National Academies Press: OpenBook

Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities (2003)

Chapter: 13. Conclusions

« Previous: 12. Assessment of the Mars Exploration Program
Suggested Citation:"13. Conclusions." National Research Council. 2003. Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10715.
×

13
Conclusions

It is humankind’s nature to explore our surroundings if it can be done. Fifty years ago, exploring Mars was not one of the things anyone could do. Those who were curious had to be content with fuzzy images of the planet, quivering in the oculars of telescopes. But that is far from the case today. Forty years ago, spacecraft began to be sent to the planets, and since then, the art of space exploration has become increasingly refined and discoveries have multiplied. We now have the capability, in principle, of reaching and exploring any object in the solar system. At the top of the list of targets of exploration is Mars, the most Earth-like, most accessible, most hospitable, and most intriguing of the planets. Two years ago, in October 2000, NASA recognized this by setting the study of Mars apart in a structured Mars Exploration Program. The present document reports on COMPLEX’s study of the program.

COMPLEX has compared the elements of the Mars Exploration Program with the research objectives for Mars that have been stressed by advisory panels, including this one, for more than 23 years. The committee found that correspondence between the two is not perfect. Currently, NASA focuses on the search for life, and its prerequisite, water, as the main drivers for Mars research, and has favored missions and experiments that support these goals. The space agency is not now in a position to ask direct questions about life on Mars, and has not been since the Viking mission in the 1970s, but the missions supported are designed to find the areas most promising for water and life, and to investigate in situ their chemical and petrographic potential for extant or fossil life.

Since NASA operates within budget constraints, this emphasis on one particular scientific objective necessarily comes at the expense of others. COMPLEX considered the question of whether NASA’s priorities are too heavily skewed toward life-related investigations. The committee decided, however, that this is not the case. The emphasis on life is well justified; the life-related investigations that are planned range over so much of Mars science that they will result in broad and comprehensive gains in our knowledge; and the areas most neglected as a consequence of this emphasis (see Chapter 12) will, to some extent, be investigated by projected missions of our international partners.

COMPLEX endorses the program NASA has set up, though the committee has also pointed out several areas of high scientific priority that the program does not address. This report stresses the uniquely important role of sample return in a program of Mars research, and urges that sample-return missions be performed as early as possible. Discussions and recommendations related to sample return appear in Chapters 7 and 12. A more general review of the conclusions of this report is contained in the Executive Summary.

Suggested Citation:"13. Conclusions." National Research Council. 2003. Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10715.
×

FIGURE 13.1 The study of Mars has come very far. This map is a reminder of how the planet was perceived in 1967. SOURCE: Mariner 69 Mars Chart, NASA MEC-2.

Our understanding of the most Earth-like planet beyond our own has increased dramatically in 35 years of spacecraft research (see Figure 13.1). Most of us will live to see an even greater increment of knowledge result from execution of the Mars Exploration Program that this report describes.

Suggested Citation:"13. Conclusions." National Research Council. 2003. Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10715.
×
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"13. Conclusions." National Research Council. 2003. Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10715.
×
Page 106
Next: Appendix A: The NASA Mars Exploration Program »
Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $48.00 Buy Ebook | $38.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Within the Office of Space Science of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) special importance is attached to exploration of the planet Mars, because it is the most like Earth of the planets in the solar system and the place where the first detection of extraterrestrial life seems most likely to be made. The failures in 1999 of two NASA missions—Mars Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lander—caused the space agency's program of Mars exploration to be systematically rethought, both technologically and scientifically. A new Mars Exploration Program plan (summarized in Appendix A) was announced in October 2000. The Committee on Planetary and Lunar Exploration (COMPLEX), a standing committee of the Space Studies Board of the National Research Council, was asked to examine the scientific content of this new program. This goals of this report are the following:

-Review the state of knowledge of the planet Mars, with special emphasis on findings of the most recent Mars missions and related research activities;

-Review the most important Mars research opportunities in the immediate future;

-Review scientific priorities for the exploration of Mars identified by COMPLEX (and other scientific advisory groups) and their motivation, and consider the degree to which recent discoveries suggest a reordering of priorities; and

-Assess the congruence between NASA's evolving Mars Exploration Program plan and these recommended priorities, and suggest any adjustments that might be warranted.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!