MSL Landing Site Selection Activities

1
MSL Landing Site Selection Activities

• John Grant and Matt Golombek
• Co-chairs, MSL Landing Site Steering Committee
• Please note that members of the Press are
  present at this workshop

2
Guiding Principles

• Landing site selection is critical to all aspects
  of MSL mission and program success (no landing,
  no science)
• Final site recommendation, selection, and
  approval is the job of the Project, MSL Science
  Team, and NASA HQ, respectively.
• The broad expertise of the science community is
  crucial to the identification of optimal sites.
• Process is open to all and has no predetermined
  outcome

3
Basis for Site Selection

• Sites Must Meet All Engineering Requirements
• Selected Sites Are Best Suited to Achieving
  MSLMission Science Objectives
• Assess the present and past habitability of the
  martian environments accessed by the mission.
• Assess the biological potential of the regions
  accessed, characterize their geology and
  geochemistry, investigate planetary processes
  that influence habitability, including the role
  of water, and characterize surface radiation.
• Candidate landing sites should contain evidence
  of a past or present habitable environment and
  the evidence for habitability should be expected
  to be preserved for, accessible to, and
  interpretable by the MSL investigations..

MSL Science Payload Described in Next Talk
4
MSL Landing Site Selection Process

• SELECTION PROCESS TWO PARALLEL ACTIVITIES
• 1) Define and Refine Set of Landing Site
  Constraints Based on Prelim. S/C Design
• Elevation, Lat., Ellipse Size, Rock Abundance
  Height, Slope, Dust
• 2) Map these Constraints into Potential Landing
  Sites on Mars
• Use Available Remote Sensing Data and Models
• ACQUISITION OF NEW ORBITAL DATA OF LANDING SITES
• MUST LAND SAFELY - Safety of Site is Paramount
• Get No Science if Don't - Risk to Mission and
  Program
• MUST BE DEFENSIBLE
• The AA will want to know who, how, what, where,
  and why
• Must Survive Multiple Withering Reviews, Must be
  Thorough
• Do Everything Possible to Understand Surface
  Properties
• Factor Science Objectives of Mission into
  Selection of Safe Sites
• MUST BE DONE IN AN OPEN ENVIRONMENT
• Multiple Opportunities for Community Involvement
• Open Workshops - Provide Science Community Input
  to Landing Site
• Also Educational Opportunities Public Outreach

5
Participants in MSL Landing Site Selection

• NASA-Appointed Landing Site Steering Committee
• Co-chairs Grant and Golombek (MDAP
  peer-reviewed/funded)
• Other Members Appointed by NASA HQ
• Science Community Input
• Broad e-mail distribution, Workshop Attendance,
  Websites
• Mars Characterization Investigators (MDAP, MFRP,
  CDP)
• Insight into Landing Site Science and Safety
• Additional Members
• Blend Experience and Mission Involvement
• Provides for Feed-back on Process
• MSL Science Team and Project
• Science Team helps identify and evaluate merits
  of sites
• Engineering teams define the engineeringconstrain
  ts and help analyze aspects of the surface and
  atmosphericenvironments.
• Project management and the PSG review scientific
  analyses of sites.
• Headquarters and Other Ex-Officios
• Ensures broad, relevant MEP participation
• Access to Ongoing Mission Data
• Planetary Protection Compliance
• All Landing Site Selection Activities Documented
  on Two Websites

6
MSL Landing Site Steering Committee Members
7
Data Sets for MSL Landing Site Selection
Expect Exhaustive Landing Site Evaluation Process
8
MSL Engineering Requirements

• Latitude
• Wide latitude band 60
• No Subsolar Latitude Power Constraint latitude
  band 10-15
• Elevation - Land Anywhere wrt Previous Landers
• Up to 2.0 km Provides Access to 83 of Mars
• VL1, 2 MPF Landed Below lt-3 km In Northern
  Lowlands
• MER Landing Sites lt-1.3 km
• And Most of Highlands
• Key Terrain for Exploring Early Noachian
  Environment
• Possibly Warm and Wet, Conducive for Life
• Ellipse Size
• Small 20 km Diameter Allows gtgtgt103 to 109 Sites
  (potentially)
• Number Sites Scales with Ellipse Size - smooth,
  flat, safe
• Beagle - Length 500 km - 1 Site
• MPF - Length 200-300 km lt10 Sites
• MER - Length 100 km 150 Sites
• Go To Sites Possible - Specific Area Identified
  from Orbit
• Land Next to Area of Interest, Traverse Out of
  Ellipse to Area of Interest
• More in Subsequent Talks.

9
MSL Landing Altitude lt 2.0 km
MOLA Topography 90º Lat, 180º to -180W Lon

• Black area is topography gt 2.0 km
• Lines at 50º, 60º latitude

10

Summary of Current Engineering Constraints on
MSL Landing Sites
11
Planetary Protection Requirements

• The MSL assigned to Category IVc by NASA's
  Planetary Protection Office (more on this in
  subsequent talks).
• Landing sites not known to have extant water or
  water-ice within one meter of the surface
• Later access to "special regions" defined in NPR
  8020.12C permitted only in the vertical direction
  through use of sterilized sampling hardware
• Special regions - terrestrial organisms are
  likely to propagate, or interpreted to have a
  high potential for the existence of extant
  martian life forms
• MEPAG Special Regions Science Advisory Group
• Planetary Protection Office compliance of
  specific landing sites and nearby regions

12
MSL High Level Schedule
Fiscal Years
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
MSL Mission Phases
C/D
A
B
E

Instrument Selection
MSR
PDR
MRR
CDR
09-10/09 Launch Window
5/06 1st LSW 40 sites Prioritized List For MRO
10/07 2nd LSW 20-24 sites
8/08 3rd 5-10 sites/LZ
6-12/10 Arrival Window
10/08 Select Landing Site Zone L-1 yr
6/09 4th LSW 1 site
Landed Ops
Select landing ellipse L-1 month
13
LANDING SITE SELECTION TIMELINE

• 09-10/09 Launch
• 9/09 Selection of actual landing ellipse
• 6/09 4th, Final Workshop
• 10/08 L-1 yr Selection/Target Landing Site
  Zone/LV
• 8/08 3rd Workshop Review
• Recommend Landing Site
  Zone/Zones
• 10/07 2nd Landing Site Workshop
• 5/06 1st Landing Site Workshop
• 1/06 Announcement/Invitation to Workshop
• Engineering Constraints Defined
• Science Objectives Defined
• 11/05 Preliminary Engineering Constraints
  Defined

14
1st Landing Site Workshop 5/06

• 5/06 - First Landing Site Workshop
• Community Provide Suggestions for Landing Sites
• MSL Engineering Constraints Science Objectives
  Known
• Instrument Selected, Science Objectives and
  Habitability Defined
• Lots of THEMIS and MOC Images Available,
• Use Data to Guide Selection
• MER Prime Mission Over (but still going!!)
• Community/Project Can Incorporate What Has Been
  Learned
• HRSC Omega images available from 1/04
• MRO Primary Science starts in late 2006
• Workshop Objective is Prioritization of Potential
  Sites 40
• Used to Target MRO, MOC, THEMIS, HRSC Images

15
LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP
NAME LOCATION ELEVATION TARGET PROPOSER
Gale Crater 4.6S, 137.2E -4.5 km Interior Layered Deposits J. Bell, N. Bridges
Eberswalde Crater 24.0S, 326.3E -0.8 and -0.4 km Delta J. Schieber, J. Dickson
Eberswalde Crater 23.8S,326.7E -1.48 km Delta J. Rice
Candor Chasma Various -4 to 3 km Sulfate Deposits N. Mangold
Melas Chasma 9.8S, 283.6E -1.9 km Paleolake C. Quantin
E. Melas Chasma 11.62S, 290.45E Below-2 km Interior Layered Deposits M. Chojnacki
Aram Chaos 2.5N, 338E -1.6 to -3.8 km Hematite N. Cabrol
Iani Chaos 2S , 342E Below -2 km Hematite, Sulfate T. Glotch
W. Meridiani 7.5ºN, 354ºE -1 to -1.5 km Layered Sediments A. Howard
N. Sinus Meridiani 5.6N, 358E -1.5 km Crater lake sediments L. Posiolova
E. Meridiani 0, 3.7E -1.3 km Sedimentary Layers B. Hynek
E. Meridiani 1.8S, 7.6E -1.0 to -1.5 km Sediments, Hematite H. Newsom
W. Arabia 8.9N, 358.8E -1.2 km Sedimentary Rocks E. Heydari
SW Arabia Terra 2-12N, 355-348E -1 km Sed. Rocks, Methane C. Allen
Becquerel Crater 21.8N, 351E -2.6 to -3.8 km Layered Sedimentary Rocks J. C. Bridges
Terby Crater 28S, 73E -5 km Layers in crater T. Parker
Terby Crater 28S, 74E -5 km Light-toned Outcrops Z. Noe Dobrea
Terby Crater 28S, 73E -5 km Layered Material S. Wilson
http//marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/landingsites/msl/work
shops/data/
16
LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP LANDING SITES PROPOSED TO FIRST MSL WORKSHOP
NAME LOCATION ELEVATION TARGET PROPOSER
S. Holden Crater 26.4ºS, 325.3ºE -2.25 km Lacustrine Layers M. Malin
Holden Crater 26.4ºS, 325.3ºE -2.3 km Layered Materials R. Irwin, J. Grant
Holden Crater 26.1ºS, 326ºE -2.2 km Layered Materials J. Rice
Palos Crater 2.7ºS, 110.8ºE -0.75 km Layered Materials J. Rice
Argyre 56.8ºS, 317.7ºE -1.5 km Glacial Features J. Kargel
S. Hemisphere 49S, 14E Above -0.5 km Recent Climate Deposits M. Kreslavsky
Hale Crater 35.7S, 323.4E 2.4 km Gullies W. E. Dietrich
Wirtz Crater 48.6S, 334E 0.6 km Gullies W. E. Dietrich
Athabasca Vallis 10N, ?ºE -2.4 km Cerberus Rupes Deposits D. Burr
Nili Fossae Crater 18.4ºN, 77.68ºE -2.6 km Valley Networks, layers J. Rice
NE Syrtis Major 10ºN, 70ºE 0.5 to 1.5 km Volcanics R. Harvey
Margaritifer basin 12.77ºS, 338.1ºE -2.12 km Fluvial Deposits K. Williams
Margaritifer basin 11.54ºS, 337.3ºE -2.535 km Fluvial Deposits K. Williams
Avernus Colles 1.0ºS, 169.5ºE Below -2 km High iron abundance L. Crumpler
Dao Vallis 40ºS, 85ºE Below -2 km A major valley L. Crumpler
Isidis Basin floor 5-15ºN, 80-95ºE Below -2 km Volatile sink L. Crumpler
Hypanis Vallis 11ºN, 314ºE Below -2 km Delta L. Crumpler
NW Slope Valleys Various Above 0 km? Flood Features J. Dohm
Nili Fossae 22ºN, 75ºE -0.6 km Phyllosilicates J. Mustard
Marwth Vallis 22.3ºN, 343.5ºE -2 km Phyllosilicates J-P Bibring
Juventae Chasma 5S, 297E -2 km Layered Sulfates J. Grotzinger
17
A Look AheadThe 2nd Landing Site Workshop 10/07

• 10 months of HiRISE, CTX, CRISM Data Available
• New MRO Discovered Sites Possible
• Evaluate up to 40 Sites Imaged by MRO
• Prioritize Top Dozen
• Dozen Backups
• Repeat Coverage
• for Top Dozen
• 10 Months to
• Acquire and
• Evaluate Data

18
3rd Landing Site Workshop 8/08

• Recommend Landing Site Zone
• Need to target launch vehicle
• Landing site zone is 10 Lat. by 15 Long. box,
• within which is Landing Ellipse, Could be
  Multiple Ellipses
• Hq Will Likely Select Zone
• Continue MRO Data
• Acquisition/Evaluation
• Of Preferred Ellipse
• Other Possible Ellipses
• in Zone maybe handful
• Surroundings for
• Context for Landing Site

19
4th Landing Site Workshop 6/09

• Recommend Final Ellipse
• 10 Months before 4th Workshop
• Complete Detailed Evaluation of Site Safety and
  Science
• Series Project, Program, Hq Reviews
• Project Peer Review
• Project Confirmation Review
• Planetary Protection Compliance Review
• Hq Review and Selection
• Launch Opportunity Opens 09/15/09
• Continued Evaluation of Landing Site
• For Final TCM Targeting and Post-Landing Science

20
Schedule for the First MSL Workshop May
31st-June 2nd

• Day 1 - Wed
• Introductions and Goals
• Constraints and Data Sets
• Overview of Site Science
• Gale
• Argyre, etc.
• Discussion

• Day 2 - Thurs
• Holden
• Eberswalde
• Terby
• Valles Marineris/ Chaos
• Meridiani/Arabia
• Volcanoes and/or Water
• Clays and Sulfates
• Discussion

• Day 3 - Friday
• Whats Next?
• (MRO/Maps)
• Summary Discussion
• Break
• Discussion and Prioritization
• Meeting ends at 1200 pm

21
Whats Next Step?MRO Mapping Starts Late 06

• At End First Workshop Prioritize Proposed Sites
  Into 3 Groups for MRO imaging (distinguish Go
  To sites)
• 10-15 High Priority - Request ROTOs
• 10-15 Priority ROTOs or Nadir imaging
• 10-15 Low Priority Likely only Nadir imaging
• Need to Define a Region of Interest (ROI) for
  each site
• Update List Regularly, Reprioritize or Introduce
  New Sites Based on MRO Images (no early stereo)
• Request data for Each See Smrekar Talk on
  Friday
• Evaluate Sites at 2nd Workshop
• Based on MRO data HiRISE, CRISM, CTX, SHARAD
• and THEMIS, MOC, Omega HRSC data