Phoenix Mars Lander concerns

[willpittenger]

* PML is to use the same landing system blamed for MPL's failure. Hopefully the bugs are fixed prior to launch this time.<br /><br />* PML is **not** a rover and can not move from site to site. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[chew_on_this]

I thought it was they misjudged the thickness of the atmosphere so the lander came in hot (so to speak).

 

[henryhallam]

No descent data so I don't think anybody knows for sure... but IIRC the investigation determined the most likely cause to be an incorrectly set software flag which was supposed to be raised when an accelerometer detected touchdown, and would then cause the descent engine to shut off. However the accelerometer triggered this flag after a jolt as the landing gear was deployed, and the flag was not subsequently cleared like it should have been. So as soon as the software began monitoring the flag (some time in the last minute or so of the descent) it detected a false touchdown and shut the engine off while the spacecraft was still quite a long way off the ground.<br /><br />IF that was indeed the problem then it has been fixed for Phoenix.

 

[revolutionary]

One of the concerns that seems most distressing are efforts to insure that the Phoenix doesn't contaminate Mars with any microbial lifeform from Earth.<br /><br />Any experiment that would prove the capability for any earth organism to survive and thrive on Mars should be a welcomed one. Biocontamination concerns should be disregarded entirely.

 

[JonClarke]

So you have no interest in discovering whether or not Mars has indigenous life and do not believe that life should be protected? <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[revolutionary]

Jon,<br /><br />Thats a funny way of putting it. Testing Mar's capability for sustaining organisms is essential not only in forming terraformation strategies, but would also confirm the possibility that life can exist on Mars.<br /><br />If man ever does land on Mars, you can imagine that Astronauts would venture to the robotic sites, were one of these sites properly seeded, these Astronauts would have a site for studying the growth rate, migration, and evolution of life on Mars.

 

[JonClarke]

There are two issues here.<br /><br />First, the Phoenix mission is designed to look for evidence of life, past or present, on Mars. It's instruments are highly sensitive. Thus it must be cleaned and sterilized to a very high level to ensure that they are not contaminated by terrestrial materials and organisms that would give false readings. This is called level V protection<br /><br />Secondly, the surface of Mars needs to be protected against inadvertent contamination by terrestrial organisms. This is applies to those missions which are not designed specifically to test life (such as the MERs), this is called level IV protection.<br /><br />the last thing that astrobiologists want at this stage is even a small change of uncontrolled introduction of terrestrial organisms to Mars where they might endanger native organisms and confuse research through false postives. That is why the proetectional protocols have been in place since the 60's.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[mogster]

Once humans go to Mars surely contamination with terrestrial bacteria will be unavoidable. <br /><br />Of course its important to sterilise everything we send now though.<br /><br />

 

[willpittenger]

No terraforming of any type should be allowed until we know why Mars is like is. You might be wasting your efforts until we understand more thoroughly what happened to the Mars biosphere. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

My excuses in advance, but I feel I must indulge myself in a rant....<br /><br />Well, it looks like the manned flight freaks (space cadets?) rear their ugly collective head. Its one thing to endorse sending manned flights to Mars to increase exploration. Quite another to say that contaminating Mars with Earth organisms is inconsequential, or even helpfull!!!!<br /><br />If I seem a bit worked up its because a lot of the manned flight proponents are ANTI-SCIENCE!!! They would just as soon cancel ALL the science missions to have the money to build their precious, neato spaceplane. They would spew Earth organisms over Mars to 'pave the way for human colonization'. This may be a ridiculous plan, but it illustrates the mindset: Human colonisation of Mars above all -- especially above science. Human spaceflight above all -- especially above science. I can't abide by the space cadets, they are ANTI-SCIENCE. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[revolutionary]

centsworth, I'm beginning to wonder whether or not your comments were directed towards me. <br /><br />Science can not be conducted with observation alone, experimentation is part of the process. Experimental testing will eventually be conducted on the ability of earth-based organisms to survive on Mars. Eventually, you're going to have to compensate for very real effects of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.<br /><br />The space-cadets are capable of doing by far, the most valuable science as it applies to the people's needs in space. The best science is the science that chronicles & enables humanity's colonization of space. It is science that enables human colonization of Mars, and space. Science is a tool, nothing more nothing less. <br /><br />Designating astral bodies as "wildlife preserves" is ludicrous and hinders progressive scientific research. Monitoring the evolution and activities of "Earth Life" on Mars is itself a scientific endeavor worthy of pursuing. Developing means of habitation, and studying terraformation techniques will be essential tools for future generations.

 

[gunsandrockets]

" I can't abide by the space cadets, they are ANTI-SCIENCE. "<br /><br />If you felt a rant coming on you should have counted to ten and not posted anything at all. And instead of throwing around accusations willy-nilly, like a person who throws a bomb into a crowd of people, you should have had the courage to directly confront whoever you are really attacking via private message.

 

[qso1]

centsworth_II:<br />Well, it looks like the manned flight freaks (space cadets?) rear their ugly collective head....<br /><br />Me:<br />I consider myself to be a proponent of manned flight to Mars...a space cadet as you call us.<br /><br />Issue 1:<br />I fully support any reasonable effort to protect the Martian biosphere from earthly contamination. If for no other reason, to minimize the chance of a false positive indication of life.<br /><br />Issue 2:<br />I also support scientific investigation of the planet. How else will we shed light on how Mars came to be the way it is now? The difference between human and robotic advocates is that more meaninful science can be accomplished in a shorter timeline with humans present, as there are certain things robots cannot do at least for the foreseeable future.<br /><br />Issue 3:<br />I'm pretty sure most humans to Mars advocates are not this anti science. They know that science has to be part of the mission. Only a simplistic moron would advocate sending humans to Mars to essentially do nothing other than walk and plant flags. A precious neato spaceplane? We did try to develop a spaceplane for LEO, not for Mars (Unless your referring to Mars glider proposals which included scientific tasks). The purpose of which was to provide lower cost access to LEO. Government proved they were not up to the job of providing low cost LEO access. Had this spaceplane been built and lived up to the promise of low cost access, science missions to Mars would have benefited by having the cost of getting them to LEO cut substantially.<br /><br />And so...who are these space cadets?<br /><br />And also, what are your reasons for being anti humans to Mars? And thats my rant LOL. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Any bacteria that can do without oxygen might do well if they can handle the cold and air pressure. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"centsworth, I'm beginning to wonder whether or not your comments were directed towards me."</font><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br />Your comment about contaminating Mars was the last straw, but my rant has been building for some time. Criticism of the Crew Exploration Vehicle because its not cool enough. Criticisms of robot probes which didn't move fast enough, or take pretty enough pictures, or do enough. Probes astounding in their accomplishments, like Huygens and the MERs. It all has been grating on me. My rant was about all that, not just your comment condoning biocontamination of Mars.<br /><br />For a lot of us, the ultimate achievement on Mars would be finding microscopic life. Wether it is found by robot or man is not important. If found, the first question would be, 'is it related to Earth life, and if so, how?'. Both the discovery of life and the answer to that question would be greatly complicated by contamination. <br /><br />When someone jumps over the question of whether there is life on Mars directly to the question of how to introduce Earth life to the benefit of human colonization, it shows either an ignorance of or, worse, a total disregard for those of us with a scientific interest in looking for Mars life. We also would like to see manned missions to Mars -- to look for Mars life, not to seed Mars with Earth life. Therein lies our difference.<br /><br />Of course humans will carry microbes with them to Mars, its unavoidable. But those microbes need not contaminate crutial areas, specifically the underground. I don't believe any microbe, earthly or martian, can (much) survive the surface of Mars. So the essential is to prevent contamination of the bore holes that will be drilled into Mars to look for life. This will require a great deal of care, not a 'so what' attitude.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"If you felt a rant coming on you should have counted to ten and not posted anything at all.... you should have had the courage to directly confront whoever you are really attacking via private message."</font><br /><br />If only you knew how often I delete rather than post my comments.<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I was attacking an attitude more than a specific person or persons. And I want to do it publicly because I hope to make readers of this thread see the difference between the vision of space cowboys on Mars and that of scientists on Mars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"And so...who are these space cadets?</font><br /><br />I didn't coin the term, but as I used it, they are those to whom humans living on Mars is an end in and of itself. Someone (hypothetically) can get excited about the prospect of humans living on Mars without caring one wit about science. As someone who cares about science this bothers me.<br /><br />I wouldn't call you a space cadet, not in a purjorative way. A recent hero of mine, Steve Squyres, would like to see human exploration of mars. Another hero, in the small world of SDC, Jon Clarke, would also like that. But I'm sure they don't endorse the 'throw it on Mars and see what happens' approach.<br /><br />I agree with your points one and two. My argument is with those who see no need for point one and my fear is that there is no money, given our realities, to address point number two.<br /><br />As to point three, I hope you're right that those who would sent people to Mars just to have people on mars are few. Although in a vote I guess I'll take them over those who don't want to send people to Mars for any reason!<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />My concerns about space plane dreams are mostly financial. There is no money, so don't waste my time complaining about not having it. The CEV is the best we are going to get now.(Talking to an imaginary space cadet, not you.)<br /><br />NASA yealy budget...16 billion for manned AND unmanned missions<br />Iraq war per year......100 billion<br /><br />Just putting things in perspective, don't want to start a freespace debate.<br /><br />P.S. I'd LOVE to see human exploration of Mars. But there's that darn money issue. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

"I was attacking an attitude more than a specific person or persons. And I want to do it publicly because I hope to make readers of this thread see the difference between the vision of space cowboys on Mars and that of scientists on Mars."<br /><br />Your self-admitted rant, which was arrogant and insulting, accomplished nothing except lowering the level of discourse.

 

[qso1]

At the heart of that problem was a mixup in use of metric and english systems. This I would hope has been corrected as it was a relatively easy fix. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[nibb31]

"Designating astral bodies as "wildlife preserves" is ludicrous and hinders progressive scientific research. "<br /><br />When you want to study a wildlife preserve, you dont charge in with an army of SUVs, honking their horns and littering the place with your trash. Not if you want to come home with any valuable observations.<br /><br />If you want to study the possibility of life on Mars, you don't want to bring your own bacteria that could:<br />1) Contaminate your own observations<br />2) Have a negative impact on any local lifeforms<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[lbiderman]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>At the heart of that problem was a mixup in use of metric and english systems. This I would hope has been corrected as it was a relatively easy fix. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Actually, that problem was the one that the Mars Climate Observer had, someone confused the measure system and sent the spacecraft to a lower orbit than intended, plunging it into a burn in the atmosphere.

 

[qso1]

If memory serves me, the same problem occured on MPL because as I recall, the engine switched off too early because one or the other system was used as the altitude cutoff trigger which caused the lander to fall.<br /><br />Guess I'll have to research it to see exactly what caused it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

No, MPL did not suffer from a metric/imperial confusion. The problem there was that the jettison of the backshell produced enough of a jolt to trigger the touchdown sensors. A fatal design oversight, basically. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>When you want to study a wildlife preserve, you dont charge in with an army of SUVs, honking their horns and littering the place with your trash. Not if you want to come home with any valuable observations. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />That's an excellent analogy.<br /><br />Personally, I want to get people on Mars. Humans still greatly outperform robots in many respects. While the rovers can operate on the surface for much longer, humans will make much better use of the time they have on the surface. The time delay is a major factor. But humans are very expensive to send, so in the meantime, I want robots on Mars. My short term objectives for Mars are scientific. Long-term, I'd like to see mankind colonize other worlds to get our eggs out of one basket, but really, that's so long-term it's not really worth planning for it at this stage, in my opinion. We're not ready. But we are ready to do some serious science. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Well said!<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>