F
fsm
Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It's off topic, I know, but I wonder how the people who winge about Phoenix will react to MSL?On one hand its has aa very high coolnes factor. Two billion dollar mission, largest Mars lander ever, largest Mars rover ever, first nuclear powered rover, first nuclear lander since Viking, largest rover anywhere since 1972, most sophisticated lab ever, laser beam, neutron beam, movies, Skycrane landing system, etc. etc.On the other hand the expectations are very high. because it is nuclear some people seem to think it has almost no limiations, that it can travel fast and far, has no restrictions as to weather or latitude, nd can work 24 hours a day. the reality is quite different. It is very limited as to where it can land with respect to altitude and latitude, can't work 24 hours a day andd, if it ends up at the southern sites, will have to shut down over winter to conserve heat. Although it may well be faster than the MERs, the highly complex lab means that it will spent most of its time sitting still. So to may not offer much improvement in coverage over the 10 or so metres a day that the MERs did early on. So there is huge potential for disillusioment. Especially if some of the insanely complex equipment does not work as advertised, or gets jammed by grit or a pebble. We could se a lot of whining about NASA incompetence or why MSL was choen over repeat MERs.Jon <br /> Posted by jonclarke</DIV></p><p>I agree with that. Also the reduction in weight of some types of modern instruments could mean an only slightly heavier rover than MER could carry a lot of intrumentation - the original ExoMars rover proposal was only slightly heavier than MER, I understand. The MSL was originally assigned $650 million by National Research Council - it is now destined to top $2 billion. (http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2008/10/msl_commentary.html) </p><p>To be fair to NASA, it is a far more ambitious mission than the MERs, and ExoMars (with some NASA instruments) was pencilled in for 2009, so there were to be two bites at the cherry. </p><p>There is a real danger that if something goes wrong with MSL, NASA could be left with absolutely no functioning Mars missions of any sort by around 2012.. </p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>