Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Curiosity Rover Arrives At Long-Term Destination

Posted by Soulskill on from the now-kicking-back-and-relaxing dept.

When NASA's Curiosity rover landed on Mars, the mission team had a particular destination in mind: Mount Sharp. Just over two years and about nine kilometers of driving later, Curiosity has arrived at Mount Sharp. It will now begin its ascent of the mountain (PDF), first analyzing basal rocks with a "paintbrush" texture, then moving further to observe hematite-bearing rocks further up the slope. It will then proceed into an area laden with clay-bearing rocks, and finally to the upper reaches of the foothills, which contain rocks with magnesium sulfate in them. The team has selected routes and driving modes that they hope will slow the steadily accumulating damage to the rover's wheels.

18 of 33 comments (clear)

  1. Knee-jerk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Days after being excoriated for essentially failing at their primary science mission, NASA announces it arrives at Mt. Sharp despite being several miles from the actual mountain.

    1. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Excoriated?
      "All extended missions were rated higher than "Good""

    2. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people." - Socrates

    3. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by Teresita · · Score: 2

      There's no sharp boundary between the plain and Mt. Sharp.

    4. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by pz · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Excoriated?

      "All extended missions were rated higher than "Good""

      Excoriated --- here are a few choice excerpts (there was some positive language, but the panel really did come down hard in this report):

      "The panel viewed this as a poor science return for such a large investment in a flagship mission."

      "Despite identification of two EM1 science objectives, the proposal lacked specific scientific questions to be answered, testable hypotheses, and proposed measurements and assessment of uncertainties and limitations."

      "It was unclear from both the proposal and presentation that the Prime Mission science goals had been met. In fact, it was unclear what exactly these were. "

      "After the presentation and subsequent discussion within the panel during executive session, other questions were formulated and then presented to the Curiosity team. Unfortunately the lead Project Scientist was not present in person for the Senior Review presentation and was only available via phone. Additionally, he was not present for the second round of Curiosity questions from the panel. This left the panel with the impression that the team felt they were too big to fail and that simply having someone show up would suffice. The panel strongly urges NASA HQ to get the Curiosity team focused on maximizing high-quality science that justifies the capabilities of and capital investment in Curiosity."

      "As Curiosity is a flagship mission, the panel was surprised by the lack of science in the EM1 proposal ..."

      "In summary, the Curiosity EM1 proposal lacked scientific focus and detail."

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    5. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by AJWM · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "the proposal lacked specific scientific questions to be answered, testable hypotheses, and proposed measurements and assessment of uncertainties and limitations."

      Sounds like the report was written by physicists, not geologists or biologists.

      I figure "we're going to look around, crack open a few rocks and do some chemical analyses to see what's there" is pretty good science.

      On the other hand I also wonder why in almost 40 years nobody has yet tried repeating the labeled-release experiment on Viking which tested positive per the pre-mission criteria for signs of life.

      --
      -- Alastair
    6. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      That would suggest they redefined the boundary after the criticism came out, like a politician would.

      Actually, I've read they were getting fairly close before the critical report even came out.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    7. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

      On the other hand I also wonder why in almost 40 years nobody has yet tried repeating the labeled-release experiment on Viking which tested positive per the pre-mission criteria for signs of life.

      That's not exactly the way it turned out. The test got some major initial results when it was applied than nothing. The results from Viking fit the parameters of a very reactive and toxic surface, not for the presence of life, either archival or extent.

    8. Re:Knee-jerk reaction by AJWM · · Score: 1

      It still met the pre-mission criteria for life. That the other experiments gave confusing results was a contributing factor to wondering if those criteria were correct.

      There's some indication that those other experiments weren't sensitive enough to detect life signs even in Earth soil samples from places like the Atacama desert in Chile.

      In 2003, a team of researchers published a report in the journal Science in which they duplicated the tests used by the Viking 1 and Viking 2 Mars landers to detect life, and were unable to detect any signs in Atacama Desert soil.[21] The region may be unique on Earth in this regard and is being used by NASA to test instruments for future Mars missions. The team duplicated the Viking tests in Mars-like Earth environments and found that they missed present signs of life in soil samples from Antarctic dry valleys, the Atacama Desert of Chile and Peru, and other locales.

      In 2008, the Phoenix Mars Lander detected perchlorates on the surface of Mars at the same site where water was first discovered.[23] Perchlorates are also found in the Atacama and associated nitrate deposits have contained organics, leading to speculation that signs of life on Mars are not incompatible with perchlorates.

      (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...)

      And speaking of perchlorates and the Viking biology experiments:

      On 2006, scientist Rafael Navarro demonstrated that the Viking biological experiments likely lacked sensitivity to detect trace amounts of organic compounds.[36] On a paper published in December 2010,[25] the scientists suggest that if organics were present, they would not have been detected because when the soil is heated to check for organics, perchlorate destroys them rapidly producing chloromethane and dichloromethane, which is what the Viking landers found.

      (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...)

      --
      -- Alastair
  2. 2 years and nine kilometers... by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    So the rover is driving 2.8 miles per year.

    Obviously used to DC Traffic.

    1. Re:2 years and nine kilometers... by Richy_T · · Score: 2

      I hear it was being driven by an 80 year old Floridian.

      Apparently it had its right-turn indicator on all the way.

    2. Re:2 years and nine kilometers... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      DC traffic: bumper-to-bumper with lobbyists. Joy. I'd rather be on Mars.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  3. Awww! by ian_mackereth · · Score: 1

    Rover gets to his forebber home!

  4. Re:Call the Auto Club! by Tablizer · · Score: 1, Funny

    Your club is known as a Clue Stick.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  5. Spices. We sent you to find spices. by pupsocket · · Score: 1

    Not potatoes and gold.

  6. Re:Call the Auto Club! by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

    The rocks are damaging the wheels?

    Call the auto club and have them fix it.

    Does Curiosity have a club card?

    Flamebait?
    Overrated?
    Offtopic?

    Someone really has a hard on for this stupid buggy. Can't even let a couple jokes about it go.

    --
    If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
  7. Re:Call the Auto Club! by used2win32 · · Score: 1

    Ugg.... It was an attempt at humor using the "Big Bang Theory" episode where Howard gets the Mars rover stuck and Sheldon make a comment/joke about the auto club fixing it. He joked how you have to be standing next to the vehicle with the auto club card in hand. You can see it on episode eight of season two.

    --
    Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.
  8. Re:Call the Auto Club! by used2win32 · · Score: 1

    Ugg.... It was an attempt at humor using the "Big Bang Theory" episode where Howard gets the Mars rover stuck and Sheldon make a comment/joke about the auto club fixing it. He joked how you have to be standing next to the vehicle with the auto club card in hand.

    You can see it on episode eight of season two.

    --
    Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.