Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
Home > News > Science > Space

February 11th, 2009, 13:25 GMT · By

MSL Critics Are Wrong

SHARE:

Adjust text size:


The MSL will be one of the most complex machineries ever made
Enlarge picture
NASA's Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) is currently under intense fire from critics, who say that the project has already exceeded more than 4 times the initial sum of money granted for the project, and that the new rover attempts to include way too many new technologies for the current stage of development. At the top of the list is Alan Stern, a former NASA associate administrator for science missions and also a planetary scientist, who states that the space agency should go about exploring Mars using the same old-fashioned types of rovers like Spirit and Opportunity. However, there are those who see sense in this and continue to push on with the completion of the project.

First of all, MSL is a huge leap forward from the tiny, solar-powered probes that now scout or have scouted the Martian surface in the past. No one is disputing the great results the current rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, have got, in fact, they are very much appreciated. But there comes a time when progress must be felt, especially in the delicate field of planetary exploration. That's why the new machine will not be tiny, and will not be powered by the Sun, but is bound to have in excess of 550 kilograms, and an uninterrupted power source in the form of a small nuclear charge.

Stern, who has gone after NASA in a newspaper column, is the best example of how a small part of NASA's management employees are – reluctant to try something new, and clinging on to the past, as shown in this video. He advocates that the MSL only be equipped with six instruments instead of ten, and that other innovation on the spacecraft is useless. Fortunately, the ideas at NASA differ from this money-oriented and puny perspective:

"We need a larger support structure. We need a more capable arm. We need to be able to look at not just the geology but much more the chemistry, much more the organic elements. We have to have a more capable rover," Jim Green, who is the director of NASA's planetary science division, argues. He shares that the new devices aboard the MSL are due to provide a more thorough insight into what the planet is made of, as the robot will have the ability to dig, remove, and store samples in specific chambers that are retrofitted with various tools designed to analyze the samples, and send back information on the spot.

In addition, the new rover is far more rugged and durable than Spirit and Opportunity, which currently stand about half of MSL's size. For this mission, a new landing system had to be devised, one that would ensure the delicate machinery was not damaged upon entering the Martian atmosphere. In truth, this is the cause that drives prices over budget – innovation and careful planning, as well as a desire to progress. For people such as Stern, this is just a useless spending of money. Unfortunately, not everybody sees the big picture in space exploration.


TELL US WHAT YOU THINK:

943 hits · 1 comment · Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend · Subscribe to news

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:


One More Weekend for Naming the Next Mars Rover

Contamination Could Endanger Next Mars Mission

MSL Martian Landing Sites Narrowed Down to Four

Sample Storage Compartment Removed from MSL

Mars Science Laboratory Mission Postponed Until 2011

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: Brian Koester on 04 Mar 2009, 20:08 UTC reply to this comment

Wow, you are being way too accepting of the MSL cost overruns. I dont blame only JPL but rather a process that needs total re-invention.

I mean how many "pioneer" or advanced technologies need to be on one craft? The skycrane idea is radical enough but MSL was also trying to go with a whole different set of actuator tech that cannot be ready.

The concept of Technology readiness level that is part of the culture at NASA should have played a MUCH BIGGER ROLE in the MSL planning & timelines.

To say that Dr. Alan Stern is:

"Fortunately, the ideas at NASA differ from this money-oriented and puny perspective"

TOTALLY misses the point. Yes we can spend 1.6 Billion on a mission that was budgeted for a 1/3 of that but what other missions are zapped in the process.

The idea that budget overuns should come out of the Mars program or the program that is responsible for them is sound and the consequence is that the 2016 Opportunity for a Mars misision like sample return wont happen for likely a much longer time.

Dr. took on the process, majorly revamped the Science Mission Directorate and ultimately resigned as a matter of principle to his credit.

Copyright © 2001-2012 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM