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 Group

MSO SAG-2Wendy Calvin, Chair

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

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

Review concepts for MSO 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) - Orbital Geophysics - Combination with a landed (drop-off) package Goal: Identify MRO-Class Missions with outstanding science and with scientific feed-forward to future near-term missions

Science Analysis Group (SAG-1) Chaired by C. B. FarmerRecommended Aeronomy and Trace Gas Measurements

Emphasized characterization of loss of water to space through the upper Mars atmosphere.Complemented by measurements of key biogeochemical gases (e.g., methane,ethane, etc.) in the lower Mars atmosphere, possibly identifying local areas for future landed exploration.Cost of mission, with straw-man payload, included in 2006 POP guidelines (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 new Science Analysis Group was formed to re-evaluate options for the 2013 launch opportunity.

The New Study for MSO

His

tory

: S

AG

-1Mars Science Orbiter (MSO 2013) MEPAG Science Analysis Group Activity

Cu

rren

t S

tud

y:

SA

G-2

MRO-class spacecraft

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Process

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

traceable to MEP goals and objectives: - Atmospheres, Polar, Geology/Geophysics, Landed Geophysics

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

Plan A: Atmospheric Signatures and Near-Surface ChangePlan P: Polar and Climate ProcessesPlan G: Geological and Geophysical Exploration

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

Cost/mass option space was explored by considering options which either augmented or reduced 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 and MEP Lead Scientist for MarsPosted on MEPAG website: http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/index.html

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

MS

O A

ttri

bu

tes

:10

-yea

r li

feti

me

for

tele

com

, “M

RO

-Cla

ss”

Mis

sio

n

1 June 2007

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

MSO SAG-2 MembersWendy M. Calvin, Chair - University of Nevada, RenoMark Allen, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/CaltechW. Bruce Banerdt, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/CaltechDon Banfield, Cornell UniversityBruce A. Campbell, Smithsonian InstitutionPhil R. Christensen, Arizona State UniversityKen S. Edgett, Malin Space Science Systems (resigned 4/18/07)Bill M. Farrell, NASA Goddard Space Flight CenterKate E. Fishbaugh, International Space Science InstituteJim B. Garvin, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center John A. Grant, Smithsonian InstitutionAlfred S. McEwen, University of ArizonaChristophe Sotin, University of NantesTim N. Titus, U. S. Geological SurveyDaniel Winterhalter Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech (Study Scientist)Richard W. Zurek, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech (Mars Program Office)

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

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 by

concurrent 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

landing site 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 (U Az)

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Plan P: Polar and Climate Processes

Motivation: Follows up on observations of active erosion of the residual south CO2 cap, of the

diverse structures of the polar layered terrain, and of varied properties of seasonal volatile 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 residual

polar caps— Extend the stratigraphic record from MGS, ODY, and MRO, particularly of the polar

layers— 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 and

transport Imaging with sub-meter resolution and high signal-to-noise (preferred for science

and landing 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 (U Az)

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

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 characterize

surface gullies, debris flows, etc.— Explore the structure and activity of the Martian interior with a landed geophysical package

o 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 landing

site 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 (U AZ)

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Polar Mass and Energy BudgetsPolar Processes Today

Geologically Recent Climate Change

Mars Science Orbiter (MSO) 2013 Science RationaleScienceThrusts

MEPAG Science Themes Feed-Forward

Tectonic Activity on MarsGeological History of Water on Mars

Past and Present Climates

MSO Science Goals

Past and Present HabitabilityModern Water Cycle

Current Climate Activity

Science:Ancient Climate ChangeSurface Change Today

Missions:Network, MSR

Mid-Range Rovers

Science:Astrobiology

Atmospheric TransportSurface Change Today

Missions:AFL, MSR

Mid-Range Rovers

Science:Modern Climate Change

Volatile InventoryPolar Processes

Missions:Polar AFL or Station

Mid-Range Rovers, MSR

Atmospheric Signatures of Subsurface ActivityBiotic or Geochemical?

Surface ChangeChanges in Geomorphology

Credits: NASA/JPL and MRO CTX & MARCI (MSSS), MRO HiRISE (UA), MGS MOC (MSSS), M. Allen (JPL)

Seismic ActivityCrustal activity and Dynamics

Surface ChangeChange in Geomorphology

Subsurface StructureWhat lies beneath the dust mantle?

Ice Cap VolumeVolatile Inventory

Dynamics of Volatile ExchangePolar Energy Balance

Stratigraphy

Po

lar/

Cli

ma

te

DY

NA

MIC

MA

RS

: A

ctiv

ity,

Tra

nsp

ort

an

d C

han

ge

Atm

os

ph

ere

/Su

rfa

ce

Ge

olo

gy

/Ge

op

hy

sic

s

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Final Mission Scenarios

MSO Scenarios kg $ Mkg $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 12HiRISE class imager (HCI) 65 45 65 45 * 65 45 * 65 45Multi-Beam Lidar Altimeter 32 30 32 30Radio 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 40Landed Seismo 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4 8Precision Tracking -X-band DTE trnspd 1.5 10 1.5 5 1.5 5Landed Heat Flow 2.4 5 2.4 5 2.4 5Landed Met Package 3.2 5 3.2 13 3.2 13

Reduced 108 108 99 108 121 98Core Concept 153 128 164 146 151 147Augmented 198 168 209 186 193 182Alt. Augmented 163 159

kg $M9.5 31

Core Concept: Best combination focused on Scenario Science Theme Reduced: Compromise needed (varies) to fit Cost Guidelines from SAG-1 Study

Atmospheric Signatures and Near-Surface Change

Climate & Polar Processes

Descopes imaging capability

Descopes imag. & composition

Plan GPlan PPlan A

SAR imaging

Trace gas, Atm. Monitor + dynamic Hi-res. Imaging

Polar monitoring Atm winds Hi Res imaging and composition

Geological and Geophysical Exploration

High-res. Imag. + SAR imaging, Landed sci. + composition

Descopes landed sci. & compos.

Augmented: Broader investigation, but requires significant augmentation

* or ** indicates substitution of instrument in reduced science scenario

Totals

Landed Payload

SAR Imaging

Lander delivery system & Orbiter accommodation costs not included

Trace gases

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

Landed Sci

Cost-Benefit Brackets:

Orbiter

Lander

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Mars Science Orbiter (MSO) 2013 Example Mission Concept Description

PA

YL

OA

D E

LE

ME

NT

OP

TIO

NS

* 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 deck

Payload 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

FL

IGH

T S

YS

TE

M

MRO-class spacecraft

Science thrustsAtmosphere/SurfaceGeology/GeophysicsPolar/Climate

Infrastructure for future missionsLanding site imaging 10 years telecom capability Critical event coverageScience data relayM

SO

OB

JEC

TIV

ES

Example Payload Considered

MIS

SIO

N D

ES

IGN

Launch November 2013MOI 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

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Conclusions and Findings (1 of 3)

• SAG-2 did not prioritize among the 3 scenarios

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

• Each scenario provides new orbiter remote sensing capabilities at Mars--no one orbiter can address all scenarios adequately.

• A landed drop-package can return significant science return even from a single station.

All three scenarios have implications for missions now being studied to follow MSO, though the implications differ in nature and degree depending on the scenario and the future mission

• 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 of other environmental factors (e.g., winds for EDL).

• All scenarios provide information (though of different types) needed for human exploration of Mars.

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Conclusions and Findings (2 of 3)

• SAG-2 Findings The Core Mission and Augmented scenarios may range $20-

65M above the present cost guidelines: this requires some funding augmentation, a paring down of orbiter costs, or provision of a major component by international partners

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

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

• The need for science team preparations for Phase E should not be overlooked for Phases B-D.

A core Mars mission should address key questions with innovative, synergistic capabilities

• The Core Mission Concepts achieve this with the significant science gain enabled 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.

MEPAG MSO SAG 2 Final

Conclusions and Findings (3 of 3)

• Immediate Programmatic Decisions Needed Is the drop-package to be a key component of the MSO

mission?• 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 and

mass) a meaningful geophysical package and should carry an integrated meteorological package as well to justify its cost.

Which scenario should the Science Definition Team focus on?

• All return great science--programmatic issues thus become the discriminators.

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

What cost and mass resources will be baselined for MSO?

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 Review Services (CL#07-1783 )