Searching for Mars Polar Lander again.

[holmec]

They are searching the Polar Lander again using a new technique of photo imaging.<br /><br />http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050502_mpl_search.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

What I like about this is that they are using every shred of available resources (most of which were sent to Mars) to verify an perfect this technique.<br /><br />Its almost like tennis. Sure you can upgrade a racket from a small wooden thing to a carbon graphite marvel. But unless you know how to hit the ball in the sweet spot of the racket and thus control the ball you might as hit your opponent over the head with it because you won't win the game.<br /><br />I like it when we've got to the phase of a tool where you find creative ways to use it and thus spawn new uses for it and new inovations for the next upgrade or repacement for the tool. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

Well one of the interesting things about the current search is that if they can definitively locate MPL, they can target the site when Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter gets there and create some (relatively) high-res shots of the site. When MRO gets to Mars -- it will almost certainly be too busy to <b>search</b> for MPL for quite some time. However, if the site is already known, then it could certainly be used for this purpose. Any photos taken by MRO might well help in ensuring that Phoenix doesn't suffer a similar fate.

 

[JonClarke]

Since MPL suffered a technical failure rather than an environmental one, high resolution imagery isn't going to have any impact on the Phoenix mission.<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>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"Since MPL suffered a technical failure rather..."</font><br /><br />You making an assumption without even thinking about it. An accident mishap board is <b>never</b> going to come back with an answer of: 'We have no flipping clue what went wrong'. From the article, the current feeling is:<br /><br /><i>"An investigation of the mishap concluded that the most probable cause of the failure was the generation of spurious signals when the craft’s legs were deployed during descent. "</i><br /><br />They go on to state:<br /><br /><i>"But nobody really knows what happened. "</i><br /><br />SO. Unless you have some evidence for your statement about the failure -- what you just posted is entirely content-free. Photos of the crash site <b>will</b> provide additional information about that happened to MPL. This information may or may not be of assistance to the Phoenix team. <br /><br />

 

[henryhallam]

Specifically, by knowing the exact location and having a good idea of the profile of the atmosphere, and the aerodynamics of the spacecraft, it might be possible to figure out where in the descent everything went pear-shaped, which would have a bearing on the most likely cause.

 

[vogon13]

Would it PO the Russians if we went looking for Mars 2? <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>

 

[thalion]

Finding the Mars landers would be much more difficult than finding MPL, IMO; I don't think even the Russians know where they landed to more than a round degree of accuracy, and I don't know if even a landing ellipse for the landers was ever published. Hundreds, and possibly thousands of square miles of territory is too much to look for a small lander on.

 

[holmec]

Yes, knowledge of what happened to some of the failed landers can only add to our lessons learned file. How to do it better next time. <br /><br />It would have been cool if somehow we could still use some of these. But this is mostly fantasy since time is an issue. Because the more time it would take the more the argument to make a new lander and send it makes sense. <br /><br />Maybe they are hoping for only a communications failure that is easily fixable for some of these landers.<br /><br />Maybe we should consider putting some type of GPS/Communictations satelite network around Mars to locate and communicate easily with future landers.<br /><br />You know after all is said and done with Mars, we will probably make a textbook on how to explore and populate a planet so the 23rd Century Capt Kirk would know what to do with a planet. <br /><br />Now I'm just rambling. lol <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"Maybe we should consider putting some type of GPS/Communictations satelite network around Mars..."</font><br /><br />Or perhaps just a comm satellite like the Mars Telecommunications Orbiter being launched in 2009?<br /><br />A GPS constellation around Mars is a wee bit much to expect.

 

[kane007]

4 questions? 1) Is the resolution capabilities of ESA's Mars Express camera's greater than MGS?<br />2) Are they able to use MARSIS on Mars Express to "ping" for the lander or its wreckage?<br />3) Next years arrival of MRO - its optics will be of higher resolution capabilities again - HiRISE = 25cm/pixal. Could this help?<br />4) Could MRO's SHARAD be used?