New Year on Mars
 

New Year on Mars

Let us hope that the next two scheduled Mars landers, NASA’s "Spirit" and "Opportunity" receive better treatment at the hands of the Red Planet than did the Beagle (R.I.P.).

These twin rovers are scheduled to land on January 3 (Spirit) and January 24 (Opportunity).

*crosses her fingers*

Mars is one tough rock to hit successfully. Hopefully the U.S. team has learned something from past failures and will have some success next month.

I was holding out hope for Beagle2 but it’s not looking good at this point.:( Some day I will get out a copy of my Space Research Benefits sermon and share why I believe this is SO important to ALL of us.







(How’s that for a reason for the ladies to keep me entertained) ;) lmao

January 3rd is my [deceased] brother's birthday!

That seems to me to be a good sign!

*crosses fingers anyway.........and sings "let me entertain you" to PF*

LOL!

yeah ever wonder why these missions go wrong?, the little aliens don't want us to discover them, we are like the beverly hillbillies of the universe!......lmao

it was horrible

"No-one would have believed......."

Those little green guys and their zap guns! As Dr Smith would say. "Oh the pain, the pain!"

Mars missions, 1964 to 2004
 

Here, for those who are interested, is the list of the efforts of the last 40 years of which I am aware. The Red Planet has been unforgiving.

1964 U.S. launches Mariner 3, which fails after liftoff.

1964 U.S. launches Mariner 4. First successful Mars fly-by in July 1965. The craft returns the first pictures of the Martian surface.

1964 Soviet Union launch Zond 2. Mars fly-by. Contact lost in May 1965.

1969 U.S. launches Mariner 6 and 7. The two spacecraft fly by Mars in July and August 1969 and send back images and data.

1971 Soviet Union launch Mars 2. Orbiter and lander reach Mars in November 1971. Lander crashes but orbiter sends back images and data.

1971 U.S. launches Mariner 8, which fails during liftoff.

1971 U.S. launches Mariner 9. Orbiter reaches Mars in November 1971, provides global mapping of Martian surface and studies atmosphere.

1973 Soviet Union launch Mars 5. Orbiter reaches Mars in February 1974 and collects data.

1975 U.S. launches Viking 1 and Viking 2. The two orbiter/lander sets reach Mars in 1976. Orbiters image Martian surface. Landers send back images and take surface samples.

1992 U.S. launches Mars Observer. Contact lost with orbiter in August 1993, three days before scheduled insertion into Martian orbit.

1996 U.S. launches Mars Global Surveyor. Orbiter reaches Mars in September 1997 and maps the planet. Still in operation.

1996 Soviet Union launch Mars 96, which fails after launch and falls back into Earth's atmosphere.

1996 U.S. launches Mars Pathfinder. Lander and rover arrive on Mars in July 1997. Lander sends back thousands of images, and Sojourner rover roams the surface, sending back 550 images.

1998 Japan launches Nozomi. Orbiter suffers software failure in December 1998, forcing circuitous course correction. Mission fails in 2003.

1998 U.S. launches Mars Climate Orbiter. Spacecraft destroyed while entering Martian orbit in September 1999.

1999 U.S. launches Mars Polar Lander. Contact lost with lander during descent in December 1999. Two microprobes "hitchhiking" on lander also fail.

2001 U.S. launches Mars Odyssey. Orbiter reachedbb Mars in October 2001 to detect water and shallow buried ice and study the environment. It can also act as a communications relay for future Mars landers.

2003 European Space Agency launches Mars Express. Orbiter and lander arrived at Mars in December 2003.

2003 U.S. launches Mars Expedition Rovers. Spirit and Opportunity rovers due to land on Mars in January 2004.

Fascinating stuff. Loved watching previous space successes and hope to have that chance with Spirit and Opportunity. There's so much to learn and it's so awesome to see something that no person has ever seen before. Wow!

Go Spirit and Opportunity! :)

Success!
 

The Mars rover Spirit has safely landed on Mars and has brodcast pictures. It will explore the Gusev Crater, just south of the Martian equator, which may once have held a lake.

After engineering checks, it will roll off its lander and start trundling over the surface of Mars.

The second lander, Opportunity, is scheduled to land January 24, at about 9:05 pm PST

Yeah team!

YEP! YEP! YEP
 

:D Maybe we CAN do something ritght. :D

PantyFanatic,

Yes indeed! This is however, one of the more difficult venues.

I'm of the school that believes the money could be better spent understanding and caring for the mysteries on earth before invading someone elses backyard!

just my two cents

Yes, we know not a lot about what is at the bottom of the oceans.

Can you believe it's a year next month (1st Feb) since the NASA spaceship crashed killing all it's crew?

Bilbo---I agree with you!! Irish
P.S.I have never been to Iraq,but I have seen people that were
tortured & raped in VN.It's an image,that stays burned in your mind,forever.Everyone has "Bitched" about the cost of the war,
but I,personally,think it is better spent,then the cost of space travel!Thats just my $.02.I'm sure eveyone else has different
opinions!That means that NO-ONE is wrong,thier opinions are just
differing!

Ah, and the pics are lovely.

This is wonderful, two major successes in a row.

Go NASA!

Catch22,

Quite true. Irish, in a different thread, said much the same thing.

There are, I have read, areas on the sea bottom liberally covered with mineral nodules. I wonder what caused that. An ecosystem NOT based on photosynthesis was recently discovered near volcanic submarine vents. If not an alien ecosystem, it does, at the very least, warrant reexamination.

I’ll admit that my preferences are towards exploring outer, rather than inner space, but I wonder if there is a balance point in these various expenditures, and if there is one, what it might be.

ukG²,

I believe that the Columbia crew was lost when it disintegrated during reentry, rather than crashed, but it was indeed, a sad day for NASA.

They were not the first, nor will they be the last explorers to die on humanity's borders.

If the idea is to find places for humans to live then it is worth it. If it is just to show off that one nation is better at it then perhaps not. I think China is going to try and land on Mars soon. They have the worst worker safty record in the world. Yet they can send craft into space. Very up side down thinking.

Catch22,

Many people think that during the Cold War, the Space Race was driven by chauvinistic pride. This is not to say that valuable research wasn’t done, but it certainly wasn’t driven by altruistic ideals. The Soviet Union could, and did, point to its scientific successes (of which their substantial space successes were an example) and assert that it showed the equivalency of the results of the Communist vs. the Capitalistic system.

I think that these “we have arrived” demonstrations remain attractive to countries which need to prove that they are real players on the field of technology. There remains a certain flash and glamour about outer space successes which are difficult to match with revelations from the seafloor or breakthroughs in understanding why we are as we are.

While the discovery by the submersible ALVIN of the Black Smokers,
http://www.amnh.org/nationalcenter/...ck_smokers.html , http://www.oceansonline.com/smokers.htm , and the associated ecosystems that are not dependant on photo synthesis is an extraordinary event, it is hard to counter such glorious visuals as the “The Pillars of Creation” http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/ne.../1995/44/image/ pictures returned from the HST. The irony is that many scientists believe that life on earth first arose in environments similar to those surrounding submarine geothermal vents! http://www.well.com/~ajmilne/black_...ack_smoker.html

On the subject of human habitation, it is difficult to see much justification for either deep sea or space exploration, for both environments are inhospitable in the extreme. It is less expensive to get the humans to the bottom of the sea than into space, as the cost of lifting each pound to orbit is, if I may be permitted to say so, astronomical. The pressures at the bottom of the ocean are as difficult to manage as the airlessness of outer space. The cost of building and operating cities under the sea will keep such proposals in the realm of fantasy for some considerable time.

http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/m2k4/index1.html

You won't find any triumphal nationalism on the NASA wbsite, I'm glad to say - just a global view of humanity's desire to explore.

They have been showing some very nice pictures. All the place needs is a pub.

That is a nice site, Vigil. Thanks.

Catch22,

I'd love to drop in at "The Pub at the Mars Hotel", but it would be such a long way out of my way!

Bush unveils space plans


AP - President George W Bush is planning a permanent science base for astronauts on the moon and, in what would be an even greater leap for mankind, human voyages to Mars, according to senior administration officials.

The president wants to aggressively reinvigorate the space program, still reeling from the Columbia tragedy nearly one year ago, said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan confirmed that Bush would deliver a speech on Wednesday describing his vision of the long-term direction of the space program, but he did not reveal what Bush would say.

"The president is strongly committed to the exploration of space," McClellan said.

A major question is how to pay for an expensive space initiative while the country is struggling with record budget deficits and the high costs of the war against terrorism.




McClellan said that the White House budget office was involved in the administration's space review, and that Bush will "put forth a responsible budget that meets our highest priorities while working to hold the line of spending elsewhere in the budget".

A Nobel-winning physicist who investigated last year's crash of the Columbia space shuttle is among those who would rather see more affordable robots - rather than astronauts - exploring the lunar and Martian surfaces. He points to NASA's Spirit rover newly arrived at Mars.

"The cost of a manned enclave on the moon, I think, is going to make the space station look cheap. That's the only good thing about it," said Stanford University's Douglas Osheroff.

In any event, "I think we're still 30 years from going to Mars and if there's any reason to do that, I don't know," Osheroff said.

Bush does not intend to propose sending Americans to Mars anytime soon, but instead envisions preparing for a Mars expedition more than a decade from now, one administration official said.

NASA's chief spokesman, Glenn Mahone, would not divulge any details.

"We're not going to pre-empt the president," he said. "But we're excited about the news of the announcement next week and what it means for the future direction of NASA." He said the announcement will be made in Washington.

The White House has been looking for a new revitalising role for NASA for months, with Vice President Dick Cheney leading the interagency task force since summer. The speculation over a major space initiative began heating up early last month.

Representative Ralph Hall, a member of the House Science Committee, welcomed the news that Bush would be making an announcement about space.

Hall said he has long been trying to get the president more interested in space exploration. The president never went to Johnson Space Centre in Houston while serving as Texas governor; in fact, last February's memorial service for the seven Columbia astronauts was his first visit.

Bush's fresh interest in space coincides with an election year. A new bold space initiative, it is thought, could excite Americans.

"I had the feeling the last 2-1/2 years people would rather make a trip to the grocery store than a trip to the moon because of the economy," Hall said. "As things are turning around, we need to stay in touch with space" and the science spinoffs it provides.

It was the Columbia accident that helped force a discussion of where NASA should venture beyond the three remaining space shuttles and the international space station. The panel that investigated the disaster called for a clearly defined long-term mission - a national vision for space that has been missing for three decades.

Astronauts last walked on the moon in 1972; in all, 12 men trod the lunar surface over a 3-1/2-year period. This time, the president favours a permanent station, administration officials said.

Bush's father, on the 20th anniversary of the first manned moon landing, made a similar call for lunar colonies and a Mars expedition. But the plan was prohibitively expensive - an estimated $US400 billion to $US500 billion - and went nowhere.

No one knows what the new venture might cost or how NASA would pay for it.

House Science Committee spokeswoman Heidi Tringe said lawmakers on the panel had yet to be briefed on the specifics.

Earlier this week, Bush put in a congratulatory call to officials in charge of NASA's latest Mars rover. He called the Spirit rover's successful landing a "reconfirmation of the American spirit of exploration." Another rover is due to arrive at the red planet in two weeks.

Many space buffs see the moon as a necessary place to test the equipment and techniques that would be needed by astronauts on Mars. It's closer, just three days away versus six months away for the red planet.

Visionaries say observatories could be built on the moon and mining camps could gather helium-3 for conversion into fuel for use back on Earth.

Others, however, contend that astronauts should make a beeline to Mars.

Still others, including John Glenn, the first American to orbit the Earth, believes the United States should complete and fully maximise the international space station before dashing anywhere else.

Catch22,

We must wait and see how much of these high minded proposals come to fruition.

Yes. When his father said he wanted to have a program to go to mars it was shelved once they heard how much it was going to cost.

I will wait until after Wednesday to see if there is more interest in research than political incentive involved here. It would seem we have tripped the trigger before the breech was filled.............. again.

PantyFanatic,

Interesting. It would seem that you and I are saying the same thing; let us wait and see.

Catch22,

I believe that President Bush outlines his plans for NASA's manned future in space at 4:00 (EST) today.

Cool

Post about it if you can. :)

I've only heard the news statements. Not much of an outline. Going to look for more details and find out why we don't have the completion of ISS as an interest and part of this.:confused:

I asked this question,before,but the server went down & evidently,didn't submit my question.I was wondering if anyone
knew if the Presedential regime changes if the space programs
will stay the same?Around here,Bush was almost a shoe-in but I have heard alot of discontent over the space program and the
undocumented(formerly,illegal)alien program. Irish

Catch22,

To be frank, it looks pretty grim.

The funding added for manned exploration will total $12 billion over the next five years. Most of this added funding for new exploration will come from reallocation of $11 billion that is currently within the five-year total NASA budget of $86 billion. President Bush will request an additional $1 billion to NASA's existing five-year plan, or an average of $200 million per year

What that tells me is that the unmanned programs will be gutted to fund more than 90% of the "Return To the Moon" program. You’ll note that the new money – which is proposed, not a given – is 1 in 12. The mission to Pluto would be an example of what is on the chopping block.

I am minded of the cancellation of Great Britain’s Black Arrow project back in 1971, in part due to the development costs of the Concorde, which also needed funds that could otherwise have gone to the space program. In the end, Concorde won out. It was seen as having more commercial potential, and the British space program was relegated to the status of a museum piece.

I hope I'm wrong about this.

But makes for great press:rolleyes:

Anything to take peoples minds off other issues in a voting year. I think the ISS is not going to be finished in a hurry either.

Catch22,

On the plus side, the Spirit rover rolled down an alternate ramp last night, the primary one being blocked. As it touched down on the Martian surface, the rover had about a 4 inch drop.

Images taken from Spirit's rear camera showed the landing pad behind the rover and tracks leading away on the Martian soil. Pictures from the front of the rover show "Sleepy Hollow", a depression near where Spirit touched down.

Yeah Team!

In 9 days the second of the pair, Opportunity, makes its scheduled landing on the other side of Mars. Let’s hope for a second success.

Yes, I saw the 360 photos. Very good. If they find signs of water that will get the minds a thinking.