NASA Mars Rover Opportunity Lifts Off 155
Joost Schuur writes "At 11:18 PM EDT on Monday, Opportunity, the second of 2 NASA Mars Exploration Rovers took off aboard a Boeing Delta 2 Heavy rocket after several delays and begun its 305 million mile trip to the Red Planet, where it will join its sister vehicle Spirit, which launched June 10th. Spirit and Opportunity will land on opposite sides of Mars, travelling up to 40 meters a day, and use a series of instruments to search for water, including the Rock Abrasion Tool, which will grind into rocks to give scientists a peak inside. Things are going to get crowded next January in orbit, as both NASA missions join the European Mars Express mission also launched this month and the Japanese Nozomi probe, which would finally complete its troublesome 5 year journey. Those stuck on Earth can take advantage of the closest Mars opposition in 60,000 years and watch with a telescope, or follow the images provided by the International MarsWatch 2003 group."
Poor martians (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Poor martians (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Poor martians (Score:2, Funny)
With apologies to HG Wells (Score:3, Funny)
With the luck Nasa has had recently exploring Mars, I don't think we're going to disturb anyone there.
Re:Poor martians (Score:5, Funny)
"There are no infidel alien robots on Mars! Never! We have already destroyed one of their stupid vehicles, and we have another one surrounded on all sides! Let the Earthlings bask in their own illusion! They have not landed, and those that have landed, we will welcome with bullets and shoes!"
Re:Poor martians (Score:2, Funny)
WebCast on Mars Exploration (Score:5, Informative)
Terrorist metric system will crush NASA mission ! (Score:2, Funny)
Probe Names (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Probe Names (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Probe Names (Score:1)
Klingons.
The Klingons will be circling Uranus.
Re:Probe Names (Score:1)
OMG...so many punchlines, so little time. Does the word Goatse mean anything to you?
Best /. article I've seen in a while! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Best /. article I've seen in a while! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Best /. article I've seen in a while! (Score:1)
Re:Best /. article I've seen in a while! (Score:1)
Re:Best /. article I've seen in a while! (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just imagine the surprise... (Score:3, Funny)
...or burns "No Kill I" into a nearby rock...
...or challenges Kirk, Spock, President Lincoln, and the Vulcan god-like dude to fight a bunch of outlaws.
Re:Just imagine the surprise... (Score:1)
Re:Just imagine the surprise... (Score:2)
...or chooses that particular moment to deeble [google.com].
good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:4, Interesting)
What would really interest me however would be if they switched their attention from Mars to Venus. Most scientists agree that life on Mars is not feasable wheras Venus, which is closer to the sun, has a far more interesting chemical makeup. Although too hot for any carbon based lifeforms to be found, many scientists have thought that in Venus's rich ammonia lakes a Silicon based life could have emerged. Although these would be very basic forms of life (not as advanced a monkeys) discovering them would mean that we could no longer view ourselves as being at the center of the universe.
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
Atlantis? What happened to Atlantis? I thought it was Challenger, then Columbia, right?
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:1)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:5, Funny)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:5, Informative)
I guess as the others pointed out, you were referring to Columbia and STS-107.
Actually I am pretty sure this mission has been in the books for quite sometime. Especially since Earth and Mars are supposed to be in the closest configuration with respect to their orbits. A trip to Mars right now will take approximately 7-8 months and the two rovers(Spirit and Opportunity) should get to Mars by January.
Also, its not just NASA which has used the current orbit position as an advantage; the European Space Agency(ESA) and the Japanese Space Agency(NASDA i think) have also launched their respective payloads to Mars.
About Venus, I doubt if NASA will come out with a program. A whole load of factors , not the least scientific goes into allocating budget to programs. And especially right now, I would think it would be really hard for NASA to convince the govt., to fund a program to Venus. The question of selling it to the public ranks high up there among the criteria and seems tough to me.
Venus (Score:5, Informative)
There are Venus missions under study now. The leading one is called the Venus In-Situ Explorer.
See http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/concepts.htm [nasa.gov]
More likely because Venus is *difficult* (Score:2)
Mars is relatively easy.
I'll still never forgive Time for thinking Nadia Comaneci was more important that the first pictures from the surface of Mars. (Even though I did have a bit of a crush on her at the time....)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:1)
Oh, finding some extraterrestrial robo-bacteria would somehow unseat us from the center of the universe?? What are they going to do, throw a mitochrondria at us? Now, if we found Unicron or something, I'd be more interested.
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm not saying that the Mars exploration is not important, I'm only worried about science without big budgets and TV cameras being considered "not serious".
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
I wonder if we sent something modern if it'd survive longer than the average hour that the Russian landers lasted.
I'd love to see some good footage from around the planet - would probably rival hollywood's wildest dreams.
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:3, Informative)
There is virtually zero chance of life on the surface of Venus, and it's way too hot for any kinds of lakes other than, say, lead. Ammonia, which evaporates at room temperature even on Earth, is right out. However, there is a benign zone in Venus's upper atmosphere, deep enough to avoid nast
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
Well, until I get a little more cooperation from all of you I must insist that I am at the center of the universe. Now please have all of your scientists conduct long studies and make time-consuming measurements and I'll have mine do the same. Eventually we'll get to the bottom of this, we're predicting the results will be in sometime next century.
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:2)
MANY scientists? Can you name some of them? Silicon-based life is a load of hooey. Call me BiochemistryExpert.
And there are no lakes of any kind on Venus.
Where did you get this stuff, some 50's sci-fi magazine?
Mars missions planned 5 years ahead (Score:2)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:1, Interesting)
(oops?)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:1)
Re:good to see nasa doing some serious science (Score:1)
Don't Disturb The Natives! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Don't Disturb The Natives! (Score:2, Funny)
Additional media coverage at... (Score:5, Informative)
planetary.org [planetary.org]
Discovery.com [discovery.com]
Some of the context is redundant, the first link is the most informative.
Please tell me..... (Score:4, Funny)
Remeber...... Faster, Better, Cheaper
Please delete as applicable.
Re:Please tell me..... (Score:1)
Re:Please tell me..... (Score:2)
>
> Remeber...... Faster, Better, Cheaper
"...Choose any two."
And my name went with them... (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.planetary.org/rrgtm/dvd.html
Let's hope this doesn't
It's strangely comforting to know that my name will be up there forever (well at least until we colonise Mars and enshrine the little discs somewhere)!
Quizo69
Here's the text in case of /. (Score:2, Informative)
A Planetary Society produced mini-DVD will fly on each Mars Exploration Rover spacecraft, mounted to the lander petals as shown here. These DVDs are designed to engage and involve the public in numerous ways. After landing on Mars the rover will capture an image of the DVD before driving away from the lander.
Each DVD carries nearly four million Mars enthusiasts? names collected by NASA. Each DVD also includes engaging designs leading to other activities. Each DVD?s
My kids names are already there!!! (Score:2)
I did this for both of my kids entire classes which they got quite a kick out of. "Ooooh, my name is gonna be on MARS!!"
Then it crashed.....
Re:My kids names are already there!!! (Score:2)
Re:My kids names are already there!!! (Score:2)
Hence the title of my post...
It would have been nice if had landed as expected then there would have been more press about the names. Once it was lost, so were the names in the eyes of the press.
Re:And my name went with them... (Score:1)
oh, the name is opportunity... i thought... (Score:2, Funny)
because after the last couple attempts, just because they launch doesn't seem to mean a guaranteed placement.
Damn... (Score:1, Funny)
Better for everyone (Score:2, Insightful)
Although if you look at the ISS, that has been hampered with cost and other problems from each country. Also it could limit the research and intelligence that is gather.
6 on way, 1/2 dozen the other
Re:Better for everyone (Score:1)
This makes one wonder: Another high-res camera? Do we really need to verify existence of water again with basically the same kind of instruments on board of an orbiter?
Re:Better for everyone (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Better for everyone (Score:3, Insightful)
It's like egg fertilisation - why release one big sperm when you can send millions of little ones and increase the odds of one getting through!
Having lots of space programmes is just like making love to a beautiful woman.
Deep Space Network Overload? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Deep Space Network Overload? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Deep Space Network Overload? (Score:1)
Bracing for an interplanetary traffic jam [nasa.gov]
Easier than you think (Score:4, Informative)
Also remember that Spirit and Opportunity are going to opposite sides of the planet, so generally only one will use the DSN at a time.
Re:Easier than you think (Score:4, Informative)
This placed an enormous strain on the DSN's resources. The very low data rate required more tracking time to transfer a given amount of information, and multiple antennas at each site were often arrayed to increase the received signal. The end of Galileo frees these antennas for other missions.
I visited the Canberra DSN site in September 1997. While I was there, Jupiter rose and most of the antennas at the site were pointed at it. Very impressive to see them all moving together.
Re:Easier than you think (Score:2, Informative)
And add to that that the ESA is finishing up work on their own tracking station facilities. The DSN and thier European counterparts will be busy (they always are), but they can handle the load.
With that said, the DSN is getting up there in age and many of the antennae need upgrading and/or replacing. Hopefully, there will be budget money in the coming years to deal with this.
Re:Easier than you think (Score:1, Informative)
It's a little more complicated than "you just add extra receivers", but that is the gist of it.
Good show (Score:1)
Re:Good show (Score:1)
Re:Good show (Score:1)
First transmission from probe as it leaves Earth (Score:3, Funny)
Enough with the probes (Score:4, Interesting)
And before you go arguing how it will be so expensive, bear in mind that it would only be a 7% increase in NASA's budget for the next 10 years, and that would give us 5 manned missions.
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:3, Insightful)
7% increase once and that 10 years long or
every year a 7% increase, for ten years?
That makes a *BIG* difference. Does anyone want to let NASA's budget grow exponentially?
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:2, Informative)
Incidentally, this would bring NASA's budget up to the level of spending during the Apollo program, adjusted for inflation, of course.
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:1)
I appreciate your enthusiasm, and I agree that we need to get people to Mars, and I'm a big fan of Zubrin's work.
With that said, I don't think it's an either/or proposition. We have 6+ billion people on this planet and we still have a lot of good science that is done with orbiters around Earth. The rovers are being sent to two different likely places where we may find evidence of life, past or present. I view these missions as information gathering for what I hope are the inevitable manned missions to
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:1)
For example, a mission involving an orbiter and a few hundred micro-probes to land at various points on Mars and develop a climatological/meteorilogical profile would provide more practical data than a single, expensive probe designed to "find evidence of life."
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:1)
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not sure how valid of a claim that is. Certainly, right now our probes aren't that great, mainly because there is little actual autonomy. However, in the near future, probes will be built to handle major decisionmaking on their own. Our best hope for exploring the most of Mars is to send thousands of small autonomous probes that will do the looking around for us. This could be done for roughly the same cost as the manned mission, without the PR risk (yes, I hate it but it's very true) that manned missions currently represent.
I work at the Jet Propulsion Lab, and many [nasa.gov] of the robotics [nasa.gov] technologies [nasa.gov] that are currently being persued [nasa.gov] there should give us the capability to collect huge amounts of useful data on Mars in the next 20 years or so.
Is manned flight expensive? Well not really, but the price/performance ratio isn't that great compared to what will be done in the next 20 years with robotics probles (remember economy of scale, 1000 probes isn't much more expensive to build than 1).
Costs Baby... (Score:3, Informative)
The two rovers are sent for 800 million, each costing 400 million that way. Shuttles still cost 500 million per launch. This doesn't count any of that extra stuff, like repairs and maintenance that need to happen. Also the cost of building these shuttles are not in that 500 million number, often shuttle trips will cost more.
Besides will men really be that much better at examining red rock
Re:Enough with the probes (Score:3, Interesting)
And if Congress doesn't wanna increase NASA's budget, how about we scrap the Shuttle and ISS and use the savings to fund a permanent presence on Mars, rather than just low earth orbit?
The Shuttle will have to be retired and replaced with a better manned launch system in 10 years anyways.
What would you rather have by 2010? A shuttle replacement, or a permanent Ma
Rock Abrasion Tool (Score:2)
Should we be going there? (Score:2, Funny)
Without such hard evidence, I don't see justification for going in there and invading like that.
yeah, but... (Score:2)
Another good official site (Score:2, Interesting)
Peak Inside? (Score:1)
Wow, they're going to grind rocks down into mountains! I'd really like to peek inside those rocks to see where they hide those hills!
Visualization (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.maasdigital.com/gallery.html
Check out the CGI animation of the mission! (Score:4, Informative)
After a quick search on the web once we got home, I found lesser quality versions of the film.
A couple are here:
http://athena.cornell.edu/the_mission/rov_video
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mer/gallery/video/anim
I think the animator's site had the best quality one, in MPEG. I think his name is Maas.
If you like eye candy, this is sort of a factually based minds-eye type video. I think it's really good CGI, but I'm no expert.
I'd read about the mission, and spinning the probe up for the big burn, and reeling out weights to spin down, etc, but it's not until I saw it on the screen, that the grace and elegance of all the solutions to the various problems of sending this probe to mars really hit me.
Seeing this film makes me feel good about paying my taxes.
Heard on the radio this morning... (Score:2, Funny)
Rocket Hub? (Score:1)
Re:I hope... (Score:1)
Daniel
Re:Something fishy?? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Something fishy?? (Score:3, Interesting)
You don't really want to let them reenter the atmosphere and cover your city with radioactive dust. That is a problem. Maybe one can place the radioactive stuff into (nearly) unbreakable shells. Nasa et
Re:Something fishy?? (Score:1)
Also, the amount of radiation from the amount of plutonium in the Cassini probe, should it have broken up in the earth's atmosphere for some reason, would be miniscule. (I don't have the exact figure, but my source is "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin.) However, RTGs have a very low power density, making nuclear reactors a much more attractive option. (For those who don't know, RTG
Re:Something fishy?? (Score:2)
In europe, quite a few care about russian nuclear submarines. At least they are saying it
The cassini probe has probably been more attacked because people see the direct link to the air they breathe.
Off topic: Nevertheless, the highly radioactive reactors in the submarines are a problem. But there are many, many problems to solve...
And e.g. unsecured nuclear weapons are concer