Interplanetary contamination: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
KolbertBot (talk | contribs)
m Bot: HTTP→HTTPS (v475)
Rescuing 4 sources and tagging 0 as dead. #IABot (v1.6) (Balon Greyjoy)
Line 111:
{{quote|"One of the most reliable ways to reduce the risk of forward contamination during visits to extraterrestrial bodies is to make those visits only with robotic spacecraft. Sending a person to Mars would be, for some observers, more exciting. But in the view of much of the space science community, robotic missions are the way to accomplish the maximum amount of scientific inquiry since valuable fuel and shipboard power do not have to be expended in transporting and operating the equipment to keep a human crew alive and healthy. And very important to planetary protection goals, robotic craft can be thoroughly sterilized, while humans cannot. Such a difference can be critical in protecting sensitive targets, such as the special regions of Mars, from forward contamination.<br><br>"Perhaps a change in the public's perspective as to just what today's robotic missions really are would be helpful in deciding what types of missions are important to implement. In the opinion of Terence Johnson, who has played a major role in many of NASA's robotic missions, including serving as the project scientist for the Galileo mission and the planned Europa Orbiter mission, the term "robotic exploration" misses the point. NASA is actually conducting human exploration on these projects. The mission crews that sit in the control panel at JPL, "as well as everyone else who can log on to the Internet" can observe in near real-time what is going on. The spacecraft instruments, in other words, are becoming more like collective sense organs for humankind. Thus, according to Johnson, when NASA conducts it's so-called robotic missions, people all around the world are really "all standing on the bridge of Starship Enterprise". The question must thus be asked, when, if ever, is it necessary for the good of humankind to send people rather than increasingly sophisticated robots to explore other worlds"}}
 
Humans in close orbit around the planet could control equipment on the surface in real time via telepresence, so bringing many of the benefits of a surface mission, without its associated increased forward and backward contamination risks.<ref>[https://www.wired.com/category/wiredscience?p=136729 Almost Being There: Why the Future of Space Exploration Is Not What You Think]</ref><ref>[http://telerobotics.gsfc.nasa.gov/ First Exploration Telereobotics Symposium] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150705060719/http://telerobotics.gsfc.nasa.gov/ |date=2015-07-05 }}</ref><ref>[HERRO: A Science-Oriented Strategy for Crewed Missions Beyond LEO HERRO: A Science-Oriented Strategy for Crewed Missions Beyond LEO]
</ref>
 
Line 154:
==== Chain of contact ====
 
The sample return mission would be designed to break the chain of contact between Mars and the exterior of the sample container, for instance, by sealing the returned container inside another larger container in the vacuum of space before return to Earth.<ref name=esf2010_PP /><ref name=mepag_ppt /> In order to eliminate the risk of parachute failure, the current plan is to return the capsule to the Earth without the use of parachutes: the capsule will fall at terminal velocity and the impact will be cushioned by the capsule's thermal protection system. The sample container would be designed to withstand the force of the impact.<ref name=mepag_ppt>{{cite web |url=http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meeting/mar-10/Li2-MSR_Dis-for-MEPAG3-17_tech_updates.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2013-08-12 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130216181529/http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meeting/mar-10/Li2-MSR_Dis-for-MEPAG3-17_tech_updates.pdf |archivedate=2013-02-16 |df= }} Mars Sample Return Discussions As presented on February 23, 2010</ref>
 
==== Receiving facility ====
Line 252:
They came to the conclusion that telerobotic approaches could permit direct study of the samples on the Mars surface via telepresence from Mars orbit, permitting rapid exploration and use of human cognition to take advantage of chance discoveries and feedback from the results obtained so far.<ref name="lpi.usra.edu">[http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/marsconcepts2012/pdf/4214.pdf LOW-LATENCY TELEROBOTICS FROM MARS ORBIT: THE CASE FOR SYNERGY BETWEEN SCIENCE AND HUMAN EXPLORATION], Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration (2012)</ref>
 
They found that telepresence exploration of Mars has many advantages. The astronauts have near real-time control of the robots, and can respond immediately to discoveries. It also prevents contamination both ways and has mobility benefits as well.<ref>[http://telerobotics.gsfc.nasa.gov/papers/TelepresenceSymposiumfinal.pdf SpaceExplorationEnabledbyTelepresence:CombiningScienceandHumanExploration] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130217143104/http://telerobotics.gsfc.nasa.gov/papers/TelepresenceSymposiumfinal.pdf |date=2013-02-17 }} BasedonFindingsfrom:"ExplorationTeleroboticsSymposium" May2-3,2012NASAGoddardSpaceFlightCenter</ref>
 
Return of the sample to orbit has the advantage that it permits analysis of the sample without delay, to detect volatiles that may be lost during a voyage home. This was the conclusion of a meeting of researchers at the NASAGoddardSpaceFlightCenter in 2012.
<ref>[http://telerobotics.gsfc.nasa.gov/papers/SymposiumReport-ExtendedVersion29Oct.pdf SpaceExplorationViaTelepresence:TheCaseforSynergyBetweenScienceandHumanExploration, FindingsandObservationsfrom:"ExplorationTeleroboticsSymposium"May2-3,2012NASAGoddardSpaceFlightCenter] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130217143111/http://telerobotics.gsfc.nasa.gov/papers/SymposiumReport-ExtendedVersion29Oct.pdf |date=2013-02-17 }}</ref>
[[File:Telerobotics image1 large.jpg|thumb|Telerobotics exploration of Mars]]
{{bq|"One possible scenario for surface exploration of Mars via LLT could be the deployment of twin telerobotic rovers on the surface with high-definition visual tools to allow low-latency communication and rapidly adaptable operation from an on-orbit crew for field astrobiology. Such “tele-rovers” could be equipped with instruments for detailed in situ reconnaissance and capabilities for recovering and sending selected samples to the human-tended on-orbit spacecraft for preliminary screening by means of lab analysis by resident astronauts. In the case of samples of biological significance, very rapid encapsulation and recovery of the sample materials at the spacecraft in orbit are required and this is enabled by this approach. Most of the required technology already exists for terrestrial telerobotics exploration of Earth, although the TRL would have to be advanced and validated for operations on Mars"<ref name="lpi.usra.edu" />}}