Author Topic: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover  (Read 46364 times)

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11315
  • Liked: 2787
  • Likes Given: 1

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11315
  • Liked: 2787
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #161 on: 08/08/2018 11:05 PM »
Was at JPL this morning. Took a photo of Mars 2020 coming together. Rover parts not yet in the big clean room.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10176
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7036
  • Likes Given: 4817
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #162 on: 08/09/2018 01:16 PM »
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/us-plans-mars-should-include-more-sample-return-report-warns
Thanks for sharing this (and the other one in the next post)

Do you have a view on whether the commentary in these two pieces hits or misses the mark?
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline vjkane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #163 on: 08/09/2018 03:41 PM »
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/us-plans-mars-should-include-more-sample-return-report-warns
Thanks for sharing this (and the other one in the next post)

Do you have a view on whether the commentary in these two pieces hits or misses the mark?
I've read the report.  The committee looked at a wide range of topics, and the committee provided its judgement on all of them.  The committee found that NASA's managers have done a pretty good job of trying to execute to the last Decadal Survey with the resources they had.  There are no big red flags.  So different reporters focus their short articles on different ones of the 24 recommendations made by the committee.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11315
  • Liked: 2787
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #164 on: 08/09/2018 07:35 PM »
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/us-plans-mars-should-include-more-sample-return-report-warns
Thanks for sharing this (and the other one in the next post)

Do you have a view on whether the commentary in these two pieces hits or misses the mark?

I would suggest that everybody here who is interested read the report themselves. The study director was a wise and knowledgeable expert. Handsome too, and smells like daffodils.


Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11315
  • Liked: 2787
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #165 on: 08/09/2018 07:40 PM »
I've read the report.  The committee looked at a wide range of topics, and the committee provided its judgement on all of them.  The committee found that NASA's managers have done a pretty good job of trying to execute to the last Decadal Survey with the resources they had.  There are no big red flags.  So different reporters focus their short articles on different ones of the 24 recommendations made by the committee.

That's pretty accurate. There are a bunch of recommendations, but some of them are big ones, and others are rather narrow, and some of them are along the lines of "the decadal survey recommended doing X, and we recommend that you continue to do X." Different reporters picked out different things to emphasize, in part because the report does not give the reporters red meat in the form of "NASA is doing a bad job..."

In fact, what you're seeing is sorta one of the foundations of journalism. For weeks now there has been bad news about JWST, and so reporters have been jumping on that story because it is juicy. And then along comes a report that basically says that the planetary science program is well-managed and doing a good job, and a lot of reporters are either bored, or don't know how to write that story.

I think the stuff that the reporters kinda missed is what the committee said about the Europa Lander. There is a subtle, but important point being made there. But read the report yourself and you'll figure it out.


Offline gosnold

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 452
  • Liked: 138
  • Likes Given: 1001
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #166 on: 08/10/2018 02:33 PM »
I think the stuff that the reporters kinda missed is what the committee said about the Europa Lander. There is a subtle, but important point being made there. But read the report yourself and you'll figure it out.

That NASA should stick to the decadal and not study missions because they are popular in Congress?

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11315
  • Liked: 2787
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #167 on: 08/10/2018 04:08 PM »
That NASA should stick to the decadal and not study missions because they are popular in Congress?

I'm going to break that sentence down into three parts.

1-"That NASA..." NASA doesn't get a lot of say in the matter. The agency has to do what the executive and legislative leadership tells them to do. Now NASA does get some say in how they implement things. And external advisory reports can back up NASA when they decide to do things (or swat at them when they don't do things).

2-"and not study missions"  Studying is fine. Studying doesn't cost a lot of money. It's building things that costs money.

3-"are popular in Congress" Congress is not a point source, it is made up of a lot of people, some with much more power than others. When a bill comes out of Congress it is, for all intents and purposes, Congress speaking. But 99% of Congress many not care about some issue and only 1% does.

And all of that points to the importance of building a broad consensus. Big, expensive missions should happen because a lot of people want them to happen.

Offline vjkane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: NASA - Mars 2020 Rover
« Reply #168 on: 08/11/2018 04:07 PM »
There's a new description of the Midway landing site that's been posted on the page for the upcoming landing site meeting.

https://marsnext.jpl.nasa.gov/workshops/2018-10/midway_ellipse_development_info_v4.pdf

The center of the Midway landing eclipse is 10 km closer to the Jezero eclipse and a mission that lands in one and traverses to the second is considered feasible.  Per the post, "exposures and accessibility of NE Syrtis-type stratigraphy in the Midway ellipse has been deemed roughly equivalent to the original NE Syrtis ellipse by multiple subject matter experts. Multiple safe routes into or out of Jezero crater have been identified by the Mars 2020 Project."

Tags: