|
A NASA report lays out the risks of exploring Mars and considers
how to mitigate them.
+ Play Audio |
+ Download Audio | +
Historia en Español | +
Email to a friend | + Join mailing list
October 28, 2005: This is it: the moment of truth.
The
spacecraft door has just clanged shut behind you, locking
you and your fellow astronauts into the small cabin that will
be your home for the next half-year's journey through interplanetary
space--at the end of which you personally will be the first
human to set foot on Mars.
As
the countdown echoes in your ears and as you feel the boosters
rumbling beneath you, you wonder ... Are we ready?
According
to Murphy's Law, whatever can go wrong, will go wrong, and
presumably this applies on Mars as well as Earth. So if things
go wrong on Mars, are we ready for them? What do we need to
know about Mars before we send people there?
That
question is what NASA's Mars Exploration Program Analysis
Group (MEPAG for short) addressed in its
report dated June 2, 2005, which bears the long mouthful
of a title An Analysis of the Precursor Measurements of
Mars Needed to Reduce the Risk of the First Human Mission
to Mars.
The
heart of MEPAG's June report is a full-page table on p. 11
that lists 20 risks, "any one of which could take out
a mission," says David Beaty, Mars Program Science Manager
at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and the report's lead author.
Top
among those risks:
- Martian
dust--its corrosiveness, its grittiness, its effect on electrical
systems such as computer boards;
- possible
Martian "replicating biohazards"--organisms dangerous
either to the astronauts or for return to Earth;
- the
dynamics of the Martian atmosphere, including dust storms,
that might affect landing and takeoff;
-
potential sources of water, especially crucial if the first
astronauts were to stay on the surface longer than a month.
The
group asked itself, "What would we need to learn by sending
robotic missions to Mars to reduce each risk? And how much
would that information lower the risk [e.g., if engineers
could design the spacecraft differently to protect astronauts]?"
Loud
and clear from the MEPAG report is that "Martian dust
is a #1 risk," says Jim Garvin, NASA chief scientist
at the Goddard Space Flight Center. "We need to understand
the dust in designing power systems, space suits and filtration
systems. We need to mitigate it, keep it out, figure out how
to live with it."
According
to MEPAG, a mission to gather and return samples of Martian
soil and dust to Earth is crucial.
"Most
scientists believe it's not possible to evaluate biohazards
without a sample return," notes Beaty. In addition, a
sample return could resolve controversies about just how gritty
or how chemically toxic the Martian soil may be. Even though
lunar dust proved to be a major problem for the Apollo astronauts,
"lunar dust does not equal Martian dust," Garvin
cautions. Scientists and engineers simply need to get their
hands on real Martian dirt. The significance of a sample even
as small as 1 kilogram "should not be underestimated"
for both its scientific and engineering value, Beaty adds.

Above:
A partial list of risky things on Mars, from page 11 of the
June 2005 MEPAG report. [More]
The
MEPAG report also gave high rank to measurements involving
the release of probes with parachutes and balloons into the
Martian atmosphere. "We could observe Martian wind speeds
at different altitudes, which is vital both for targeting
accuracy when a mission lands, and for reaching the right
orbit when the mission departs," Beaty says.
And
then there's water: MEPAG assigns high priority to robotic
expeditions that could definitively find water, either as
water ice or as deposits of hydrous minerals. Two versions
of a first human expedition are being debated: a short stay
of about a month, and a long stay of about a year and a half.
While a short-stay mission might be able to carry all the
water it needed with it--relying on closed-loop life-support
systems to recycle waste-water--a long-stay mission would
need to excavate fresh water and manufacture breathable oxygen
from ice-filled Martian soils.
These
are but a few of MEPAG's recommendations. The full report
may be read here.
MEPAG
itself is something new.
"NASA
is reinventing how it formally acquires advice," explains
Garvin. Until the last few years, NASA has relied either on
commissioning formal recommendations from the National Academy
of Sciences, or on constituting ad hoc working groups. But
both "would go quiet" after completing a single
report, so there was no mechanism for evaluating how such
high-level recommendations translated into concrete specifications
for engineering hardware, scientific experiments, and actual
measurements.
Right:
Discussion at an MEPAG workshop. Open to all interested Mars
scientists, MEPAG regularly evaluates Mars exploration goals
on the basis of the widest possible community outreach. [More]
In
contrast, MEPAG is a permanent body of scientists and engineers,
working rather like the former U.S. Congressional Office of
Technology Assessment. Its sole purpose is to figure out how
big-picture goals translate into specific design options for
exploration.
"It's
worked so well that we're seeking to use the MEPAG model to
form similar groups devoted to analyzing mission approaches
to the Moon, Venus, and the outer planets," Garvin says.
Are
we ready? Ask MEPAG.
SEND
THIS STORY TO A FRIEND
Authors: Trudy E. Bell
| Editor: Dr. Tony
Phillips | Credit: Science@NASA
| More
Information |
|
The
three most recent MEPAG reports (from June, July, and
August 2005) plus earlier ones, can be obtained from
MEPAG's
home page.
Crackling
Planets -- (Science@NASA) on the electrostatic hazards
of lunar and Martian dust
The
Devils of Mars -- (Science@NASA) on potential hazards
of Martian dust blown at hurricane speeds
Don't
Breathe the Moondust -- (Science@NASA) on the potential
toxicity of lunar and Martian dust
En
Route to Mars, the Moon -- (Science@NASA) on the
value of using the Moon as a testbed for systems destined
for Mars),
The
Sands of Mars -- (Science@NASA) on the challenges
of designing excavating equipment for a long-stay mission
to Mars
A
primer of definitions and approaches to assessing hazards
and risks is "Managing Murphy's law: engineering
a minimum-risk system," pp. 24–27 in a special
issue of IEEE Spectrum magazine on designing large,
complex systems (vol. 26, no. 6, June 1989).
The
Vision for Space Exploration |
|