sign in sign up
<<
Home , Artemis program

Lunar Surface Science Workshop 2020 (LPI Contrib. No. 2241) 5075.pdf

THE LUNAR EXPLORATION PROGRAM: A PLANETARY SCIENCE EXPLORATION PERSPECTIVE. J. W. Head1, 15 Commander D. R. Scott1, C. M. Pieters1, M. T. Zuber2, D. E. Smith2, E. Mazarico3, M. Barker3, G. Neumann3, D. R. Cremons3, A. N. Deutsch1. 1Brown University, Providence, RI 02912; 2MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139; 3NASA GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20881 ([email protected]).

I. Introduction: The goals of the Lunar Surface Sci- The exploration operational goals and objectives are ence Workshop (LSSW) are to provide “input and ear- also clear: 1) Define regions that optimize the realiza- ly integration of science into the exploration archi- tion of the scientific goals and objectives. 2) Define re- tecture…essential to maximizing the science return gions that provide continuous or near-continuous from the Artemis missions”…which are to place illumination to provide sufficient power to survive lu- ”human beings…on the lunar surface near the nar night and establish a long-term presence. 3) Explore ’s south pole, and…create a sustained human the SPR to establish the nature, abundance, mode of oc- presence on the lunar surface”. The intent of the currence and “grade” of candidate volatile deposits. 4) workshop is “to provide an open forum for the Characterize the surface physical properties and traffi- presentation, discussion, and consideration of vari- cability in order to optimize scientific and operational ous concepts, options, capabilities, and innovations activities. 5) Prepare for dedicated human and robotic to advance scientific discovery on the lunar sur- exploration missions to other parts of the nearside and face.” Here we seek to provide a planetary science farside of the Moon and on . 6) Test nascent tech- perspective on these LSSW goals. nologies required for sustained human Moon/Mars II. Fundamental Goals & Objectives: In order to presence (habitation, energy storage, radiation protec- frame a fundamental planetary science perspective and tion, ISRU). strategy, we ask: Why, Where, How, and When. 3) How?: Necessary is the development of a concep- 1) Why?: What is the legacy, the long-term impact tual and operational framework built on a firm founda- of our efforts? Apollo revealed the Earth as a planet, tion of existing knowledge and data, and inclusion and showed the inextricable links of the Earth-Moon sys- optimization of new ideas and technologies. This will tem, and made the our neighborhood. We permit us to continue the to the now ask: What are our origins and where are we head- next logical stages following the remarkably successful ing?: We seek to understand the origin and evolution of Apollo Lunar Exploration Program and the multiple the Moon, the Moon’s links to the earliest history of followon orbital/surface robotic missions that have set a Earth, and its lessons for exploration and understanding firm foundation for the next stages of human-robotic of Mars and other terrestrial planets. A basis for our exploration. What are some of the pillars of this foun- motivation is the innate human qualities of curiosity dation? a) Science and Engineering Synergism (SES): and exploration, and the societal/species-level need to Apollo was successful because of the shoulder-to- heed Commander John Young’s warning that shoulder engineer-scientist work culture that developed “Single-planet species don’t survive!”. These perspec- during the program, and enabled longer-duration stay tives impel us to learn the lessons of off-Earth, long- times and EVAs, significant mobility, additional term, long-distance resupply and self-sustaining pres- equipment and experiments, and significantly greater ence, in order to prepare for the sample return. SES requires concentrated and dedicated and other Solar System destinations. effort, but the rewards are clear, essential and synergis- 2) Where?: The combination of Transformative Lu- tic. SES maps out into operations at all levels of mis- nar Science (TLS) questions [1] and exploration opera- sion planning and execution. b) Human-Robotic Part- tional requirements compel us to explore the South Po- nerships: Exploration is not a technique contest, but a lar Region (SPR) of the Moon. The scientific goals are partnership. The US sent 21 robotic missions to the clear: 1) What is the origin, nature and abundance of Moon prior to the landing. The key to con- polar volatile deposits and what do they tell us about in- tinual success lies in developing an architecture that ternal and external sources and volatile history? [2-3] 2) complements and optimizes robotic and human capabil- What is the nature, composition and age of the South ities. c) Exploration Guidelines: Define human and ro- Pole-Aitken Basin (the largest known impact basin on botic strengths and weaknesses, and optimize explora- the Moon) and its ejecta, and how does this inform us tion plans from the beginning. Longer-term stays will about the lunar interior, lunar chronology, the bom- mean both increased interactions with Earth and explo- bardment history of the Moon, and the dynamics of the ration independence of the . Avoid “creeping early Solar System? [4-5] The scientific objectives are: determinism” [6], and encourage the Apollo T3 ap- 1) to explore, document and sample volatile deposits in proach (Train ‘em, Trust ‘em and Turn ‘em loose). Sci- permanently shadowed and stratigraphically related re- ence and operational goals and objectives require ex- gions. 2) To explore, document, sample and date SPA ploration of broad areas: build in extensive Apollo ejecta deposits and pre-SPA crustal materials. LRV-like mobility from the beginning (Fig 1). New Lunar Surface Science Workshop 2020 (LPI Contrib. No. 2241) 5075.pdf

remote-sensing technologies will enable more in situ IV. Site Selection and Traverse Planning Guide- characterization, sample analysis and selection but lines: Landing site selection always involves a balance Earth laboratory technology advances will always out- of mission goals and objectives, and landing and opera- pace in situ analysis. Build in the ability for significant tion safety and success. Science and Engineering Syn- sample return mass from the beginning. d) Exploration ergism (SES) is the key to this success as demonstrated Architectures: Individual missions should be viewed as during Apollo, and should be implemented throughout integrated elements in an operational strategy and ar- the exploration architecture. The same principles apply chitecture that is designed to accomplish the overarch- to traverse planning. SES ensures that the science and ing goals. Candidate elements include: I) Precursor engineering data needed for key decisions will be avail- (What do we need to know before we send humans?). able and that decisions will be optimized. SES also op- II) Context (What are the robotic mission requirements timizes the long-term goal of lunar base siting: for ex- for final landing site selection and regional context for ample, Mons Malapert, an inviting target for base siting landing site results?). III) Infrastructure/Operations due to favorable illumination and power, has been (What specific robotic capabilities are required to opti- shown from LRO LOLA/LROC data to be difficult to mize human scientific exploration performance?). IV) traverse with Lunokhod and Apollo LRV-type vehicles Interpolation (How do we use robotic missions to inter- [7]. Furthermore, new discoveries concerning the loca- polate between human traverses?). V) Extrapolation tion and “grade” of polar volatile deposits will dictate (How do we use robotic missions to extrapolate beyond adaptive lunar base locations. the human exploration radius?). VI) Progeny (What V. Surface Operations: Scientific, engineering, op- targeted robotic successor missions might be sent to the erations and exploration activities on the surface in the region to follow up on discoveries during exploration SPR will require integrated and flexible planning. New and from post-campaign analysis?). The way in which instrumentation and technologies will significantly en- the NASA Commercial Lunar Services (CLPS) hance exploration planning and accomplishment of Program complements the can be goals. For example, a multispectral laser reflectometer readily viewed in this manner. e) Flexibility and Adapt- on the surface can confirm the presence of water ice ability: Science is the exploration of the unknown. From and its location and distribution on scales relevant to a planetary science perspective, we currently have a human operations (cm to m), and be used to sam- fundamental baseline of information about the Moon pling and ISRU efforts undertaken by Artemis astro- that enables us to define TLS questions and propose ex- nauts, a capability [9] highly complementary to orbital ploration solutions. Each new discovery will define new approaches. The parallel operations of robotic rovers, questions and the exploration architecture should be CLPS payload deliveries, and human activities will re- flexible enough to adapt and accommodate this evolu- tion (as was done with each succeeding Apollo mis- quire continuous engineering and science opera- sion). tions/analysis centers on Earth. Lessons from the ISS 4) When?: Temporal goals for accomplishment of should be incorporated, while also recognizing the hu- key exploration events and milestones are important for man exploration capabilities of the Astronauts on the motivation and decision making. Integrated exploration Moon [6]. architectures are modular long-term strategies and thus VI. Conclusions: At the end of the first 60 years of subject to national and international events and should the , we have entered a new era of hu- be designed to adapt to these. International coordina- man/robotic exploration partnerships for planetary sci- tion and cooperation are essential to the scientific and ence that will enable us to build on the lessons of past political success of exploration and should be appropri- successes and incorporate new concepts, innovations ately cultivated and embedded. and technologies “to advance scientific discovery on III. Data Requirements: In addition to the signifi- the lunar surface”, to Mars and beyond. cant baseline of scientific and engineering data in hand, Fig. 1. new data and re-analysis of existing data are essential. The NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is currently optimal for this due to its near-polar orbit and consequent high density of data essential for explora- tion in the SPR. Topography, slopes, roughness, illumi- nation-shadowing and reflectance (LOLA) [e.g., 7], high resolution imaging, DTMs, and illumination (LROC), and roughness/physical properties data (Di- viner) are among the key resources for science and ex- ploration planning. New dedicated experiments and or-

bital/surface missions will complement and supplement References: 1. Pieters et al. (2018)*; 2. Zuber et al (2012) Nature 486, 378; 3. Li et al. (2019) PNAS these data. 115, 8907; 4. Moriarty & Pieters (2018) JGR 123, 729; 5. Ivanov et al. (2018) PSS 162, 190; 6. Krikalev et al. (2010) Acta Astro. 66, 70; 7. Mazarico et al., 2020, LSSW; 8. Baslievsky et al. (2019) SSR 53, 383; 9. Cremons et al. (2020) LSSW. *http://www.planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/5480.pdf