Mars Pathfinder
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Dustin M. Schroeder
Dustin M. Schroeder Assistant Professor of Geophysics Department of Geophysics, School of Earth, Energy, and Environmental Sciences 397 Panama Mall, Mitchell Building 361, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 [email protected], 440.567.8343 EDUCATION 2014 Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas, Austin, TX Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Geophysics 2007 Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering (B.S.E.E.), departmental honors, magna cum laude Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in Physics, magna cum laude, minors in Mathematics and Philosophy PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2016 – present Assistant Professor of Geophysics, Stanford University 2017 – present Assistant Professor (by courtesy) of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University 2020 – present Center Fellow (by courtesy), Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment 2020 – present Faculty Affiliate, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence 2021 – present Senior Member, Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology 2016 – 2020 Faculty Affiliate, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment 2014 – 2016 Radar Systems Engineer, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 2012 Graduate Researcher, Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University 2008 – 2014 Graduate Researcher, University of Texas Institute for Geophysics 2007 – 2008 Platform Hardware Engineer, Freescale Semiconductor SELECTED AWARDS 2021 Symposium Prize Paper Award, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society 2020 Excellence in Teaching Award, Stanford School of Earth, Energy, and Environmental Sciences 2019 Senior Member, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 2018 CAREER Award, National Science Foundation 2018 LInC Fellow, Woods Institute, Stanford University 2016 Frederick E. Terman Fellow, Stanford University 2015 JPL Team Award, Europa Mission Instrument Proposal 2014 Best Graduate Student Paper, Jackson School of Geosciences 2014 National Science Olympiad Heart of Gold Award for Service to Science Education 2013 Best Ph.D. -
Telling Time on Mars 41
Telling Time on Mars 41 The InSight Lander will arrive at Mars on September 20, 2016 according to Earth Time, but when will it arrive according to Mars Time? One Earth Day is exactly 24 hours long, so that the time between two High Noons is exactly 24 hours. But Mars rotates a bit more slowly and by Earth units, one Mars Day (called a Sol) is 24 hours and 40 minutes long. This photo was taken by the NASA Phoenix Lander on Sol 90, which is Earth date August 25, 2008 The Curiosity Rover can only safely move during the Martian daytime. This is when scientists on Earth can use TV cameras to watch where the rover is traveling. The Martian day is 40 minutes longer then the Earth day. That means scientists have to move their work schedule forward by 40 minutes each Earth day to keep up with sunrise and sunset on Mars. The rover landed on August 5, 2012 at about 10:30 pm Pacific Daylight Time (PDT), which was defined as Sol 0 for this mission. All of the navigation is performed by Navigation Engineers working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Problem 1 - What time and date will it be on Earth on Sol 5? Problem 2 - Suppose that sunrise at the Curiosity lander happened on February 16, 2013 at 5:20 pm Pacific Standard Time (Sol 190 at 6:00 am Local Mars Time). A Navigation Engineer begins his work shift exactly at that moment. When will his shift have to start after 5 Sols have passed on Mars? Problem 3 – How many Sols have to elapse before his work shift once again starts at the same Earth time of 5:20 pm PST? Space Math http://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov Answer Key 41 Mars Sunrise and Sunset Tables http://www.curiosityrover.com/sundata/ Problem 1 - What time and date will it be on Earth on Sol 5? Answer: This will be 5 x (1 day and 40 minutes) added to August 5 at 10:30 pm PDT. -
Human Mars Architecture
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Human Mars Architecture Tara Polsgrove NASA Human Mars Study Team 15th International Planetary Probe Workshop June 11, 2018 Space Policy Directive-1 “Lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities. Beginning with missions beyond low-Earth orbit, the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.” 2 EXPLORATION CAMPAIGN Gateway Initial ConfigurationLunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (Notional) Orion 4 5 A Brief History of Human Exploration Beyond LEO America at DPT / NEXT NASA Case the Threshold Constellation National Studies Program Lunar Review of Commission First Lunar Architecture U.S. Human on Space Outpost Team Spaceflight Plans Committee Pathways to Exploration Columbia Challenger 1980 1990 2000 2010 Bush 41 Bush 43 7kObama HAT/EMC MSC Speech Speech Speech Report of the 90-Day Study on Human Exploration of the Moon and Mars NASA’s Journey to National Aeronautics and November 1989 Global Leadership Space Administration Mars Exploration and 90-Day Study Mars Design Mars Design Roadmap America’s Reference Mars Design Reference Future in Reference Mission 1.0 Exploration Architecture Space Mission 3.0 System 5.0 Exploration Architecture Blueprint Study 6 Exploring the Mars Mission Design Tradespace • A myriad of choices define -
Selection of the Insight Landing Site M. Golombek1, D. Kipp1, N
Manuscript Click here to download Manuscript InSight Landing Site Paper v9 Rev.docx Click here to view linked References Selection of the InSight Landing Site M. Golombek1, D. Kipp1, N. Warner1,2, I. J. Daubar1, R. Fergason3, R. Kirk3, R. Beyer4, A. Huertas1, S. Piqueux1, N. E. Putzig5, B. A. Campbell6, G. A. Morgan6, C. Charalambous7, W. T. Pike7, K. Gwinner8, F. Calef1, D. Kass1, M. Mischna1, J. Ashley1, C. Bloom1,9, N. Wigton1,10, T. Hare3, C. Schwartz1, H. Gengl1, L. Redmond1,11, M. Trautman1,12, J. Sweeney2, C. Grima11, I. B. Smith5, E. Sklyanskiy1, M. Lisano1, J. Benardino1, S. Smrekar1, P. Lognonné13, W. B. Banerdt1 1Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109 2State University of New York at Geneseo, Department of Geological Sciences, 1 College Circle, Geneseo, NY 14454 3Astrogeology Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 2255 N. Gemini Dr., Flagstaff, AZ 86001 4Sagan Center at the SETI Institute and NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035 5Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, CO 80302; Now at Planetary Science Institute, Lakewood, CO 80401 6Smithsonian Institution, NASM CEPS, 6th at Independence SW, Washington, DC, 20560 7Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College, South Kensington Campus, London 8German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Planetary Research, 12489 Berlin, Germany 9Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA; Now at Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA 98926 10Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996 11Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 12MS GIS Program, University of Redlands, 1200 E. Colton Ave., Redlands, CA 92373-0999 13Institut Physique du Globe de Paris, Paris Cité, Université Paris Sorbonne, France Diderot Submitted to Space Science Reviews, Special InSight Issue v. -
Magnetic Planets and Magnetic Planets and How Mars Lost Its
Magnetic Planets and How Mars Lost Its Atmosphere Bob Lin Physics Department & Space Sciences Laboratory Universityyf of Calif ornia, Berkeley Also (visiting) School of Space Research Kyung Hee University, Korea Thanks to the MGS, MAVEN, and LP teams Earth’s Magnetic Field The Earth’s Magnetosphere Explorer 35 (1967) Lunar Shadowing Apollo 15 Mission -1971 Lunar Rover -> <- Jim Arnold's Gamma-ray Spectrometer <- Apollo 15 Subsatellite -> <= SIM (Scientific Instrument Module) Lunar Shadowing <= Downward electrons <= Upward electrons <= Ratio of Upward to DdltDownward electrons Electron Reflection Electron Trajectory Converging Magnetic Fields Secondary Electron ---- ---- - dv||RemotelydU SensingdB Surface MagneticB Fields by m + e + μ = 0⇒sin 2 α = LP []1- eΔU E Planetary Electron Reflection Magnetometryc (PERM) dt ds ds BSurf Apollo 15 & 16 Subsatellites Electron Reflectometry OneHowever, of the the great Apollo surprises 15 & 16 from Subsatellite Apollo was magnetic the discovery data set of paleomagneticis very sparse and fields confined in the lunar within crust 35 degrees. Their existence of the suggestsequator. Attempts that magnetic to correlate fields atsurface the Moon magnetic were muchfields with strongerspecific geologic in the past features than they were are largely today. unsuccessful. Mars Observer (1992-3) – disappeared 3 days before Mars orbit insertion Mars Global Surveyy(or (MGS) 1996-2006 MGS Mag/ER team Current state of knowledge • Very strong crustal fields measured from orbit: – Discovered by MGS: ~10 times stronger -
The Journey to Mars: How Donna Shirley Broke Barriers for Women in Space Engineering
The Journey to Mars: How Donna Shirley Broke Barriers for Women in Space Engineering Laurel Mossman, Kate Schein, and Amelia Peoples Senior Division Group Documentary Word Count: 499 Our group chose the topic, Donna Shirley and her Mars rover, because of our connections and our interest level in not only science but strong, determined women. One of our group member’s mothers worked for a man under Ms. Shirley when she was developing the Mars rover. This provided us with a connection to Ms. Shirley, which then gave us the amazing opportunity to interview her. In addition, our group is interested in the philosophy of equality and we have continuously created documentaries that revolve around this idea. Every member of our group is a female, so we understand the struggles and discrimination that women face in an everyday setting and wanted to share the story of a female that faced these struggles but overcame them. Thus after conducting a great amount of research, we fell in love with Donna Shirley’s story. Lastly, it was an added benefit that Ms. Shirley is from Oklahoma, making her story important to our state. All of these components made this topic extremely appealing to us. We conducted our research using online articles, Donna Shirley’s autobiography, “Managing Martians”, news coverage from the launch day, and our interview with Donna Shirley. We started our research process by reading Shirley’s autobiography. This gave us insight into her college life, her time working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and what it was like being in charge of such a barrier-breaking mission. -
Appendix 1: Venus Missions
Appendix 1: Venus Missions Sputnik 7 (USSR) Launch 02/04/1961 First attempted Venus atmosphere craft; upper stage failed to leave Earth orbit Venera 1 (USSR) Launch 02/12/1961 First attempted flyby; contact lost en route Mariner 1 (US) Launch 07/22/1961 Attempted flyby; launch failure Sputnik 19 (USSR) Launch 08/25/1962 Attempted flyby, stranded in Earth orbit Mariner 2 (US) Launch 08/27/1962 First successful Venus flyby Sputnik 20 (USSR) Launch 09/01/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Sputnik 21 (USSR) Launch 09/12/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Cosmos 21 (USSR) Launch 11/11/1963 Possible Venera engineering test flight or attempted flyby Venera 1964A (USSR) Launch 02/19/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Venera 1964B (USSR) Launch 03/01/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Cosmos 27 (USSR) Launch 03/27/1964 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Zond 1 (USSR) Launch 04/02/1964 Venus flyby, contact lost May 14; flyby July 14 Venera 2 (USSR) Launch 11/12/1965 Venus flyby, contact lost en route Venera 3 (USSR) Launch 11/16/1965 Venus lander, contact lost en route, first Venus impact March 1, 1966 Cosmos 96 (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Possible attempted landing, craft fragmented in Earth orbit Venera 1965A (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Flyby attempt (launch failure) Venera 4 (USSR) Launch 06/12/1967 Successful atmospheric probe, arrived at Venus 10/18/1967 Mariner 5 (US) Launch 06/14/1967 Successful flyby 10/19/1967 Cosmos 167 (USSR) Launch 06/17/1967 Attempted atmospheric probe, stranded in Earth orbit Venera 5 (USSR) Launch 01/05/1969 Returned atmospheric data for 53 min on 05/16/1969 M. -
Long-Range Rovers for Mars Exploration and Sample Return
2001-01-2138 Long-Range Rovers for Mars Exploration and Sample Return Joe C. Parrish NASA Headquarters ABSTRACT This paper discusses long-range rovers to be flown as part of NASA’s newly reformulated Mars Exploration Program (MEP). These rovers are currently scheduled for launch first in 2007 as part of a joint science and technology mission, and then again in 2011 as part of a planned Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. These rovers are characterized by substantially longer range capability than their predecessors in the 1997 Mars Pathfinder and 2003 Mars Exploration Rover (MER) missions. Topics addressed in this paper include the rover mission objectives, key design features, and Figure 1: Rover Size Comparison (Mars Pathfinder, Mars Exploration technologies. Rover, ’07 Smart Lander/Mobile Laboratory) INTRODUCTION NASA is leading a multinational program to explore above, below, and on the surface of Mars. A new The first of these rovers, the Smart Lander/Mobile architecture for the Mars Exploration Program has Laboratory (SLML) is scheduled for launch in 2007. The recently been announced [1], and it incorporates a current program baseline is to use this mission as a joint number of missions through the rest of this decade and science and technology mission that will contribute into the next. Among those missions are ambitious plans directly toward sample return missions planned for the to land rovers on the surface of Mars, with several turn of the decade. These sample return missions may purposes: (1) perform scientific explorations of the involve a rover of almost identical architecture to the surface; (2) demonstrate critical technologies for 2007 rover, except for the need to cache samples and collection, caching, and return of samples to Earth; (3) support their delivery into orbit for subsequent return to evaluate the suitability of the planet for potential manned Earth. -
Report on the AES Candidates
Rep ort on the AES Candidates 1 2 1 3 Olivier Baudron , Henri Gilb ert , Louis Granb oulan , Helena Handschuh , 4 1 5 1 Antoine Joux , Phong Nguyen ,Fabrice Noilhan ,David Pointcheval , 1 1 1 1 Thomas Pornin , Guillaume Poupard , Jacques Stern , and Serge Vaudenay 1 Ecole Normale Sup erieure { CNRS 2 France Telecom 3 Gemplus { ENST 4 SCSSI 5 Universit e d'Orsay { LRI Contact e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This do cument rep orts the activities of the AES working group organized at the Ecole Normale Sup erieure. Several candidates are evaluated. In particular we outline some weaknesses in the designs of some candidates. We mainly discuss selection criteria b etween the can- didates, and make case-by-case comments. We nally recommend the selection of Mars, RC6, Serp ent, ... and DFC. As the rep ort is b eing nalized, we also added some new preliminary cryptanalysis on RC6 and Crypton in the App endix which are not considered in the main b o dy of the rep ort. Designing the encryption standard of the rst twentyyears of the twenty rst century is a challenging task: we need to predict p ossible future technologies, and wehavetotake unknown future attacks in account. Following the AES pro cess initiated by NIST, we organized an op en working group at the Ecole Normale Sup erieure. This group met two hours a week to review the AES candidates. The present do cument rep orts its results. Another task of this group was to up date the DFC candidate submitted by CNRS [16, 17] and to answer questions which had b een omitted in previous 1 rep orts on DFC. -
NUCLEAR SAFETY LAUNCH APPROVAL: MULTI-MISSION LESSONS LEARNED Yale Chang the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
ANS NETS 2018 – Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space Las Vegas, NV, February 26 – March 1, 2018, on CD-ROM, American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL (2018) NUCLEAR SAFETY LAUNCH APPROVAL: MULTI-MISSION LESSONS LEARNED Yale Chang The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, 11100 Johns Hopkins Rd, Laurel, MD 20723 240-228-5724; [email protected] Launching a NASA radioisotope power system (RPS) trajectory to Saturn used a Venus-Venus-Earth-Jupiter mission requires compliance with two Federal mandates: Gravity Assist (VVEJGA) maneuver, where the Earth the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) Gravity Assist (EGA) flyby was the primary nuclear safety and launch approval (LA), as directed by Presidential focus of NASA, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Directive/National Security Council Memorandum 25. Cassini Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel Nuclear safety launch approval lessons learned from (INSRP), and the public alike. A solid propellant fire test multiple NASA RPS missions, one Russian RPS mission, campaign addressed the MPF finding and led in part to two non-RPS launch accidents, and several solid the retrofit solid propellant breakup systems (BUSs) propellant fire test campaigns since 1996 are shown to designed and carried by MER-A and MER-B spacecraft have contributed to an ever-growing body of knowledge. and the deployment of plutonium detectors in the launch The launch accidents can be viewed as “unplanned area for PNH. The PNH mission decreased the calendar experiments” that provided real-world data. Lessons length of the NEPA/LA processes to less than 4 years by learned from the nuclear safety launch approval effort of incorporating lessons learned from previous missions and each mission or launch accident, and how they were tests in its spacecraft and mission designs and their applied to improve the NEPA/LA processes and nuclear NEPA/LA processes. -
Navigation Challenges During Exomars Trace Gas Orbiter Aerobraking Campaign
NON-PEER REVIEW Please select category below: Normal Paper Student Paper Young Engineer Paper Navigation Challenges during ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter Aerobraking Campaign Gabriele Bellei 1, Francesco Castellini 2, Frank Budnik 3 and Robert Guilanyà Jané 4 1 DEIMOS Space located at ESA/ESOC, Robert-Bosch-Str. 5, Darmstadt, 64293, Germany 2 Telespazio VEGA located at ESA/ESOC, Robert-Bosch-Str. 5, Darmstadt, 64293, Germany 3 ESA/ESOC, Robert-Bosch-Str. 5, Darmstadt, 64293, Germany 4 GMV INSYEN located at ESA/ESOC, Robert-Bosch-Str. 5, Darmstadt, 64293, Germany Abstract The ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter satellite spent one year in aerobraking operations at Mars, lowering its orbit period from one sol to about two hours. This delicate phase challenged the operations team and in particular the navigation system due to the highly unpredictable Mars atmosphere, which imposed almost continuous monitoring, navigation and re-planning activities. An aerobraking navigation concept was, for the first time at ESA, designed, implemented and validated on-ground and in-flight, based on radiometric tracking data and complemented by information extracted from spacecraft telemetry. The aerobraking operations were successfully completed, on time and without major difficulties, thanks to the simplicity and robustness of the selected approach. This paper describes the navigation concept, presents a recollection of the main in-flight results and gives a retrospective of the main lessons learnt during this activity. Keywords: ExoMars, Trace Gas Orbiter, aerobraking, navigation, orbit determination, Mars atmosphere, accelerometer Introduction The ExoMars program is a cooperation between the European Space Agency (ESA) and Roscosmos for the robotic exploration of the red planet. -
7'Tie;T;E ~;&H ~ T,#T1tmftllsieotog
7'tie;T;e ~;&H ~ t,#t1tMftllSieotOg, UCLA VOLUME 3 1986 EDITORIAL BOARD Mark E. Forry Anne Rasmussen Daniel Atesh Sonneborn Jane Sugarman Elizabeth Tolbert The Pacific Review of Ethnomusicology is an annual publication of the UCLA Ethnomusicology Students Association and is funded in part by the UCLA Graduate Student Association. Single issues are available for $6.00 (individuals) or $8.00 (institutions). Please address correspondence to: Pacific Review of Ethnomusicology Department of Music Schoenberg Hall University of California Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA Standing orders and agencies receive a 20% discount. Subscribers residing outside the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico, please add $2.00 per order. Orders are payable in US dollars. Copyright © 1986 by the Regents of the University of California VOLUME 3 1986 CONTENTS Articles Ethnomusicologists Vis-a-Vis the Fallacies of Contemporary Musical Life ........................................ Stephen Blum 1 Responses to Blum................. ....................................... 20 The Construction, Technique, and Image of the Central Javanese Rebab in Relation to its Role in the Gamelan ... ................... Colin Quigley 42 Research Models in Ethnomusicology Applied to the RadifPhenomenon in Iranian Classical Music........................ Hafez Modir 63 New Theory for Traditional Music in Banyumas, West Central Java ......... R. Anderson Sutton 79 An Ethnomusicological Index to The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Part Two ............ Kenneth Culley 102 Review Irene V. Jackson. More Than Drumming: Essays on African and Afro-Latin American Music and Musicians ....................... Norman Weinstein 126 Briefly Noted Echology ..................................................................... 129 Contributors to this Issue From the Editors The third issue of the Pacific Review of Ethnomusicology continues the tradition of representing the diversity inherent in our field.