What if MPL had been a success?

JonClarke · Nov 13, 2008

Now that the very fruitful Phoenix mission is over, perhaps we can play some hypotheticals! Phoenix was based on the failed Mars Polar lander mission and deployed many of the same tools and instruments. Based on Phoenix’s experience we can ask the question: How would MPL have fared if it had landed successfully and what might it have found?  Let’s leave the Deep Space 2 penetrators out of the picture for the moment, they were really a separate mission. MPL was equipped with the following: 1) MVACS Mars volatile and climate surveyor instrument package <ul><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm0cm0pt;color:black;tab-stops:list36.0pt">a) SSI stereo surface imager (backup flown on Phoenix)</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm0cm0pt;color:black;tab-stops:list36.0pt">b) RA robotic arm (similar arm flown on Phoenix)</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm0cm0pt;color:black;tab-stops:list36.0pt">c) MET meteorology package (similar package flown on Phoenix)</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm0cm0pt;color:black;tab-stops:list36.0pt">d) TEGA thermal and evolved gas analyzer (backup flown on Phoenix)</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm0cm0pt;color:black;tab-stops:list36.0pt">e) RAC robotic arm camera</li></ul>2) MARDI Mars descent imager (similar package flown on Phoenix) 3) LIDAR light detection and ranging instrument (A Russian instrument, similar in principle to the Canadian one flown by Phoenix) Compared to the Phoenix site MPL would have landed on layered terrain (probably wind deposited snow and dust), rather than the northern plains.  It was at higher latitude (76 degrees S) and higher elevation (above rather than below Mars datum).  Like the Phoenix site it was flat and largely crater free. http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast25aug99_1.htm   So, what might MPL have seen and discovered with its instruments, compared to Phoenix?  Jon  http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast25aug99_1.htm <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · Nov 13, 2008

And, since I forgot, here is a labelled picture of MPL.Jon <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/11/cb51ab83-6207-4de6-bb7e-b4e03cba5d03.Medium.jpg" alt="" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

MarkStanaway · Nov 13, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>And, since I forgot, here is a labelled picture of MPL.Jon Posted by jonclarke</DIV>I see that MPL had a tilted solar array. Why was this not incorporated into the Phoenix design? We might have got an extra month or so of life out of the probe if this had been adopted.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

freya · Nov 13, 2008

Good question Mark. Was the design meant for an equatorial mission?Tilted arrays may reduced the dust build up problem.All in all, we have learnt alot from Phoenix, with lots more to come.Many thanks to all the contributors to this forum for making the Phoenix experience informative, exciting and 'lively'.Cheers, Gary.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

JonClarke · Nov 14, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I see that MPL had a tilted solar array. Why was this not incorporated into the Phoenix design? We might have got an extra month or so of life out of the probe if this had been adopted.  Posted by MarkStanaway</DIV>Interesting question.I think, but don't know for sure, that the reason that MPL had the canted solar panels was to collect more light.  Remember it was optimised for polar operations, whereas the Phoenix power system was originall designed for the equator.  Perhaps this is why MPL was able to targeted 7 degrees closer to the pole than Phoenix? Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

3488 · Nov 14, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Interesting question.I think, but don't know for sure, that the reason that MPL had the canted solar panels was to collect more light.  Remember it was optimised for polar operations, whereas the Phoenix power system was originall designed for the equator.  Perhaps this is why MPL was able to targeted 7 degrees closer to the pole than Phoenix?Jon Posted by jonclarke</DIV>Hi JonThat's correct. MPL IIRC could have landed as far south as 82 degrees S. Obviously the site 'near' Jeans Crater @ approx 76 S was considered safe by the engineers, as was on a polar plain & also was within an area of polar layered terrain.Phoenix Mars Lander formally Mars Surveyor 2001 was certainly an equatorial, at least tropical mission, with one potential landing site being only about 150 KM north of where MER B Opportunity landed.Regarding science result assuming a successful MPL landing? I think in many respects very similar to Phoenix, but perhaps a greater diurnal temperature range, as you have also correctly pointed out, MPL was to be well above the Datum Line, hence thinner atmosphere, unlike Phoenix at nearly 4 KM BELOW the Datum Line.Regolith, IMO similar to Phoenix, but perhaps even more alkaline. Phoenix landed not too far from the NW flanks of the giant volcano Alba Patera & also NNE of Olympus Mons (which was approx 2,400 KM away). The relative proximity of Scandia Colles to Tharsis, may had reduced some of the buffering by the Calcium Carbonates????  IIRC MPL was to have landed nowhere near any volcanic province, though I do not really know that much about that region of Mars. To me MPL's site looked older than Phoenix's from orbit, regarding the cratering of the surrounding area. But of course I could be wrong & most possibly am.It would be wonderful if another lander could be sent to MPL's site.Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

MeteorWayne · Nov 14, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Good question Mark. Was the design meant for an equatorial mission?Tilted arrays may reduced the dust build up problem.All in all, we have learnt alot from Phoenix, with lots more to come.Many thanks to all the contributors to this forum for making the Phoenix experience informative, exciting and 'lively'.Cheers, Gary.  Posted by freya</DIV> I doubt the tilted arrays would have helped much with dust considering how sticky it seems to be.Andrew, any pictures you are aware of showing dust accumulations on tilted surfaces? No rush, I don't want to take up too much time on a Shuttle launch day. Just over 10 hours to launch

<div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

3488 · Nov 14, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I doubt the tilted arrays would have helped much with dust considering how sticky it seems to be.Andrew, any pictures you are aware of showing dust accumulations on tilted surfaces? No rush, I don't want to take up too much time on a Shuttle launch day. Just over 10 hours to launch

Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV>Thanks Wayne,I will try & watch the STS 126 Endeavour launch tonight (should be able to). I will also try & find some images of dusty tilted surfaces. An interesting engineering question.Of course there's this Sols 708 - 710 Eldorado on Husband Hill, in Gusev Crater. MER A Spirit.Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

JonClarke · Nov 15, 2008

This is my take on how MPL might have panned out.  I will assume it might of lasted for ~150 sols, as did Phoenix, the canted solar panels counteracting for the higher latitude landing site.   1) MVACS Mars volatile and climate surveyor instrument package  a) SSI stereo surface imager It would have work as well as the one on Phoenix, returning similar quality images of the terrain and obtaining basic spectral information on features of interest including the trenches.  The landscape would have been smooth, possibly stepped and polygon free, but perhaps slightly more cratered.  Because it was closer to the pole and higher up there may been more frost and show visible at the start and finish to the mission.   b) RA robotic armLike the one of Phoenix this would have worked well.  However, it may have had similar problems digging deep into the icy subsurface, which would have been colder and therefore harder than that at the Phoenix site.  The thermal and conductivity probes would likewise have given useful results.   c) MET meteorology package  Likewise would have functioned similar to that on Phoenix.  d) TEGA thermal and evolved gas analyzer  I suspect it would have worked better than the one on Phoenix.  Possibly the sticking doors was due to the length of time the Phoenix unit had been in storage, if so the MPL TEFA doors might have opened OK.  The mostly likely cause for the stickiness that made getting samples into the ovens so difficult would to have been a problem for MPL.  The sight was higher and colder, moisture films would not have been present.  As with Phoenix, the MPL Phoenix would have been able to characterise the volatile containg phases, and (unlike Phoenix) may have been able to measure the D/H ratio.  Because of the lower temperature it may have detected CO2 ices.   e) RAC robotic arm camera It is quite possible that MPL would also have excavated its substrate, in which case the robot arm camera would have been able to see subsurface ices and regolith layering.   2) MARDI Mars descent imager  There was no hint of problems with the MPL instrument, so this should have returned a couple of images, as designed.   3) LIDAR I see no reason why this Russian instrument should not have worked as well as the Canadian one on Phoenix.  Like the Phoenix lidar it would have provided useful information on atmospheric aerosols, clouds, and precipitation.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

franontanaya · Nov 15, 2008

Given that the Phoenix landing site was probably more habitable 5 million years ago than the higher latitudes for MPL, I think Phoenix has been in a more favorable place for new findings than MPL would have been. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

JonClarke · Nov 15, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Given that the Phoenix landing site was probably more habitable 5 million years ago than the higher latitudes for MPL, I think Phoenix has been in a more favorable place for new findings than MPL would have been. Posted by franontanaya</DIV>But remember that the layered terrain records global climate changes and, just as the Antarctic and Greenland icecaps tell us about conditions in more clement regions, so would invesigating the the martian polar layers.Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

3488 · Nov 15, 2008

Hi Jon,I think our evaluations are remarkably similar & this gives me more confidence in what I post.Regarding the layering, IYO, would the landing site have looked like very broad shallow steps? How deep would those steps have been. A few CM, half a metre, 1 metre? I intended to participate with the MRO HiRISE MPL search, buit the software never worked & kept crashing my computer, so I could never participate. I agree about the possibility of more small craters & no tundra polygons as MPL's site did appear older than Phoenix's.Andrew Brown.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

3488 · Nov 15, 2008

Hi Jon,Talking of the MPL search campaign, here is the link from the HiRISE site. Forgot to link to it earlier. Search for Mars Polar Lander. Shows the area within the landing ellipse extremely well.Also found this. From Javier on the HiBlog thread concerning the search for MPL.Andrew Brown.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

franontanaya · Nov 15, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>so would invesigating the the martian polar layers.</DIV>Yup, but not with a static lander and a scoop that can only rasp a bit of rock-frozen permafrost. Phoenix made sense for the uniform, young Northern Plains, but to the MPLs I'd rather bring a drill or something on wheels.   <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

JonClarke · Nov 16, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Yup, but not with a static lander and a scoop that can only rasp a bit of rock-frozen permafrost. Phoenix made sense for the uniform, young Northern Plains, but to the MPLs I'd rather bring a drill or something on wheels.   Posted by franontanaya</DIV> A rover would have been too expensive.  Remember they cost roughly twice what a stationary lander dpes per kg.  Plus the main surface science instrument on MPL was TEGA.  The entire surface mission would have been needed to investiagte what was in reach of the arm.  As with Phoenix, a rover was not needed.Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

neuvik · Nov 16, 2008

I don't understand why there must be "flash" with science.   The research MPL performed was amazing, too bad if some people can't wrap their heads around the significance of it.    Guess what, it would still have been a success if it didn't find water! Meeting perceived goals does not have to be defined as success; with good old scientific method, finding the opposite of what we hypothesised is just as good.  With that knowledge then we can proceed with further studies, proofs what not.       It is completely pretentious to think that every mission has to be collage of jaw dropping images.  I can only guess the reason everyone seems to want rovers is because they seem to give drastically different pictures than a static object.   Yes it would be wicked if everything we sent to Mars was a rover and still had all the scientific equipment aboard.   Asides from the obvious budget issue though, why use a chain saw when a butter knife will do. The MPL will not help me afford SolidWorks, it won't help me pass my naval architecture exam it will however help someone else now or later help pave the way for something I hold dear. edit:  For the record I thought the MPLs photos were awesome, and some of those sun set photos were mesmerizing.   <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I don't think I'm alone when I say, "I hope more planets fall under the ruthless domination of Earth!"SDC Boards: Power by PLuck - Ph**king Luck </div>

MarkStanaway · Nov 16, 2008

For the record I thought the MPLs photos were awesome, and some of those sun set photos were mesmerizing.   Posted by neuvik[/QUOTE]For the record all contact with MPL (Mars Polar Lander) was lost just prior to atmospheric entry and it never made it intact to the Mars surface. It was Phoenix which gaves us those awesome images of the sun sets.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Nov 16, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> For the record I thought the MPLs photos were awesome, and some of those sun set photos were mesmerizing.   Posted by neuvik</DIV>For the record all contact with MPL (Mars Polar Lander) was lost just prior to atmospheric entry and it never made it intact to the Mars surface. It was Phoenix which gaves us those awesome images of the sun sets.  Posted by MarkStanaway</DIV> The acronym MPL (Mars Phoenix Lander) was also used for Phoenix, but never became too popular. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

3488 · Nov 16, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The acronym MPL (Mars Phoenix Lander) was also used for Phoenix, but never became too popular. Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV>Very true Wayne & Phoenix acronym became PHX instead & that was seldom used outside of NASA / JPL / JHU & APL. Andrew Brown.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

neuvik · Nov 16, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>For the record all contact with MPL (Mars Polar Lander) was lost just prior to atmospheric entry and it never made it intact to the Mars surface. It was Phoenix which gaves us those awesome images of the sun sets.  Posted by MarkStanaway</DIV>The acronym MPL (Mars Phoenix Lander) was also used for Phoenix, but never became too popular. Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV> Whoops, prolly should had read a bit closer.    My bad, I read Clarks thread " Was Phoenix a Waste?" great defense from all you,  and I read those exact same posts on the news articles and it irritated me just as much.   For some strange reason...lack of sleep haha, I thought this was another thread but caving more to the types of people he wanted to debate in his first thread.    <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I don't think I'm alone when I say, "I hope more planets fall under the ruthless domination of Earth!"SDC Boards: Power by PLuck - Ph**king Luck </div>

What if MPL had been a success?

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

MarkStanaway

Guest

freya

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

3488

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

3488

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

franontanaya

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

3488

Guest

3488

Guest

franontanaya

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

neuvik

Guest

MarkStanaway

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

3488

Guest

neuvik

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page