Russia planning 2 Mars missions.

[flynn]

<b>Russia planning double assault on Mars</b><br /><i>15:14 24 June 2005 <br />NewScientist.com news service <br />Kelly Young </i><br /><br />Russia is planning two uncrewed Mars missions, according to press reports. <br /><br />The first, in 2009, is a mission to orbit Mars and land on the tiny moon Phobos, where a rover would roam for three years. There, it would collect samples of soil to bring back to Earth – the first ever if successful. The second mission, scheduled for 2015, is to place a lander on the surface of the Red Planet.<br /><br />But Russia has had little success in its Martian missions. Since 1960, Russia, and the Soviet Union before it, has tried to send 17 probes to Mars - only three of those were unqualified successes. <br /><br />The Phobos 1 and 2 missions were dispatched to the Martian moon in 1988, but one failed on the way because of a software error. The other made it into orbit around Mars but a computer glitch prevented it from deploying a lander to Phobos’ surface. Russia’s most recent attempt to conquer the Red Planet was in 1996, when its Mars-96 orbiter did not even get out of Earth orbit.<br /><br />Russia has been working on a Phobos mission for several years, says a report by the UPI press agency. In theory, it should be easier to land on the Martian moons because a probe would only have to move alongside another orbiting object, rather than decelerate rapidly through the planet’s atmosphere. A sample return mission would also use less fuel escaping the tiny gravity of a moon compared to leaving the much larger planet.<br /><br /><b>Kicking up dust</b><br />A further advantage of landing on Phobos is that it is very close to Mars – just 9000 kilometres above the surface. From that vantage point, a spacecraft could also make detailed measurements of Mars. <br /><br />The proximity of Mars means Phobos is likely to have pieces of the planet on it. When large meteorites crash into Mars, they kick up rocks and soil. The finest particles are launched i <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[rogers_buck]

Cool. I hope they have better luck this time...

 

[rybanis]

I dunno, the Russian's record with the Martian Defense System makes ours (USAs) look just great in comparison. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[flynn]

But then if they don't try they won't get anywhere either.<br /><br />I'm sure they have learnt from the previous mistakes, and they could still attract funding and expertise from other sources such as ESA who have Mars Express under their belts now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[luciusverus]

Should be interesting to see how this develops over the next few years..........

 

[henryhallam]

Any thoughts about a manned base on Phobos as a prelude to expeditions to the Martian surface? It would be quite a bit less costly to set up and maintain in terms of dV. You could practice with near-Earth asteroid missions. Once the base on Phobos is established then Mars excursion "dropships" could be developed and shipped out there.

 

[flynn]

I think that could depend alot on the water situation. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[vogon13]

Funding will be an enormous obstacle.<br /><br />Also, loss of institutional memory since last mission really decreases chance of success.<br /><br />A blunt, realistic appraisal would be to forget about it.<br /><br />Not happy posting this, but space is unforgiving and reality is going to assert it self at some point.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

So just because it is going to be difficult means that they should not try?<br /><br />Money is not that short in Russia. The question is making it available, which is a political decision.<br /><br />Institutional memory has not been lost. Lavochin, who would probably build the spacecraft, has been working on follow on Mars missions constantly, though on the back burner. Much of the technology will presumably be off the shelf.<br /><br />This is excellent news, and I hope it happens.<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>

 

[majornature]

Hi<br /><br />Ok I have a few questions about the 2 Mars missions that Russia is planning. Are the Russians planning on sending out Humans or Robots to Mars? Have they or will they find way to neutralize the gravity to Earth's conditions? Can it be possible that there are machines being built to filter Mars aimosphere materials into breathing for the Humans If they're one going on the mission? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#14ea50"><strong><font size="1">We are born.  We live.  We experiment.  We rot.  We die.  and the whole process starts all over again!  Imagine That!</font><br /><br /><br /><img id="6e5c6b4c-0657-47dd-9476-1fbb47938264" style="width:176px;height:247px" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/14/4/6e5c6b4c-0657-47dd-9476-1fbb47938264.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" width="276" height="440" /><br /></strong></font> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"Ok I have a few questions..."</font><br /><br />The initial post pretty much answers the primary question, which pretty much invalidates the other two. However.<br /><br />1. Unmanned.<br />2. No. Zero-G is a non-issue for unmanned missions.<br />3. No. 'Filtering' CO2 into O2 is really only practical for plants. O2-generation methods generally revolve around processing wither water or oxygen-bearing minerals. However, again since the missions are unmanned, the point is moot.