Artist's view of ESA's Mars Sample Return (MSR) ascent module lifting off from Mars' surface with the Martian soil samples. Credits: ESA
[/caption]
Future missions to Mars, including a sample return mission will be joint endeavors between NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA). NASA’s associate administrator for space science Ed Weiler revealed in Thursday’s Mars Science Laboratory press conference that the two space agencies agreed this week, based on initial discussions last July, to work together on future Mars missions. “This delay (of MSL) also means an opportunity of in the future having one Mars program for all the Earth,” said Weiler.
“We have now gotten approval that in the future, NASA and ESA are going to work together to come up with a European-U.S. Mars architecture,” Weiler said. “That is, missions won’t be NASA missions, they won’t be ESA missions, they will be joint missions. We need to work together. We’ll never, ever do a sample return mission unless we work together. We both have the same goals scientifically, we want to get our science communities together and start laying out a plan. We’ve committed to working together to reaching those goals.”
A robotic mission to collect soil and rock samples and return them to Earth for analysis would likely cost between $6 billion and $8 billion and not be feasible until the 2020s.
While many of the current missions are international efforts, with scientists from several countries contributing instruments and working together on research, this agreement would seemingly mean the two space agencies would share costs equally and encourage even more scientific collaboration. This is a logical next step for not only Mars exploration, but all future exploration of space.
For years, an international group of scientists, called the International Mars Exploration Working Group has been working together to form long term science goals and long range strategy for Mars exploration.
NASA has listed a sample return mission as “future goal” for years, and ESA has a Mars sample return mission planned as part of its Aurora exploration program, with such a mission slated for the 2020-2022 time frame.
Hemorrhaging the NASA budget? Stern cites the MSL as a prime example of damaging overspending (NASA)
[/caption]
It is rare you’ll see such a high-ranking ex-NASA official being so blunt with his criticism of the US space agency. Alan Stern resigned as associate administrator on April 11th this year under a cloud of controversy after it was reported the Mars Exploration Rover budget would be cut; with an emphasis on switching Spirit off for an extended period. Soon after, NASA appeared to do a U-turn and said they had no such plans to scale back rover operations. However, it would seem, Stern was caught right in the middle, but NASA would not comment as to whether Stern’s resignation was in connection to the cut-back announcement. Stern said the short-sighted attitude of NASA officials concerning budget overruns, plus the fact he was stopped from doing anything about it, precipitated his resignation. It looks like the Spirit debacle was a symptom of a much deeper illness (or “a cancer” as Stern calls it).
So, eight months after stepping down from his post as associate administrator (second only to NASA Administrator Michael Griffin) Alan Stern has written a highly critical article in the New York Times, firing a salvo across the bows of the US space exploration strategy…
Alan Stern (NASA)After writing the article “Wasteful” Sample Storage Box Removed from Mars Science Laboratory on November 22nd, I couldn’t help but think how many researchers could have had their salaries, research and institutions supported by the wasted $2 million that was so easily lost by removing the surplus rock cache from the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL).
Although I personally think the storage box would have been a waste of space on the MSL, its conception, design and implementation cost a lot of money and its removal seemed a little blasé. Yes, it might free up time for MSL scientists, and yes its removal will few up space for other instrumentation, but isn’t it irresponsible to be chopping off $2 million parts at this late stage? Let’s not forget, the MSL is being launched in a little under a year (barring any overruns… naturally).
It would appear Alan Stern has a few issues with the MSL too, as is evident from the scathing opening paragraph in his Nov. 23rd New York Times article:
“A cancer is overtaking our space agency: the routine acquiescence to immense cost increases in projects. Unmistakable new indications of this illness surfaced last month with NASA’s decision to spend at least $100 million more on its poorly-managed, now-over-$2 billion Mars Science Laboratory. This decision to go forward with the project, a robotic rover, was made even though it has tripled in cost since its inception, it is behind schedule, there is no firm estimate of the final cost, and NASA hasn’t disclosed the collateral damage inflicted on other programs and activities that depend on NASA’s limited science budget.” – Alan Stern
Ouch. He continues to highlight the MSL saying, “And the Mars Science Laboratory is only the latest symptom of a NASA culture that has lost control of spending.”
The article points out the high-level of mismanagement in the NASA system, citing several projects that have overspent as a matter of routine. Overspending appears to be inevitable, and many “pet projects” suck funds from other missions, often without accountability. But it doesn’t stop at the MSL.
“The cost of the James Webb Space Telescope, successor to the storied Hubble, has increased from initial estimates near $1 billion to almost $5 billion,” Stern writes. “NASA’s next two weather satellites, built for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, have now inflated to over $3.5 billion each!”
“The list goes on: N.P.P., S.D.O., LISA Pathfinder, Constellation and more. You don’t have to know what the abbreviations and acronyms mean to get it: Our space program is running inefficiently, and without sufficient regard to cost performance. In NASA’s science directorate alone, an internal accounting in 2007 found over $5 billion in increases since 2003.”
According to Stern, NASA overspending seems to happen across the board, but this probably isn’t the biggest concern. The fact remains that NASA’s budget does not increase with each unforeseen overrun; it stays the same, so other NASA projects suffer cuts or cancellation. I haven’t worked with NASA, so cannot comment personally, but for each NASA mission I’ve covered in the past year of writing for the Universe Today, I find myself mentioning the words “overruns”, “over-budget”, “delayed” and “expensive” more often than not. We could put this down to the fact that getting into space isn’t easy (and it is by its nature, very expensive), but NASA has been in this business for 50 years, surely they should be able to keep damaging overspending to a minimum? Apparently not.
According to Stern, the “cancer” is “endemic”, where the problems begin when scientists and engineers (sometimes politicians) try to cram features and instrumentation onto missions beyond the original budget. Then, project managers allow these features to be worked into the design, without due care of the allowed budget, assuming they will get “bailed out” down the line (sounding familiar isn’t it?). In an almost fraudulent attempt by managers (in my opinion), the projected cost increase is hidden so not to arouse any concern from the guys overseeing the budget. When the mission is being constructed, the costs balloon, forcing NASA to plough more funds into the mission (especially ‘flagship’ missions like the MSL). The money has to come from somewhere, so ‘less important’ projects suffer the consequences. To make matters worse, scientists refuse to scale back costs and congressmen block cut-backs to prevent the politically damaging loss of local jobs.
Stern continues: “The result? The costs of badly run NASA projects are paid for with cutbacks or delays in NASA projects that didn’t go over budget. Hence the guilty are rewarded and the innocent are punished.”
It is well worth reading the entire article as it makes some worrying points, but Stern is keen to emphasise that NASA is a phenomenal agency on the forefront of human ingenuity, but he doesn’t want to see the current problems jeopardise the future of US space travel and exploration. He makes some pretty obvious parallels with the current economic climate and that NASA needs to rise above the zero-accountability/bail-out climate:
“To continue such accomplishments, NASA’s managers and masters must all make cost performance just as important as mission successes, scientific discoveries and good jobs. In an era of unpopular, costly government bailouts, Americans have every right to demand that NASA cease bailing out its own errant projects and make cost increases rare, rather than routine.” – Alan Stern
The MSL - a monster amongst rovers (hopefully) (NASA)
Stern: “The Mars program is slowly committing suicide in front of our very eyes”
[/caption]
NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) has been beset by technical challenges and inevitable budget overruns. The nuclear-powered rover is set for an October 2009 launch and engineers are doubling their efforts to ensure the MSL makes it to the launchpad on time. In an attempt to save money and (hopefully) time, MSL program managers have decided to remove a $2 million component from the car-sized wheeled robot. A sample storage box was conceived long after the initial MSL science goals were drawn up (a pretty controversial decision in itself), so analysed rock samples could be saved for a possible future Mars sample-return mission.
Now NASA has deemed the box “of low science value” and “wasteful” on resources that could be directed elsewhere, but outspoken critics have pointed out that by removing the box is just another component on the road to the demise of NASA’s Mars exploration program…
Wouldn’t it be great if we could dig up samples of Martian rock and launch it back to Earth? Just think about the in-depth science that could be carried out on a sample removed directly from the Mars surface. Although rovers and landers are great for in-situ experiments, you still cannot beat analysis by a scientist. Assuming infinite resources, a Mars sample return mission would be technologically possible, but in the current climate of budget cuts and overspending, it is virtually impossible. The money, quite simply, is better spent elsewhere.
So, there’s NASA constructing the most advanced rover to be sent to Mars, ever. It will be a long-term mission, powered not by sunlight but by long-lasting radioisotope thermal generators (RTGs). It will do amazing science whilst dominating the Martian landscape by day and by night. After the MSL design was drawn up, a new piece of equipment was dreamt up: a sample storage box. This may not sound very exciting, after all, its only purpose is to store rocks. Why? So a future mission can retrieve the samples and return them to Earth.
Last week, it was decided that the storage box was surplus to requirements and it will be removed from the MSL. Although it had already been built, MSL project scientist John Grotzinger (Caltech) pointed out that the instrument would have taken time away from the other instruments.
“The cache would have tied our hands to some extent,” Grotzinger said. “Now it restores our freedom.”
The MSL has run up a pricetag of over $1.5 billion, and it is expected to balloon to $2 billion by the time it launches to the Red Planet, so any excess cost should be trimmed where necessary. Alas, the storage box is low on the list of priorities and was dropped, even though $2 million had already been wasted in its development. NASA’s rationale is that more time and money will need to be put into the cache, so they may as well cut their losses.
This move isn’t a popular decision however. Ex-NASA space sciences chief Alan Stern (who resigned in March after the controversy surrounding the erroneous announcement that funds to the existing Mars rovers would be cut), is very critical of the move. “The Mars program is slowly committing suicide in front of our very eyes,” said Stern. “The only concrete step toward a sample return has been tossed after it has already been built. How does that save money?”
Indeed, this may be a signal that a sample return mission is not on the cards, certainly not involving the MSL. I would question why the sample storage box was included in the MSL at all, surely any future sample return attempt would be carried out by a devoted sample return mission? What was the motivation behind picking up rocks the MSL had analysed, only to store them for many years until a theoretical sample return robot collects the box?
When the cache was originally announced, scientists pointed out that the samples will have probably degraded by the time they are sent back anyway, so what’s the point?
Either way, the box now frees up some space on the MSL for an instrumentation cleaning station, but I can’t help but think the $2 million waste could have been prevented…
[/caption]
Communication with spacecraft is vital for NASA, and since the World Wide Web has enabled easy, reliable and quick contact for people around the world, the space agency decided to model a new deep space communication system on the internet. A month-long test of this “Interplanetary Internet” was successfully conducted by transmitting dozens of images to and from the EPOXI spacecraft, now about 20 million miles from Earth. The system uses software called Disruption-Tolerant Networking, or DTN created by a partnership between NASA and Google vice president Vint Cerf. “This is the first step in creating a totally new space communications capability, an interplanetary Internet,” said Adrian Hooke, team lead and manager of space-networking architecture, technology and standards at NASA Headquarters in Washington.
NASA’s current communication system, the Deep Space Network, has been around since the early days of space travel, and NASA is looking to upgrade and enhance their ability to communicate with spacecraft. The Interplanetary Internet must be robust to withstand delays, disruptions and disconnections in space. Glitches can happen when a spacecraft moves behind a planet, or when solar storms and long communication delays occur. The delay in sending or receiving data from Mars takes between three-and-a-half to 20 minutes at the speed of light. Therefore, the DTN sends information using a method that differs from the normal Internet’s Transmission-Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, or TCP/IP, communication suite, which Cerf also co-designed.
Unlike TCP/IP on Earth, the DTN does not assume a continuous end-to-end connection. In its design, if a destination path cannot be found, the data packets are not discarded. Instead, each network node keeps the information as long as necessary until it can communicate safely with another node. This store-and-forward method, similar to basketball players safely passing the ball to the player nearest the basket means information does not get lost when no immediate path to the destination exists. Eventually, the information is delivered to the end user. This is all done automatically.
Engineers began a month-long series of DTN demonstrations in October. Data were transmitted using NASA’s Deep Space Network in demonstrations occurring twice a week. Engineers use NASA’s EPOXI spacecraft as a Mars data-relay orbiter. EPOXI spacecraft is the bus from the Deep Impact mission that send an impactor to Comet Temple 1 in July of 2005, and it is now on a mission to encounter Comet Hartley 2 in two years. There are 10 nodes on this early interplanetary network. One is the EPOXI spacecraft itself and the other nine, which are on the ground at JPL, simulate Mars landers, orbiters and ground mission-operations centers.
This month-long experiment is the first in a series of planned demonstrations to qualify the technology for use on a variety of upcoming space missions. As Ian reported last month, the next round of testing will be done on the International Space Station next summer.
In the next few years, the Interplanetary Internet could enable many new types of space missions. Complex missions involving multiple landed, mobile and orbiting spacecraft will be far easier to support through the use of the Interplanetary Internet. It also could ensure reliable communications for astronauts on the surface of the moon.
NASA appears to be in the position of being a priority for our new president, somewhat of a rarity. So what can NASA expect under the Obama administration? NASA administrator Mike Griffin met with employees at the Kennedy Space Center on Thursday where workers asked if he would continue as administrator under the new president. “If the next president asks me to continue I would be happy to do it,” said Griffin, “But, I doubt that will happen.” However, if asked to stay, he would only if the Obama White House didn’t interfere with the direction NASA is going (presumably he meant the Constellation program and returning to the moon), and didn’t try to force any personnel on him. He also spoke out against extending the shuttle or using EELV rockets to transport humans to space instead of NASA’s current Ares I rocket design.“If somebody wanted me to stay on but said, ‘No, we need to go over here,’ well,” he said with a shrug, “do it with somebody else.” What else can NASA expect with the new presidential administration?
“While NASA usually does not factor as a near-term decision for incoming Administrations, this year the General Accounting Office highlighted Shuttle retirement as one of its top 13 urgent issues across the government,” NASA Deputy Administrator Shana Dale wrote in her blog after last week’s election. Dale said NASA has been developing a large set of reference material for the new presidential team to review. Artists concept of the Ares Rocket. Credit: NASA
Officials close to Obama’s transition team have said the new president is likely to review Constellation, the replacement for the shuttle that suffers from technical and financial problems that could delay its first scheduled mission in 2015.
Some have speculated Constellation could be terminated and replaced by more space shuttle flights and a different rocket design.
U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, one of Obama’s closest advisers on space, wants to keep Griffin as administrator, and lobbied the Obama team to keep Griffin, at least, for the time being. Current NASA Administrator, Michael Griffin. Credit: NASA
Some congressional and industry sources have cited several potential replacements, from former astronaut Sally Ride to Lori Garver, a former top NASA administrator who heads Obama’s NASA transition team.
Dr. Scott Pace, Director of the Space Policy Institute told Universe Today that putting NASA through a big reorganization could be counterproductive. “Given that NASA has reached a point of stability internally and organizationally, I would hate to see a year or two wasted by yet another re-organizational exercise,” he said. “The new president should give NASA their priorities, tell them what budget they’re going to get and move on from there. NASA has a lot on its plate right now, simply with the transition from the shuttle to whatever comes next. They need to stay focused over the next couple of years on completing their flights safely. So they should focus on that and not reorganization.”
[/caption]Oh dear. This is a tough lesson in “don’t sell NASA defective goods!”
It would appear that even NASA suffers from common infliction of shoddy contractors. Have you ever hired a plumber to find the leaking got worse? Have you hired a landscaping company who accidentally ripped up your prize hydrangeas? Have you purchased a passive flight releasable attachment mechanism interface plate only to find it had been damaged just before you attached it to your spaceship? Well, you’ve probably hired a dodgy plumber (possibly called Joe) or an unreliable gardener at some point, but these contractor problems pale into insignificance when compared with the life-or-death products sub-contractors produce for the US space agency.
It would appear that one such contractor, a 60 year old man from a space manufacturing company near Houston, attempted to pass a small, yet critical, part for NASA to fly on board Endeavour back in March this year. Unfortunately it was defective, possibly endangering the crew of the shuttle, and now he’s in for the high-jump after attempting a cover-up…
Richard Harmon from Cornerstone Machining Inc., near Houston, TX, was indicted yesterday by a grand jury, charged with fraud involving space vehicle parts and for making a false statement to NASA personnel. According to the charges, Harmon attempted to cover up damage to a part used to secure payloads inside the cargo bay of the shuttle. The damage occurred during the manufacturing process of the impressively named ‘passive flight releasable attachment mechanism interface plate,’ so to cover his mistake, Harmon is accused of welding the piece. His action had weakened the plate by up to 40%.
To make matters worse, Hermon is then accused of falsifying certificates stating that the product had been manufactured to the high standard required by NASA. The local US Attorney’s office said:
“The part was designed to secure cargo to the payload bay of the Endeavour during a flight to the International Space Station in March 2008. According to the indictment, the part, called a passive flight releasable attachment mechanism interface plate, was damaged during the manufacturing process. Harmon is alleged to have covered up the damage by causing it to be welded without informing Spacehab. Harmon is accused of delivering the part to Spacehab without disclosing the damage and falsely certifying the materials and processes used in machining the part complied with the requirements of applicable drawings.”
So what is this passive flight releasable attachment mechanism interface plate anyway? As a subcontractor to Spacehab (one of NASA’s suppliers), Cornerstone Machining Inc. prepares parts for use on missions such as space shuttle launches. The plate has an important function; it secures cargo in place during shuttle flights. Should this part fail, cargo may become loose inside the shuttle, endangering the crew, possibly having disastrous consequences for the mission. It was very fortunate that a pre-flight inspection turned up the fault.
“Had NASA not discovered the damage and used the damaged part as planned, it could have cracked open during flight, allowed cargo to come loose and, possibly, resulted in the loss of the spacecraft and personnel aboard,” said Tim Johnson, acting U.S. attorney in Houston.
Although Harmon has not pleaded to the charges, it’s not looking good. If he is convicted for fraud and for making false statements, ultimately putting the shuttle and US astronauts at risk, he faces a huge $500,000 fine and 15 years in jail.
So the moral of the story is: don’t mess with government agencies, let alone NASA…
[/caption]Just when we were growing concerned that we might be losing two Mars surface missions within a week of each other, it turns out Mars Exploration Rover Spirit has survived its recent run-in with a Sun-dimming dust storm. On Tuesday, Nancy reported that Spirit had generated a record low power output from its solar panels, indicating the storm could drive Spirit’s energy levels to a point where an emergency fail-safe would switch the wheeled robot into a sunlight-deprived coma. Mission controllers sent Spirit commands to shut down non-essential instrumentation and instructed it not to communicate with NASA until today.
It would appear the rugged rover weathered the storm, expertly avoided a low-power fault and after four days of silence, sent the signal to NASA just as it was told to do. What an incredible little robot…
One might think that using solar panels to collect light on a planet where Sun-blocking dust is a problem is a bit silly. After all, it seems the Phoenix Mars lander succumbed to an arctic dust storm-induced drained battery, and Spirit was also hit by the solar panel’s old foe, a dust storm in Gusev Crater. But the key point that needs to be remembered in both cases is that these missions operated far beyond their expected lifespan. Phoenix was only supposed to be digging into the Martian dirt for three months (it lasted five months), plus the lander had a pretty tough deadline to keep to: the loss of sunlight and the freezing cold of the onset of the northern winter. Phoenix knew its fate, but it was able to push into the dark and cold for a little longer…
However, Spirit’s fate was far from sealed. Usually the rover enjoys a full sol of daylight, day and night as regular as clockwork. This is another piece of NASA engineering that has surpassed every expectation there is. I doubt that any scientist would have said that a mission designed to operate for only three months, would be roving the Martian surface nearly five years later! So already, every minute Spirit (and its twin rover Opportunity on the other side of the planet) spends transmitting data from the Red Planet is a huge bonus.
However, MER scientists were not going to let Spirit drop dead due to a flat battery. When NASA realised Spirit was beginning to suffer, drawing much less power than was needed from its solar panels, action was taken. Firstly, some heaters were switched off (one heater protects the thermal emission spectrometer instrument from the cold), and Spirit was put on a strict low-energy consumption routine. This routine meant commanding Spirit not to attempt to communicate with Earth for four days, which was probably the most nerve-racking measure that could be taken; once communication is severed, who’s to say we’d ever hear from the rover again?
Even though engineers had stopped Spirit from communicating, they continued to listen, just in case Spirit dropped into a low-energy shutdown mode. However, no signal was received until today (Thursday), right when Spirit was scheduled to phone home. At mission control at JPL in Pasadena, CA, NASA engineers shouted “she’s talking,” when they got word that Spirit had made contact.
Although her batteries are low, the rover is still working and talking with NASA. Let’s hope Spirit holds on for a while longer…
NASA astronaut, Michael Fincke (Expedition 18 commander) will vote from orbit (NASA)
[/caption]Astronauts realise that there are some things they will miss out on. Whilst living on the International Space Station (ISS) for months at a time they may miss out on their child’s first words, they may forget to record the new season of Heroes, they may also miss out on a terrestrial celebration of their birthday.
While many of these things can upsetting or frustrating, say if you’re in space when a life-changing event or historical moment for your whole country is about to occur? This is exactly what is going to happen for the two US astronauts currently looking down on their nation from the orbiting outpost. Tomorrow is Presidential Election Day, so Michael Fincke and Gregory Chamitoff are going to exercise their rights as American citizens (that only four astronauts have been able to do previously) to vote in their next leader…
Fincke and Chamitoff will be able to vote in tomorrow’s US election using a Texas law that was passed in 1997. The eleven year-old law extends the right that every ground-based adult American citizen takes for granted to the US astronauts carrying out their duties on the space station.
“So I’m going to exercise my privilege as a citizen and actually vote from space on Election Day,” the ISS Expedition 18 Commander Michael Fincke said before he left Earth. “I think the candidates this year are exciting in and of themselves. But hopefully we get people to realize what a privilege it is, and they exercise and get a chance to vote.” Fincke was launched on October 12th with cosmonaut Yuri Lonchakov and space tourist Richard Garriott on the Soyuz TMA-13 flight.
The 1997 Texas bill has allowed four astronauts to vote in the southern US state. Astronaut David Wolf was the first space-based ballot to be cast in the ’97 Houston election from the Russian Space Station Mir. Then Leroy Chiao (2004 ISS Expedition 10 commander) was able to vote in the last presidential election. In 2006 and 2007, astronauts Michael Lopez-Alegria and Clayton Anderson were also able to cast their votes during separate space station missions.
This year, both orbiting astronauts are urging American citizens to get to their local polling places, as regardless of who is being voted for, the right to vote is a privilege. “Voting is the most important statement Americans can make in fulfilling a cherished right to select its leaders,” Fincke said in a patriotic NASA TV video with Chamitoff. “So this Election Day, take time to go to the polls and vote. If we can do it, so can you.”
It all sounds great, but how do astronauts actually vote in space?
The Texas bill allows astronauts to cast an absentee ballot from space with the help of the County Clerk of Harris and Brazoria counties (containing Houston). A secure electronic ballot is then sent to the ISS via mission control from the Clerk’s Office. Separately, an email is sent to the astronauts on board the space station with login information to the secure ballot. Once completed in orbit, the secure ballot is sent back to Mission Control and then forwarded to the Clerk’s Office.
“I was thankful for everyone making it possible for me to vote from space,” Leroy Chiao said. “I think it was an important symbolic gesture. Also, it was important to me personally.” Chiao added that making the space vote possible also encouraged ordinary US citizens to make the short trek down to their local polling station.
Discoveries of methane on Mars suggest it is actively being replenished. (Image: ESA/DLR/FU Berlin, G Neukum)
[/caption]
We’ve known about the methane in Mars’ atmosphere for over four years now. But we don’t know where it is coming from. On Earth, methane is produced from biological agents: rotting vegetation or flatulence from large animals like cows. But, of course, with our extensive explorations of Mars with rovers and high-resolution orbiting cameras, we’re fairly sure there are no Martian bovine equivalents chewing cud from the foliage on the Red Planet. Even if life existed in the past on Mars, methane is broken down quite quickly by sunlight, and scientists have calculated that methane should only exist for a few hundred years in the Martian atmosphere. The only possibility is that somehow, either chemically or biologically, the methane is being replaced on a regular basis. And now, two recent reports outlining separate discoveries on Mars make this methane mystery even more intriguing.
Methane was discovered on Mars by three independent groups in 2003 – 2004. One detection was made using the Mars Express spacecraft, another used observations from the Keck II and Gemini South telescopes, and the third used the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope.
And the mystery of how methane on Mars is being replenished has scientists continuing their observations in an effort to understand what’s happening on Mars. Michael Mumma of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland was one of the original methane discoverers. Observations he and his team have made over the last four years show methane is not spread evenly around Mars, but concentrated in a few “hotspots.” They have seen that methane clouds spanning hundreds of kilometers form over these hotspots and dissipate within a year – much shorter than the 300 – 600 years it was thought to take for atmospheric methane to be destroyed by sunlight. If methane is being destroyed so quickly, it also must be created at far higher rates than previously thought. Mumma reported these results at a planetary science conference last month.
One of the hotspots is Nili Fossae a fissure that has been eroded and partly filled in by sediments and clay-rich ejecta from a nearby crater. Could a living ecosystem be hidden here under the Martian surface? On Earth, subterranean microbes survive without sunlight, free oxygen, or contact with the surface. Additionally, the prospect becomes more intriguing when it is known on Earth, most deep-surface microbes are primitive, single-celled organisms that power their metabolism with chemical energy from their environment. These microbes are called “methanogens” because they make methane as a waste product.
Nili Fossae is one of the possible landing sites for the Mars Science Laboratory, the next generation of rover currently set to head off the Red Planet next year.
A pair of pit caves on Mars. Could life exist inside? Credit: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona
But astrobiologists aren’t ruling out the possibility of some type of ongoing chemical process on Mars, which could be producing the methane. But even this is intriguing, because it means there are active processes going on inside Mars. One idea proposed in a recent paper is that methane clathrates are near the Martian surface, and are constantly releasing small amounts of methane as temperatures and pressure near the surface change.
Methane clathrates are solid forms of water that contain a large amount of methane within its crystal structure.
Caroline Thomas and her colleagues at the Universite de Franche-Comte say the clathrates could only exist near the surface of Mars if the atmosphere had once been methane rich. Otherwise the clathrates could never have formed. One possibility is that the atmosphere was once temporarily enriched by a comet impact. Also, the discovery of gray crystalline hematite deposits on the surface could be a proof of an early methane-rich Martian atmosphere.
Otherwise, the researchers say, the only other possibility is a biological source.
“Our results show that methane enriched clathrate hydrates could be stable in the subsurface of Mars only if a primitive CH4-rich atmosphere has existed or if a subsurface source of CH4 has been (or is still) present,” the researchers write.
So what does all this mean? The Mars Science Laboratory rover might have the ability to find out, or at least bring us closer to solving this mystery. Otherwise it will take a fairly large breakthrough from the other spacecraft and telescopes observing Mars. But it’s possible we might not fully understand why Mars has methane until humans actually go there themselves to find out.
[/caption]In an initiative energized by Google Vice-President and Chief Internet Evangelist Vint Cerf, the International Space Station could be testing a brand new way of communicating with Earth. In 2009, it is hoped that the ISS will play host to an Interplanetary Internet prototype that could standardize communications between Earth and space, possibly replacing point-to-point single use radio systems customized for each individual space mission since the beginning of the Space Age.
This partnership opens up some exciting new possibilities for the future of communicating across vast distances of the Solar System. Manned and robotic space craft will be interconnected via a robust interplanetary network without the problems associated with incompatible communication systems…
“The project started 10 years ago as an attempt to figure out what kind of technical networking standards would be useful to support interplanetary communication,” Cerf said in a recent interview. “Bear in mind, we have been flying robotic equipment to the inner and outer planets, asteroids, comets, and such since the 1960’s. We have been able to communicate with those robotic devices and with manned missions using point-to-point radio communications. In fact, for many of these missions, we used a dedicated communications system called the Deep Space Network (DSN), built by JPL in 1964.”
Indeed, the DSN has been the backbone of interplanetary communications for decades, but an upgrade is now required as we have a growing armada of robotic missions exploring everything from the surface of Mars to the outermost regions of the Solar System. Wouldn’t it be nice if a communication network could be standardized before manned missions begin moving beyond terrestrial orbit?
“When we launch a spacecraft with a unique set of sensors onboard, we often end up writing special communication and application software that is adapted to that spacecraft’s sensor systems and manipulators,” Cerf said in response to the challenges space missions face each time they are designed.
The Internet uses standard TCP/IP protocols so billions of online entities are always compatible. Although there are limitations to the Internet, it has proven to be a highly flexible and scalable system, so with the help of Google, NASA hopes to push the Internet beyond Earth. “The Interplanetary Internet project is primarily about developing a set of communication standards and technical specifications to support rich networking in space environments,” Cerf added.
This all sounds very interesting, but the challenges with building such a system require some novel techniques. How do you deal with the limitation of the speed of light? After all, it can take light 40 minutes to travel to-and-from Mars, and up to 12 hours to Pluto and back. How do you cater for planetary rotation? The transmitters/receivers won’t always be on the correct side of the planet. What happens if a satellite signal is blocked by a planet, the Sun or a moon?
Vint Cerf says the disruption of data transmission has to be confronted with a delay- and disruption-tolerant networking system, otherwise known as DTN. “It will allow us to maintain communications more effectively, getting much more data because we don’t have to be in direct line of sight with the ultimate recipient in order to transfer data,” he said.
DTN will be based on store-and-forward methods used by TCP/IP systems; if there is a disruption in signal, the transmitting station will hold data packets until the signal is re-established. However, DTN will be more robust, catering for long transmission lag-times (such as the many-hour light transmission times between Earth and the outer Solar System). “We have to cope with the fact that there is a really high potential for delay and disruption in the system,” he added.
Standard TCP/IP protocol should also work seamlessly with the DTN, allowing planetary missions to have their own distributed Internet whilst using DTN as a link through interplanetary space.
