Mars Rover's Epic Trek For the Crater Endeavor

Smivs writes "The BBC reports that NASA is to send its Mars rover Opportunity on a two-year trek to try to reach a crater called Endeavour. The robot will have to move about 11km to get to its new target — a distance that would double what it has already achieved on the planet. Endeavour is much bigger than anything investigated to date, and will allow a broader range of rocks to be studied. Detailed satellite imagery from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter will help pick out the best route ahead; and new software recently uploaded to Opportunity will enable the rover to make its own decisions about how best to negotiate large rocks in its path. Opportunity has just emerged from the 800m-wide Victoria Crater. Endeavour, by comparison, is 22km across."

Comments

11 km

[adpsimpson]

That's about 11,000 inches, right? Shouldn't take that long.

Re:11 km

[FreeUser]

or 32 microts

Re:11 km

[AliasMarlowe]

It's 11 km om Mars, so we should use astronomical units: almost 360 femtoparsecs.

Re:11 km

[mbone]

Parsecs are old hat. It's 36.8 microseconds (of light travel time).

Re:11 km

[pzs]

There should seriously be a moderation tag for "sarcasm impaired".

Re:11 km

[Gewalt]

There really should be a moderation tag for "most people aren't nearly as funny, or as obvious as they think they are".

No, it really was funny and obvious. You're just not nearly as sharp, or as bright as you think you are.

Re:11 km

[arielCo]

That's 100.248 football fields in PopSci units :)

Re:11 km

[Whiteox]

Nope. 11,000 metres

Re:11 km

[Comboman]

There really should be a moderation tag for "most people aren't nearly as funny, or as obvious as they think they are".

Funny is admittedly somewhat subjective, but any Slashdot reader interested enough in Mars exploration to read this article would no doubt be familiar with the Mars Climate Orbiter and the error involving conversion of metric units that caused its failure; so I would call the joke fairly obvious.

Re:11 km

[paniq]

Those of us with an username.

Re:11 km

[SenseiLeNoir]

I did smile at the joke, but I still have a lot of admiration for NASA. I am a brit, and yes I was disappointed when the Beagle 2 probe was lost.

However, I still remember as a kid, I used to be awed with NASA, and its space shuttle launches, etc. As a child it was what I associated America with: space, advancing to new frontiers, etc, and NASA usually was the center of my aspirations. I used to dream of being on a Shuttle, and often felt jealous (in a positive way) for what our friends across the pond was up to.

In recent years, and recent news, which unfortunately put the USA in a poor light amongst some, NASA with their exploits brought back some memories about why I aspired towards America; that "can do attitude".

Sure they have messed up, at times. but space exploration is like that. Their successes usually are just as great.

These rovers were built to run for 3 months. They are running for on their fifth year now. Absolutely amazing!

The official reason of how they underestimated the abilities for the wind to clean the sensors, may be correct, but in this day and age, where items are engineered to last their intended lifespan, whoever designed these things still didnt "cheap out" on the rest of the vehicle.

These are not cheap little radio controlled dune buggy models for use on earth, but self maintaining vehicles that for nearly 5 years have operated in a hostile, largely unknown environment with no physical attention!

So hats off to NASA and JPL. And god speed on the new mission. And thanks for giving this older man a thing something to smile about in these times of drab news.

Re:11 km

[ArsonSmith]

It's an estimate right now. They're not sure where the Endeavor crater will actually be. Once Atlantis does the rescue mission Endeavor will be redirected to mars in order to create it's crater.

Re:11 km

[Sporkinum]

Maybe you've heard of it. It's the rover that made the Endeavor run in less than 360 femtoparsecs.

Amazing

[Amiralul]

Godspeed, Opportunity!
Remember that Opportunity and Spirit are on their 5th year on the Martian surface. Their mission were initially planned to last no more than 3 months. Bravo!

Re:Amazing

[Amiralul]

Godspeed, Opportunity! Remember that Opportunity and Spirit are on their 5th year on the Martian surface. Their mission were initially planned to last no more than 3 months. Bravo!

Oops, read that "4th year", my apologies.

Re:Amazing

[ArcherB]

Godspeed, Opportunity!

Remember that Opportunity and Spirit are on their 5th year on the Martian surface. Their mission were initially planned to last no more than 3 months. Bravo!

So either the rovers are overachievers or we just set their goals WAY too low!

I guess they are taking a page from Scotty's manual.

KIRK: Mr. Scott. Have you always multiplied your repair estimates by a factor of four?

SCOTTY: Certainly, sir. How else can I keep my reputation as a miracle worker?

Re:Amazing

[mlush]

So either the rovers are overachievers or we just set their goals WAY too low!

I guess they are taking a page from Scotty's manual.

Its both as I understand it the big win was the martian wind kept the solar panels cleaner than expected, it was dust build up (and thus power loss) that was expected to kill the mssion

Re:Amazing

[GeordieMac]

actually a better mechanism would be to use compressed atmosphere to blast the dust away. Wipers have more points of failure and would likely abrade the surface of the solar panels, permanently reducing the efficiency fo the cells.

Re:Amazing

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you on it is an amazing feat for them to have lasted this long my issue is with how old these robots are getting up there why risk a risky two year voyage over a distance of about 6.8 miles to get to a creator that is 13 Miles wide and will take another couple of years to explore and probably end up causing a catastrophic failure of Opportunity to me this is a complete miss use of the opportunity they have with a functioning robot up there yet the functionality they have built into these robots donâ(TM)t give them too many more things to-do but explore
I also agree with you on this amazing feat for you to be able to have such an enourmous run on sentence with no punctuation whatsoever even though it seems like a risky voyage over all of those keystrokes just to get to the submit button to wait and see if your content got posted or if you got the slow down cowboy screen and then you have to wait for a while and just stare at the ceiling until you can submit again but back to the rovers I too hope they don't have a catastrophic failure when it goes to the new crater but hey what else can you do since it has explored everything else in the area that it is in and it might as well go someplace new to see something else because it isn't the destination but rather the journey

Re:Amazing

[ctetc007]

Compressor + storage = weight + power drain

Same goes for the wiper idea too. Adding any kind of cleaning mechanism adds more weight, and I'm guessing a trade study done on this deemed the estimated extended life to not be worth the added weight (fewer scientific tools).
It's also not a good idea to count on the Martian wind being there either, because what happens if you get unlucky and are in an area of doldrums? The best course of action is to plan for the worst (3 month mission), but have the capability to continue on if you get a good windfall like that.

Re:Amazing

[ctetc007]

don't give them too many more things to-do but explore

That's what Opportunity is doing. It's will be exploring the crater. Along the way Opportunity will also be studying the soil and terrain it encounters while it's making it's trek to the crater.

I the JPL scientists were planning for Opportunity to explore whatever's available, but they didn't want it to just randomly wander whichever way it wanted to. Instead, they decided to give it an exploration trek. They will be exploring the environment, and at the end of the endeavor, it will end up at Endeavor Crater. The crater was the next thing over, the closest thing of great scientific interest that made a good destination for its continuing mission...
To explore strange new worlds. To seek out new life, and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before.

Let's hope the motors hold out.

[mbone]

Opportunity saw its first electrical spike in one of its motors recently - the same problem that has basically crippled Spirit.

This was described (8 paragraphs down) in this press release. That's why they got out of Victoria Crater post haste.

Of course, the terrain in Meridiani Planum is much more navigable than Gustav Crater, so even if they do lose a motor, they may still be able to make progress.

Re:Let's hope the motors hold out.

[mapsjanhere]

This is a suicide mission, NASA wanted to shut down the rovers years ago, and the public outcry repeatedly stopped it. Now, if the rover goes on a 2 year drive and dies, what a poor little heroic guy, finally succumbed to the elements.
And NASA gets to free all the funds to build newer and bigger and better and ...
Don't forget, these are the guys that canceled the last Apollo missions for the fuel bill; they already had the rockets, trained astronauts and everything else in place.

Re:Let's hope the motors hold out.

[mbone]

Oh, and given that there was never any plans to get the rovers back, this was always a "suicide" mission.

But you are right, JPL will keep running these until they physically fail.

Re:Let's hope the motors hold out.

[khallow]

Don't forget, these are the guys that canceled the last Apollo missions for the fuel bill; they already had the rockets, trained astronauts and everything else in place.

And the money to pay the army that would be needed to build and run the missions. Ending Saturn was a good move. The rocket was too expensive. Replacing it with the Space Shuttle though was one of the worst mistakes NASA ever did.

Re:Let's hope the motors hold out.

[ctetc007]

It may be true that this specific mission seems a bit suicidal, but what else are you going to do with it? Nothing? The rover was meant to run until it died, and this seems like as good a cause to die for as any.

The rover isn't just going on a boring 2 year long road trip, it's also exploring the rocks and terrain along the way. Even if it doesn't reach its destination, the trek will still be of scientific value.

Opportunity proves it:

[paniq]

studying ... rocks!

ok, maybe only studying ... rocks ... rocks.

If you get an ... opportunity.

Allright I stop, I'm killing myself.

Re:Opportunity proves it:

[ArcherB]

studying ... rocks!

ok, maybe only studying ... rocks ... rocks.

If you get an ... opportunity.

Allright I stop, I'm killing myself.

That's the Spirit

Re:Opportunity proves it:

[strabes]

I think this humor Endeavour has been unsuccessful.

Re:Opportunity proves it:

[paniq]

We're just cratering to our audience. :/

Re:Opportunity proves it:

[NightRain]

Make the pain stop!

Re:Opportunity proves it:

[strabes]

I have to admit, the Opportunity was fairly large.

A case for manned exploration

[blind biker]

A human would take no more than a few hours to get there, on foot, much less with some vehicle. And would be able to do much more and diverse probings and experiments. And let's not forget that in those 2 years, the rover has a very high likelihood to break down.

So while human exploration of Mars may be expensive, it is probably much cheaper when comparing results.

I know the /. crowd has a strong, somewhat irrational animosity towards manned exploration. So I'll burn some karma, big deal :o)

Re:A case for manned exploration

[oldspewey]

irrational animosity towards manned exploration

Leaving aside - for now - the part where a human mission to Mars is almost certainly a suicide mission, if you want to make the case that other people are irrational your best bet is probably to present your own rational ideas for a fully-costed human mission, including all the associated life-support requirements both in transit and once on the surface.

Then we can compare your ideas against the cost of the Spirit and Opportunity missions

Re:A case for manned exploration

[gstoddart]

A human would take no more than a few hours to get there, on foot, much less with some vehicle. And would be able to do much more and diverse probings and experiments. And let's not forget that in those 2 years, the rover has a very high likelihood to break down.

Well, we'd never have been able to put people there nearly as cheaply, or for nearly as long. We haven't solved the problems of getting people in space for long enough for the journey, keeping them alive, feeding them, and having them inhabit the surface of a strange planet without any real support.

The rovers have been absolute bargain in terms of the cost for the science achieved. And, they give us a lot of the basic information we need to know if we're ever going to put humans there. The value vs cost of the these rovers is not something you can characterize as expensive for what we get -- the initial mission was, what $300 million or so?

I think until we can overcome an incredible amount of technical hurdles, the rovers are still a good idea. Of course, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying to develop some of the stuff we'll need for manned missions. Likely we'll need to work on some closer missions and return to the moon before we try to get to Mars in my opinion -- that'll at least let us try to sort out the really big challenges.

Cheers

Re:A case for manned exploration

[Shotgun]

I don't care to read the book, but I will give you rational, plausible, budgeted and non-suicidal. "Justified"...now that is where our parlay will break down. Justified, like art, is in the eye of the beholder and often requires some selling to get the justificatee to agree (yes, I just made up that word). One way of thinking of it is that justification isn't a property of an object, but is something that is done to it.

The only justification I've seen is an effort for Mars missions is to prove that life once existed there. When I was young, the hope was that we'd find some weird alien creepy-crawlies scurrying about. Now the hope is that there is some water that a microscopic lifeform might have once inhabited. The basis for the need of effort is to prove that life can autogenerate anywhere. You may not believe it, but the vast majority of the people who pay taxes respond to this sales job with a great big "Who the f&&k cares?!"

You and I may believe the expense of a manned mission is justified, but we are woefully/painfully outnumbered. That leaves us with one of two options. Sell the manned missions as an escape route from a dying Earth. That puts us in the "OH, NOZ!! We're all gonna' die!" alarmist category. Unless we can point out a REAL viable threat to the Earth, we will soon be marginalized. "There is a 1 in 8 billion chance of a catastrophic asteroid impacting the Earth within the next 1000 years" does not cross the 'valid' hurdle in mind of most people.

The second option is to send cheap probes. People like them because of the gee-whiz features, and they're not expensive enough to cause economic pain. They can also see useful applications for much of the technology involved. The science is slow, but it is progressing. The things we learn from the probes will make a manned mission safer and cheaper, since some possible eventualities will be eliminated and not need to be planned/prepared for.

In short, a manned mission has not been justified, evidenced by the complete lack of support for it. Just look at the tepid response Bush's Mars plan garnered. And I believe half of the positive response was little more than nostalgia for the Space Race heyday. Bush didn't justify the need to expend the resources necessary, and neither has anyone else.

Re:A case for manned exploration

[KeensMustard]

A human would take no more than a few hours to get there, on foot, much less with some vehicle.

You've inadvertently demonstrated the stupidity of your own argument there. If the point is to "travel faster" and vehicles travel faster then humans, why not send a vehicle? And if we have the vehicle, what's the human for? After all, it's not the 1960s. Vehicles don't need humans to steer them.

And would be able to do much more and diverse probings and experiments.

Rubbish. The fact of the matter is, we would get better quality results form observing mars from orbit then from a human on the ground. Any human observation/probing/experiments on Mars will be entirely reliant on instruments to do the measuring, cameras to record, etc. If we are sending the instruments anyway, what do we need the human there for? After all, it's not the 1960s. Instruments no longer require us to be physically present to read them.

And let's not forget that in those 2 years, the rover has a very high likelihood to break down.

So - what? S+O demonstrates clearly that we can engineer well enough to reliably meet the mission objectives - Huygens demonstrates that with a backup system, we can gather results of enormous value even in the event of partial failure.

So while human exploration of Mars may be expensive, it is probably much cheaper when comparing results.

Experience says otherwise. Human activities in space have been expensive boondoggles of little or no scientific value. Robotic missions in space - Galileo, Hubble, Spirit+Opportunity, Voyagers, Cassini/Huygens, beautiful and exciting discoveries that push the boundaries of our experience. Hardly a days passes where one of these missions doesn't give us pause. It's irrational to think we need to physically go ourselves. It's not the 1960s anymore.

On Barsoom, please...

[afc_wimbledon]

That's 18.52 haads - http://www.erblist.com/abg/weightsmeasures.html

Negotiate? Huh?

[kanweg]

"new software recently uploaded to Opportunity will enable the rover to make its own decisions about how best to negotiate large rocks in its path"

What is the origin of that? I can speculate:
1) English origin: Very polite. You just don't go around the corner, you politely ask under what conditions it is allowed. "I beg your pardon, dear corner. Would it be inconvenient to you if we continue our way as indicated by you?
2) American origin: Don't take anything for granted. You may be sued by a corner before you know it. Call your lawyer. He'll do the negotiations. Oh boy, I hope he is tough, as this corner hasn't moved his position since I started talking to and yelling at it.

Bert

Re:More than a suggestion

[gstoddart]

I know that NASA are a bunch of good people, and I know that there are very good reasons for why they do things the way they do.
But PLEASE!!! 2 years to go 11 km? I know that the Rover will stop every now and then to check out soil samples etc, but 2 years???

Dude, it's around 2 feet long and being remotely controlled on a very long time delay and it's, what, several million km's away??

It can only go so far each day before it has to shut down, recharge, and wait for new driving instructions. That usually involves people looking at obstacles and coming up with a series of instructions for it to follow to move forward so it doesn't go crashing into a rock or into an unplanned crater.

It's not like they have detailed maps and a GPS tracking system you can just plug in the coordinates and have the auto-pilot start navigating there. This actually is some pretty challenging stuff.

Remember, they started designing these suckers some time in the 90's, and they've lasted several years longer than expected. Cut them some slack, it's not like your RC 4wd is going to fare very well on Mars or magically solve the control problem of piloting something that far away.

Man, you'd think plopping something onto a whole 'nother planet and navigating it around over fairly big (for the rover) distances was something that wasn't difficult. This falls well into the realm of completely bonus science for a mission which has been completely successful in terms of the engineering goals it did accomplish (and exceed).

Cheers

Lots of pretty picture = good VR

[arthurp]

I think they should make a point of taking a full panoramic image every 10m or so. That way we can add that to the current data on mars and create a *really* nice VR version of that area. Being able to "walk" the same path as Opportunity in VR seems like it is a worthy PR and artistic goal and certainly wouldn't hurt the science of the mission either.

Re:Cleaning the solar cells?

[bishop32x]

NASA has been spending quite a bit of money recently on dust issues. Apparently in low-g situations dust stays suspended in the air for quite some time and consequently develops an static charge. NASA currently has a design for an electromagnetic dust wiper which is basically a array of wires under a surface (like a solar panel) which are electrified in sequence to push the dust around.

There are some issues with power draw and scalability, but my guess is that they will be using some sort of electro-magnetic device to remove dust in upcoming missions.

Re:More than a suggestion

[g-san]

This actually is some pretty challenging stuff.

You make it sound like it's rocket science or something on that level. Sheesh.

Bum Wheel?

[Tablizer]

I thought Opportunity was due to have a bum wheel, like that of Spirit. They've discovered voltage spike patterns that match that of Spirit's wheel before it croaked. This would suggest that Oppy can only go about another mile before the wheel gives. While flat territory may not be a signif problem, Oppy has had problems getting stuck in sand dunes in its area even with good wheels. Getting out of sand traps with a stuck wheel is going to be an interesting challenge.