 |
 |
||
 |
|
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
|
The Planetary Society BlogBy Emily LakdawallaOne-on-One Chat with Ed Weiler on Hubble and the Future of Mars ExplorationMay. 13, 2009 | 22:54 PDT | May. 14 05:54 UTC
Planetary Society volunteer Ken Kremer is reporting for us from the Kennedy Space Center, where he is anticipating the launch of Space Shuttle Atlantis to the Hubble Space Telescope on May 11. Kremer is a research scientist and freelance journalist who spends his spare time giving public outreach presentations on behalf of The Planetary Society as a volunteer and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory as a Solar System Ambassador. He also enjoys creating Mars mosaics. Thanks Ken!  by Ken Kremer
Following the thunderous ascent of Atlantis towards Hubble on May 11, I was honored to chat one-on-one with an absolutely exuberant Dr. Ed Weiler at the KSC Press Center a few hours later regarding Hubble and future exploration of Mars and Saturn. Weiler was appointed the Associate Administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington, DC, in 2008. He holds this position now for the second time after serving in between as Director of NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center in Maryland. Ed could not contain his glee after today's (May 11) successful liftoff to Hubble, his pride and joy. Ed spontaneously performed his own version of the "Hubble Hug" for me while I snapped a photo. "My Baby", he beamed while hugging the big and fabulous Hubble model situated as prime real estate right at the center of the KSC Press Center.
Weiler has been deeply involved with Hubble for over 30 years of his professional career, though all the highs and lows. He served as the Chief Scientist for Hubble from 1979 to 1998. He is eloquent and not shy about discussing any of the history, good or bad, and poking fun at himself while showing a 20 year old video clip of himself looking obviously much younger and saying "Who's that guy ?" at a pre-launch press briefing. Ed witnessed the STS-125 launch with a large flock of NASA officials, Hubble scientists and media folks at the Turn Basin water's edge near the countdown clock at the KSC press center not far from where I too was standing. This whole Hubble/Shuttle experience for me at KSC has been both thrilling and surreal as an eyewitness to history. I keep pinching myself to make sure it's real and not a dream.
I asked Weiler about what might doom Hubble in the end and he replied possibly the gyroscopes. All six of Hubble's gyroscopes will be replaced by the spacewalking astronauts on EVA Day 2. The gyros are packaged in pairs of two inside three boxes called Rate Sensor Units (RSUs). The RSU is the unit that the astronauts will replace, so gyroscopes are always replaced two at a time. To conserve them for as long as possible, the plan is to operate Hubble in a two gyro mode while "conserving" the others in the hopes of extending Hubble's lifetime to the maximum. We next turned to the topic of Mars, dear to my heart, and I was delighted to learn that the future of red planet exploration may not be quite so bleak as reported in many press accounts. I asked Ed to comment on media reports that the Mars program was in disarray and would not have a favored place in the NASA budget. In his prior stint as NASA Associate Administrator for Space Science, Weiler had put in place a robust Mars science architecture, launching new robotic explorers during every Mars launch window opportunity. Favorable launch windows occur at 26 month intervals.
After his reappointment as NASA Associate Administrator, he noted that launch windows were being skipped. Weiler told me that he would like to reinstate a Mars architecture with new launches on a continuous basis at every opportunity. It's important to say clearly here that what we discussed is not yet an approved plan with a budget, but reflects his thinking about possibilities for an evolving new strategy going forward to join forces with ESA because the mission are getting more and more complex and expensive. "Cost overruns on Mars Science Lab (MSL) have created budgetary problems for future mars missions". As a result, funds have to be taken from future mars mission allocations to pay for the overrun. These funds will be spread out over fiscal years 2010 to 2014. So how do we move forward? "The key for Mars is international collaboration with Europe", he emphasized to me several times. "Forget nationalism. We can do so much more by working together, then by working apart. After all we both have the same objectives scientifically. And we want to carry out the same types of mission. We want to get our science teams together and start laying out an architecture. We don't have enough money to do these missions separately". So I asked Ed, What's the status of the international talks? He answered, "We already have teams meeting. And more meetings are planned for this summer. I have an upcoming meeting scheduled with David Southwood (my ESA counterpart) and my European colleagues". Weiler than specifically mentioned to me the 2016 launch window as a logical starting point for cooperative missions. Although the current ESA plan is to launch the advanced ExoMars rover, that mission is now undergoing redefinition by ESA. Insufficient funding recently forced a postponement of ExoMars by ESA from 2013 to 2016 which will likely also result in a de-scoping of the science objectives and a reduction in the weight of the landed science payload.
Here is where Weiler sees a great opportunity to resuscitate a vigorous Mars exploration architecture. "We now have time to come up with some ideas for 2016. They've got some ideas, we've got some ideas". NASA could have a 2016 rover, "if we collaborate with ESA but not if we work alone". Weiler indicated to me that NASA's participation could be more that simply placing NASA instruments on a European rover. "Right now only studies have been done. But we have the freedom to make changes until we cut metal", he emphasized. The purpose of the upcoming meetings is to define a realistic approach. "We could probably do a heck of a lot better mission if we did it together then if we continued to compete. We are absolutely open to the possibility of a joint mission and would welcome that". Weiler pointed out that "2018 is an excellent launch opportunity due to a very favorable orbital alignment", much like 2003 was when NASA launched the twin rovers Spirit & Opportunity which function still to this day 5 years later. He envisions a "very good possibility to send two rovers/orbiters by ESA and NASA, one of which could be equipped with a methane spectrometer". Another undefined spacecraft concept would blast off in 2020. Weiler strongly emphasized to me another key point. "It's very important to demonstrate a critical new technology on each mission. The easy stuff has been done". So he is not talking about merely re-launching a copy of a prior rover, lander or orbiter. Weiler's exciting plan involves advancing the state of the art for science with succeeding flights. I asked Ed if NASA envisions any of the 2016, 2018 or 2020 possible missions could include a return to the north pole to follow up on the exciting results from Phoenix? Perhaps drilling deeper through the water ice to search for organics and perhaps search for signs of past or current life if it exists? He said, "The north pole is certainly an option in the trade space. So it can't be precluded but will be an option looked at by the ESA and NASA teams". Doug McCuistion, NASA's director of Mars Exploration at NASA HQ helpfully explained to me some further details on NASA's plans. "There is a very interactive process for selecting landing sites based first on a mission's scientific objectives and the science community's recommendations on where to accomplish this science on Mars' surface, and then on engineering ability to get the lander to that site". The rock issue with Phoenix and changing the landing site is a good example of an engineering constraint for landing safety. "This has been a highly success process for Pathfinder, MER and MSL (Phoenix was a PI mission with a proposed landing area)". "When we get to the landing site selection process for the missions later in the decade (not all of those will be landers) we will follow the same process, where no location on the planet is "off the table". So, a follow-up to the Martian arctic is really a science community call based on their evaluation and analysis of the best sites to accomplish the mission objectives the community also defines. The ESA ExoMars mission will have a drill and there is discussion about drills by NASA later in the decade too. Where we would drill, if we fly one, will be part of this landing site selection process". "The Martian arctic is certainly not ruled out, nor is it a predetermined landing site, since it will be considered by the community as to whether it will yield the best science for those to-be-defined missions. The ExoMars landing site process probably starts in 2011", McCuiston amplified. The trade off to accomplish dispatching new spacecraft in the 2016, 2018 and 2020 timeframe would be to basically "take Mars Sample Return (MSR) 'off the table'. We'd have to give up on MSR for now", Weiler said. There is simply not enough money in anyone's budget to realize all these objectives simultaneously. "The cost of MSR would be on the order of at least $6 to 8 Billion and with a timeframe of the early 2020s". There is a debate within the Mars community on the wisdom of building one big Flagship class mission in a decade vs. multiple smaller and more focused missions more frequently. Ed lamented the fact that we can't currently also start a return flight to Saturn, Titan and Enceladus to follow-up on the stunning science discoveries by Cassini & Huygens. He explained to me that the Europa orbiter was chosen to proceed first because "the mission architecture for Europa was more advanced at this time". But with further studies already ongoing and again emphasizing the need for international partners he indicated (with no commitment) that perhaps a Saturn mission could be listed in a future budget cycle. My impression was that Weiler truly would enjoy approving a Saturn mission soon if funds and engineering support were available. So in the final analysis, everything depends on the level of funding which Congress and the President are willing to allocate to NASA.
Post this page to:
CommentsThis comment form is powered by GentleSource Comment Script. It can be included in PHP or HTML files and allows visitors to leave comments on the website.
|
|||||||
 |
 |
|||||||
Copyright © 1993 – 2010 The Planetary Society. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Society Updates
[ what is this? ]
[ what is this? ]