1 / 21

MSL Landing Site Selection Activities

MSL Landing Site Selection Activities. John Grant and Matt Golombek Co-chairs, MSL Landing Site Steering Committee *Please note that members of the Press are present at this workshop. Guiding Principles:.

kbodily
Download Presentation

MSL Landing Site Selection Activities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MSL Landing Site Selection Activities John Grant and Matt Golombek Co-chairs, MSL Landing Site Steering Committee *Please note that members of the Press are present at this workshop

  2. Guiding Principles: • Landing site selection is critical to all aspects of MSL mission and program success (no landing, no science) • Final site recommendation, selection, and approval is the job of the Project, MSL Science Team, and NASA HQ, respectively. • The broad expertise of the science community is crucial to the identification of optimal sites. • Process is open to all and has no predetermined outcome

  3. Basis for Site Selection: • Sites Must Meet AllEngineering Requirements • Selected Sites Are Best Suited to Achieving MSLMission Science Objectives: • Assess the present and past habitability of the martian environments accessed by the mission. • Assess the biological potential of the regions accessed, characterize their geology and geochemistry, investigate planetary processes that influence habitability, including the role of water, and characterize surface radiation. • Candidate landing sites should contain evidence of a past or present habitable environment and the evidence for habitability should be expected to be preserved for, accessible to, and interpretable by the MSL investigations.. MSL Science Payload Described in Next Talk

  4. MSL Landing Site Selection Process • SELECTION PROCESS TWO PARALLEL ACTIVITIES • 1) Define and Refine Set of Landing Site Constraints Based on Prelim. S/C Design • Elevation, Lat., Ellipse Size, Rock Abundance & Height, Slope, Dust • 2) Map these Constraints into Potential Landing Sites on Mars • Use Available Remote Sensing Data and Models • ACQUISITION OF NEW ORBITAL DATA OF LANDING SITES • MUST LAND SAFELY - Safety of Site is Paramount • Get No Science if Don't - Risk to Mission and Program • MUST BE DEFENSIBLE • The AA will want to know who, how, what, where, and why • Must Survive Multiple Withering Reviews, Must be Thorough • Do Everything Possible to Understand Surface Properties • Factor Science Objectives of Mission into Selection of Safe Sites • MUST BE DONE IN AN OPEN ENVIRONMENT • Multiple Opportunities for Community Involvement • Open Workshops - Provide Science Community Input to Landing Site • Also Educational Opportunities & Public Outreach

  5. Participants in MSL Landing Site Selection: • NASA-Appointed Landing Site Steering Committee • Co-chairs Grant and Golombek (MDAP peer-reviewed/funded) • Other Members Appointed by NASA HQ • Science Community Input • Broad e-mail distribution, Workshop Attendance, Websites • Mars Characterization Investigators (MDAP, MFRP, CDP) • Insight into Landing Site Science and Safety • Additional Members • Blend Experience and Mission Involvement • Provides for Feed-back on Process • MSL Science Team and Project: • Science Team helps identify and evaluate merits of sites • Engineering teams define the engineeringconstraints and help analyze aspects of the surface and atmosphericenvironments. • Project management and the PSG review scientific analyses of sites. • Headquarters and Other Ex-Officios • Ensures broad, relevant MEP participation • Access to Ongoing Mission Data • Planetary Protection Compliance • All Landing Site Selection Activities Documented on Two Websites • http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/landingsites/ • http://webgis.wr.usgs.gov/msl

  6. MSL Landing Site Steering Committee Members

  7. Data Sets for MSL Landing Site Selection: Expect Exhaustive Landing Site Evaluation Process

  8. MSL Engineering Requirements • Latitude • Wide latitude band ±60° • No Subsolar Latitude Power Constraint [latitude band ±10-15°] • Elevation - “Land Anywhere” wrt Previous Landers • Up to 2.0 km Provides Access to ~83% of Mars • VL1, 2 & MPF Landed Below <-3 km [In Northern Lowlands] • MER Landing Sites <-1.3 km • And Most of Highlands • Key Terrain for Exploring Early Noachian Environment • Possibly Warm and Wet, Conducive for Life • Ellipse Size • Small ~20 km Diameter Allows >>>103 to 109 Sites (potentially) • Number Sites Scales with Ellipse Size - smooth, flat, safe • Beagle - Length 500 km - 1 Site • MPF - Length 200-300 km <10 Sites • MER - Length ~100 km ~150 Sites • “Go To” Sites Possible - Specific Area Identified from Orbit • Land Next to Area of Interest, Traverse Out of Ellipse to Area of Interest • More in Subsequent Talks….

  9. MSL Landing Altitude < 2.0 km MOLA Topography ±90º Lat, 180º to -180°W Lon • Black area is topography > 2.0 km • Lines at ±50º, ±60º latitude

  10. Summary of Current Engineering Constraints on MSL Landing Sites

  11. Planetary Protection Requirements • The MSL assigned to Category IVc by NASA's Planetary Protection Office (more on this in subsequent talks). • Landing sites not known to have extant water or water-ice within one meter of the surface • Later access to "special regions" defined in NPR 8020.12C permitted only in the vertical direction through use of sterilized sampling hardware • Special regions - terrestrial organisms are likely to propagate, or interpreted to have a high potential for the existence of extant martian life forms • MEPAG Special Regions Science Advisory Group • Planetary Protection Office compliance of specific landing sites and nearby regions

  12. MSL High Level Schedule: Fiscal Years 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 MSL Mission Phases C/D A B E … Instrument Selection MSR PDR CDR MRR 09-10/09 Launch Window 5/06 1st LSW ~40 sites Prioritized List For MRO 10/07 2nd LSW ~20-24 sites 8/08 3rd 5-10 sites/LZ 6-12/10 Arrival Window 10/08 Select Landing Site Zone L-1 yr 6/09 4th LSW 1 site Landed Ops Select landing ellipse L-1 month

  13. LANDING SITE SELECTION TIMELINE • 09-10/09 Launch • 9/09 Selection of actual landing ellipse • 6/09 4th, Final Workshop • 10/08 [L-1 yr] Selection/Target Landing Site Zone/LV • 8/08 3rd Workshop Review & Recommend Landing Site Zone/Zones • 10/07 2nd Landing Site Workshop • 5/06 1st Landing Site Workshop • 1/06 Announcement/Invitation to Workshop Engineering Constraints Defined Science Objectives Defined • 11/05 Preliminary Engineering Constraints Defined

  14. 1st Landing Site Workshop 5/06 • 5/06 - First Landing Site Workshop • Community Provide Suggestions for Landing Sites • MSL Engineering Constraints & Science Objectives Known • Instrument Selected, Science Objectives and Habitability Defined • Lots of THEMIS and MOC Images Available, • Use Data to Guide Selection • MER Prime Mission Over (but still going!!) • Community/Project Can Incorporate What Has Been Learned • HRSC & Omega images available from 1/04 • MRO Primary Science starts in late 2006 • Workshop Objective is Prioritization of Potential Sites – ~40 • Used to Target MRO, MOC, THEMIS, HRSC Images

  15. http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/landingsites/msl/workshops/data/http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/landingsites/msl/workshops/data/

  16. A Look Ahead:The 2nd Landing Site Workshop 10/07 • 10 months of HiRISE, CTX, CRISM Data Available • New MRO Discovered Sites Possible • Evaluate up to 40 Sites Imaged by MRO • Prioritize Top Dozen; Dozen Backups • Repeat Coverage for Top Dozen • 10 Months to Acquire and Evaluate Data

  17. 3rd Landing Site Workshop 8/08 • Recommend Landing Site Zone • Need to target launch vehicle • Landing site zone is ~10° Lat. by 15° Long. box, • within which is Landing Ellipse, Could be Multiple Ellipses • Hq Will Likely Select Zone • Continue MRO Data Acquisition/Evaluation • Of Preferred Ellipse • Other Possible Ellipses in Zone [maybe handful] • Surroundings for Context for Landing Site

  18. 4th Landing Site Workshop 6/09 • Recommend Final Ellipse • 10 Months before 4th Workshop • Complete Detailed Evaluation of Site Safety and Science • Series Project, Program, Hq Reviews • Project Peer Review • Project Confirmation Review • Planetary Protection Compliance Review • Hq Review and Selection • Launch Opportunity Opens 09/15/09 • Continued Evaluation of Landing Site • For Final TCM Targeting and Post-Landing Science

  19. Day 1 - Wed Introductions and Goals Constraints and Data Sets Overview of Site Science Gale Argyre, etc. Discussion Day 2 - Thurs Holden Eberswalde Terby Valles Marineris/ Chaos Meridiani/Arabia Volcanoes and/or Water Clays and Sulfates Discussion Schedule for the First MSL WorkshopMay 31st-June 2nd Day 3 - Friday • What’s Next? • (MRO/Maps) • Summary Discussion • Break • Discussion and Prioritization • Meeting ends at 12:00 pm

  20. What’s Next Step?MRO Mapping Starts Late 06 • At End First Workshop Prioritize Proposed Sites Into 3 Groups for MRO imaging (distinguish “Go To” sites) • 10-15 High Priority - Request ROTOs • 10-15 Priority – ROTOs or Nadir imaging • 10-15 Low Priority – Likely only Nadir imaging • Need to Define a Region of Interest (ROI) for each site • Update List Regularly, Reprioritize or Introduce New Sites Based on MRO Images (no early stereo) • Request data for Each [See Smrekar Talk on Friday] • Evaluate Sites at 2nd Workshop • Based on MRO data [HiRISE, CRISM, CTX, SHARAD] • and THEMIS, MOC, Omega & HRSC data

More Related