this point, it's difficult to even pinpoint it down to which of the three major rock types it is (igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic) without chemical and microscopic analysis. You certainly can't tell from a series of black and white pictures. Which is exactly why there's debate about this among even the experts.

In all fairness

[edremy]

If you read Squyres' book, he knew that 90 days was totally doable, but wasn't sure about much longer. The original plan was for 30 days, but he figured they couldn't get any science at all in that short a time and they needed funding for at least 90. Dust buildup on the solar panels was going to cripple the rovers quickly since they couldn't figure out a good way to clean the panels.

They never expected the Martians to clean the panels off periodically. (Dust devils, actually) Check out some of the recent photos- the panels are amazingly clean, far better than they ever hoped. Even so, the rovers aren't in good shape- Spirit has no teeth left on the RAT and has several steering motors with issues, Opportunity has major problems with it's robotic arm and how the mini-TES is still working without nighttime heat is unknown.