mso sag2 overview mepag

8/3/2019 Mso Sag2 Overview Mepag

1/14

Dynamic Mars: Activity, Transport and Change

Strategic Goals for the 2013 Mars Science Orbiter

OverviewJune 7, 2007

Report of the Mars Science Orbiter

Science Analysis GroupMSO SAG-2

Wendy Calvin, Chair


2/14

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Science Analysis Group (SAG-2) Chaired by W. M. CalvinCharter:

Review concepts forMSO 2013 including, but not limited to:- Trace Gas Investigation (including work from SAG-1)- Imaging (1-meter/pixel class or better to support future missions)- OrbitalGeophysics- Combination with a landed (drop-off) package

Goal: IdentifyMRO-Class Missions with outstanding science and with scientific feed-forwardto future near-term missions

Science Analysis Group (SAG-1) Chaired by C. B. Farmer

Recommended Aeronomy and Trace Gas MeasurementsEmphasized characterization of loss of water to space through the upperMars atmosphere.

Complemented by measurements of key biogeochemical gases (e.g., methane,ethane, etc.)

in the lowerMars atmosphere, possibly identifying local areas for future landed exploration.

Cost of mission, with straw-man payload, included in 2006POPguidelines (carried over to 2007).

Follow-upTwo Mars Scout teams, both focusing on the upper atmosphere processes and escape to space,

were selected for a head-to-head competition for the 2011 launch opportunity.A newScience Analysis Group was formed to re-evaluate options for the 2013 launch opportunity.

The New Study for MSO

History:SAG-1

Mars Science Orbiter (MSO 2013)MEPAG Science Analysis Group Activity

CurrentStudy:

SAG-2

MRO-class spacecraft


3/14


Process

Group held weekly telecons, augmented by subgroup telecon meetings.Subgroups organized along discipline lines to develop key science questions,

traceable to MEPgoals and objectives:- Atmospheres, Polar, Geology/Geophysics, LandedGeophysics

Several science themes considered with agreement on 3 final mission scenarios, each of whichaddresses an overall theme ofDynamic Mars: Activity, Transport, and Change:

Plan A: AtmosphericSignatures and Near-Surface Change

Plan P: Polar and Climate ProcessesPlan G: Geological andGeophysicalExploration

A Core-Mission-Concept providing a good balance of in-depth focus and cross-disciplinary reachwas defined for each scenario.

Cost/mass option space was explored by considering options which either augmented orreduced the scope of the core concept.

One core concept and two augmented options included a landed drop-off package with the

following science:Geophysics (seismology, tracking for geodynamics, heat flow), Meteorology

Final Report

Discussed with MEPAG Chairs andMEPLeadScientist forMars

Posted on MEPAG website: http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/index.html

Mars Science Orbiter (MSO 2013)MEPAG Science Analysis Group: SAG-2 Activity

MSOAttributes:

10-yearlifetim

efortelecom,

MRO-Class

Mission

1 June 2007


4/14


MSO SAG-2 Members

Wendy M. Calvin, Chair - University of Nevada, Reno

Mark Allen, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/CaltechW. Bruce Banerdt, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech

Don Banfield, Cornell University

Bruce A. Campbell, Smithsonian Institution

Phil R. Christensen, Arizona State University

Ken S. Edgett, Malin Space Science Systems (resigned 4/18/07)

Bill M. Farrell, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Kate E. Fishbaugh, International Space Science Institute

Jim B. Garvin, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

John A. Grant, Smithsonian Institution

Alfred S. McEwen, University of Arizona

Christophe Sotin, University of Nantes

Tim N. Titus, U. S. Geological Survey

Daniel Winterhalter Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech (Study Scientist)

Richard W. Zurek, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech (Mars Program Office)


5/14


Motivation: Follows up on recent reports of methane and active gullies

Strategy: Measure with great sensitivity a suite of trace gases whose signatures may reveal

subsurface geochemical and/or biochemical activity

Identify source regions through direct observation and by model inversion constrained byconcurrent atmospheric data

Extend the climatological record from MGS, ODY, and MRO

Continue to characterize surface changes

Key measurements: Abundances of key trace gases including, but not limited to, methane

Winds as well as profiles of dust, temperature and water vapor

Imaging with sub-meter resolution and high signal-to-noise (preferred for science and landingsite characterization)

Feed-forward: Landing site certification and atmospheric environment characterization

Identification of potential landing sites for astrobiological or detailed geochemical studies AFL, Mid-Range Rovers, MSR

Synergistic with concurrent landed network science

Plan A: Atmospheric Signatures & Near-Surface Change

Gully in Hale crater,MRO-HiRISE(UAz)


6/14


Plan P: Polar and Climate Processes

Motivation:

Follows up on observations of active erosion of the residual south CO2 cap, of thediverse structures of the polar layered terrain, and of varied properties of seasonalvolatile deposits

Strategy: Measure the volume and density of seasonal and interannual change in volatile

deposits

Characterize the radiative energy balance, particularly of the seasonal and residualpolar caps

Extend the stratigraphic record from MGS, ODY, and MRO, particularly of the polarlayers

Continue to characterize surface changes

Key measurements: Precise elevation and volume of seasonal and residual volatile deposits

Winds as well as temperature, composition and albedo for energy balance andtransport

Imaging with sub-meter resolution and high signal-to-noise (preferred for science andlanding site characterization)

Feed-forward: Landing site certification and atmospheric environment characterization

Identification of potential landing sites at high latitudes for future exploration Mid-Range Rovers, MSR

Synergistic with landed network science High-latitude Network Station North polar stratigraphy,MRO-HiRISE(UAz)


7/14


Plan G: Geological and Geophysical Exploration

Motivation:

Fill the gap regarding subsurface and internal processes Explore synergy between orbital instruments and a single landed geophysical package

Strategy: Two themes: Ancient Climate Change and Near-Surface Change Today

Characterize structure in the upper few meters of the Mars crust; observe thru dust mantles

Extend the stratigraphic record from MGS, ODY, and MRO and continue to characterizesurface gullies, debris flows, etc.

Explore the structure and activity of the Martian interior with a landed geophysical packageo Even a single station can characterize present subsurface activity and structure

Key measurements: Imaging the upper few meters of ground

Imaging with sub-meter resolution and high signal-to-noise (preferred for science and landingsite characterization)

Landed geophysical package with (in priority order) seismometer, ranging for geodynamics,

and heat flow experiment Inclusion of an integrated meteorological package provides important cross-discipline capability

Feed-forward: Landing site certification and subsurface structure characterization

Identification of potential landing sites for future exploration Mid-Range Rovers, MSR

Direct feed-forward to landed network science Guide development and strategy of network station instrumentation

Recent Impact, MRO HiRISE(UAZ)


8/14


Polar Mass and Energy BudgetsPolar Processes Today

Geologically Recent Climate Change

Mars Science Orbiter (MSO) 2013Science RationaleScienceThrusts

MEPAG Science Themes Feed-Forward

Tectonic Activity on Mars

Geological History of Water on Mars

Past and Present Climates

MSO Science Goals

Past and Present HabitabilityModern Water Cycle

Current Climate Activity

Science:Ancient Climate Change

Surface Change Today

Missions:Network,MSR

Mid-Range Rovers

Science:Astrobiology

Atmospheric Transport

Surface Change Today

Missions:AFL, MSR

Mid-Range Rovers

Science:Modern Climate Change

Volatile Inventory

PolarProcesses

Missions:PolarAFL orStation

Mid-Range Rovers, MSR

Atmospheric Signatures ofSubsurface ActivityBiotic orGeochemical?

Surface ChangeChanges in Geomorphology

Credits: NASA/JPL andMRO CTX & MARCI (MSSS), MRO HiRISE (UA), MGSMOC (MSSS), M. Allen (JPL)

Seismic ActivityCrustal activity andDynamics

Surface ChangeChange in Geomorphology

Subsurface StructureWhat lies beneath the dust mantle?

Ice Cap VolumeVolatile Inventory

Dynamics of Volatile ExchangePolarEnergyBalance

Stratigraphy

Polar/Climate

DYNAMIC

MARS:Activity,Transpor

tandChange

Atmosphere/Surface

Geology/Geophysics


9/14


Final Mission Scenarios

MSO Scenarios kg $ M

kg $M kg $M kg $M

Solar occ FTIR 42 35 42 35 42 35Sub-mm spec 35 35 35 35 35 35MARCI like imager 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1TIR spec (TES/MCS) 10 12 10 12 10 12 ** 10 12

HiRISE class imager (HCI) 65 45 65 45 * 65 45 * 65 45Multi-Beam Lidar Altimeter 32 30 32 30

Radio Sci, Ultra Stable Osc. 1 5 1 5Multi-spec SWIR/TIR 30 30 30 30 ** 30 30MOC+ 1m res Camera 20 25 20 25 * 20 25 *Syn Ap Radar (no ded. Antenna) 45 40 45 40 45 40 45 40

Landed Seismo 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4 8Precision Tracking -X-band DTE trnspd 1.5 10 1.5 5 1.5 5

Landed Heat Flow 2.4 5 2.4 5 2.4 5

Landed Met Package 3.2 5 3.2 13 3.2 13

Reduced 108 108 99 108 121 98

Core Concept 153 128 164 146 151 147

Augmented 198 168 209 186 193 182

Alt. Augmented 163 159

kg $M

9.5 31

Core Concept: Best combination focused on Scenario Science Theme

Reduced: Compromise needed (varies) to fit Cost Guidelines from SAG-1 Study

AtmosphericSignatures and

Near-Surface

Chan e

Climate & PolarProcesses

Descopes imaging

capability

Descopes imag. &

composition

Plan GPlan PPlan A

SAR imaging

Trace gas, Atm.Monitor + dynamic

Hi-res. Imaging

Polar monitoringAtm winds

Hi Res imagingand composition

Geological andGeophysical

Exploration

High-res. Imag. +SAR imaging,

Landed sci. +composition

Descopes landed

sci. & compos.

Augmented: Broader investigation, but requires significant augmentation

* or ** indicates

substitution ofinstrument in reduced

science scenario

Totals

Landed Payload

SAR Imaging

Lander deliverysystem & Orbiter

accommodationcosts not included

Trace gases

Note: Plans A and P have different desires fororbit inclination (sun drifting and sun fixed).

Landed Sci

Cost-Benefit Brackets:

Orbiter

Lander


10/14


Mars Science Orbiter (MSO) 2013Example Mission Concept Description

PAYLOAD

ELEMENTOPTIONS

* Imager (1 m/pixel)Landing site imaging, science investigations

* Trace Gas InstrumentAtmospheric constituents, sources, sinks

* Winds Instrument3D vector field wind mapping

* Thermal IR SpectrometerMineralogy, atmospheric gases, polar ice

* Wide Angle CameraGlobal atmospheric monitoring & surface imaging

* Included in Concept Payload

(Reduced Plans fit Cost Guideline)

Potential Substitutions/Augmentations

Synthetic Aperture RadarShallow subsurface imaging

HiRISE-class ImagerGeology and polar monitoring

Multibeam High-res. Laser AltimeterPolar volatile balance and global topography

Drop-off PackageSeismology, geodynamics, meteorology,and heat flow

Prominent Features

Nadir instrument deckPayload Mass 160 kg w/contingency

14 Gbits per 8-hr pass, X and Ka

500 Gbits data storage

10-year Ka/X/UHF telecom

Simple monopropellant propulsion

1500 W EOL power

FLIGHT

SYSTEM

MRO-class spacecraft

Science thrustsAtmosphere/Surface

Geology/Geophysics

Polar/Climate

Infrastructure for future missionsLanding site imaging

10 years telecom capability

Critical event coverage

Science data relayMSOOBJECTIVES

Example Payload Considered

MIS

SION

DESIGN

Launch November 2013

MOI Capture Orbit 300 X 34,000 kmAerobrake ~9 monthsScience Emphasis ~3 yrs, ~ 300 kmRelay Emphasis ~7 yrs, ~400 kmTarget Launch Vehicle Atlas V 411Launch Mass Capability 3510 kg

SDT 6/15/07 - 9/15/07AO Release 2/08MCR 5/08

NEAR-TERM MILESTONES


11/14


Conclusions and Findings (1 of 3)

SAG-2 did not prioritize among the 3 scenarios

Each scenario will return significant new information relevantto our understanding of Mars, its history and potential for life

Each scenario provides new orbiter remote sensing capabilities at Mars--noone orbiter can address all scenarios adequately.

A landed drop-package can return significant science return even from asingle station.

All three scenarios have implications for missions now beingstudied to follow MSO, though the implications differ innature and degree depending on the scenario and the futuremission

Imaging with sub-meter resolution and high signal-to-noise capability is

needed for certification of future landing sites.

Different scenarios provide different kinds and levels of characterization ofother environmental factors (e.g., winds for EDL).

All scenarios provide information (though of different types) needed for humanexploration of Mars.


12/14



SAG-2 Findings

The Core Mission and Augmented scenarios may range $20-65M above the present cost guidelines: this requires somefunding augmentation, a paring down of orbiter costs, orprovision of a major component by international partners

All major payload elements, whether or not contributed, should be reviewedagainst the key measurement requirements.

The maturity of the required instruments is likely to vary considerably andreserves should be scoped accordingly.

The need for science team preparations forPhase E should not be overlookedforPhases B-D.

A core Mars mission should address key questions withinnovative, synergistic capabilities

The Core Mission Concepts achieve this with the significant science gainenabled by the proposed augmentations to the cost guidelines.

All resources should not be devoted principally to one element of the mission.

This includes maintaining significant, innovative orbiter science should a drop-package be part of the mission.


13/14



Immediate ProgrammaticDecisions Needed

Is the drop-package to be a key component of the MSOmission? The character of the MSO mission is very different with and without

this high-profile package.

The landed payload must accommodate (i.e., provide funding andmass) a meaningful geophysical package and should carry an

integrated meteorological package as well to justify its cost.

Which scenario should the Science Definition Team focuson? All return great science--programmatic issues thus become the

discriminators.

Different science scenarios are likely to require different choices ofmission parameters (e.g., orbit inclination).

What cost and mass resources will be baselined for MSO?


14/14

For More Details, see the full Report:

MEPAG MSO-SAG-2 (2007). Report from the 2013 Mars Science Orbiter (MSO) Second

Science Analysis Group, 72 pp., posted June 2007 by the Mars Exploration Program

Analysis Group (MEPAG) at http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/index.html.

This overview has been approved for public release by JPL Document

ReviewServices (CL#07-1783 )

mso sag2 overview mepag

Documents