Mars exploration of Mars: the way is to act "faster, better and cheaper"

2000/05/01 D. Friedman, Louis Iturria: Elhuyar aldizkaria

• Astronomia

The new construction procedure is not guilty. However, there would be no alternative. In the political reality of the United States there is no shorter-term place for larger scientific projects in the space sphere, or for more ambitious budgets. The same happens in other countries dedicated to space exploration. We can claim that this situation is bad and The Planetary Society will continue to move forward for organizations around the world to take more steps in exploring space, but if we give up working faster, better and cheaper, we will do fewer projects and develop them more slowly. Only time will tell if this new type of project would supposedly be better or not, but it is known that we can run less. Moreover, political uncertainty will affect the approval of budgets, as was the case in the post-Viking era (from 1976 to the early 1990s).

From the beginning we understood that the new way of working all had risks, but that those risks were acceptable. Dan Goldin, NASA administrator, made it clear. However, we should keep in mind that the risk is not only generated in a project that is made fast and cheap. Many expensive spacecraft that took a long time to build have also suffered errors. Mars Observer, a resounding failure in 1993, was twice as expensive than the three 1998 Mars Surveyor sessions, including Mars Polar Lander, Deep Space 2, and more expensive than the Mars Climate Orbiter.

Also, the 1998 sessions were held throughout the time. This year's losses have been quite minor, and we have in hand the Mars program that can face accepting errors and wins. This should be an affirmation of how to work "faster, better and cheaper" and not its negation. The Mars program is solid and can undergo changes. US forecasts for the years 2001, 2003 and 2005 are able to adapt to new situations, according to guidelines to ensure a "continuous robotic presence" on Mars. Consequently, the losses of recent times are nothing more than a disaster, but will lead to disaster.

Acceptance of experience

Working faster, better and cheaper also means acting in a whole new way, and many of us have to realize the risk that new initiatives will not always be carried out correctly. In this "we" NASA, JPL (Reactive Propulsion Laboratory), space industry, which guides scientists, instructions and budgets, etc. There is, and a general audience that looks full of expectations. At this time, the responsibility is JPL, as navigation and system failures have occurred there, and we have not found the way to know what happened to Mars Polar Lande due to reduced data. Likewise, JPL is in charge of carrying out the Mars projects proposed by NASA. JPL will have to introduce a series of modifications to the projects it will implement from now on.

The team developed by Mars Pathfinder was compact, acting on JPL. The Mars Surveyor 1998 group, for its part, was located in three different places. In addition, his budget was much lower. This kind of organization looked more like old procedures than the current system more "fast, better, cheaper" and effective.

The intentions of the 1998 session may be too ambitious, as there were many limitations in this situation. In this case, the blame would not be exclusive to JPL, but NASA, Lockheed Martin, the scientists, who made the decisions and paid in Washington also had an ambitious and limited vision. To work faster, better and cheaper it is not convenient to have too many purposes. For this it is necessary to make rigorous decisions, achieving a balanced and adequate system.

The loss of spacecraft should become a learning and use the knowledge acquired for the benefit of the next projects. Changes must be made by putting aside ambition or reducing limits. Don't think that "faster, better and cheaper" sessions can't be done, as groups like JPL are carrying out successful projects like NEAR, Lunar Prospector, Stardust, Deep Space 1, Mars Pathfinder or Mars Global Surveyor. The latter continues to send us wonderful images of the Red Planet.

Destruction and naval exploration

In this field there are reasons for hope. There is no debate about the need to explore Mars, society is totally in favor. Pasadena was held in the city at Planetfest 99, for example, we could see the enthusiasm of the people. It was applauded by NASA administrator Dan Goldin and Richar Cook, director of the Mars Polar Lander project. The public is in favor of the exploration of the unknown and is willing to take the risks that this task entails, provided that it is prudent and honest in taking risks.

If society deals with the exploration of Mars, it is because that work gives meaning to the space program, that is, the exploration of unknown areas leads us to know each other better. We have Mars as the only suitable place for humans to live off Earth, where we have the best opportunity to understand life itself. Can life be created in any area where it is well or if it is a "cosmic accident" occurred only on Earth?

XVI. and XVII. The explorers of the twentieth century did not decide to look for the "new world", despite the sinking of ships and the delays suffered. Nor can our generation go into despair over the failure of some programs. We need to improve containers, their navigation systems and those that will be created in the future. The ability to send robots and pioneering humans to Mars will be a direct consequence of robotic techniques and trials that are developed for future projects.

We have also felt disillusionment in the last program for failure. The Planetary Society participated in the 1998 project. Our microphones were to spread the first sounds and melodies heard on Mars. We also participated in the 2001 project with the Red Rover Goes to Mars. This project is in danger right now, but The Planetary Society will not resign, as NASA will not despair. We also want to participate in the upcoming projects, as we want to offer our students the possibility of controlling the vehicle that will travel through Mars. Likewise, we will continue to promote the continued exploration of Mars, in the conviction that this "less long-term" initiative will be able to lead man to travel to Mars. We, along with us, NASA, other space organizations and all explorers, will learn as we move forward and move forward as we learn.