Mission team members for InSight, the new Mars lander mission selected by NASA to launch in 2016, explain how the spacecraft will advance our knowledge of Mars' history and rocky planet evolution.
NASA is backing a mission to study the deep interior of Mars as its next Discovery-class project, following in the footsteps of spacecraft that are already operating at Mercury and the asteroid Vesta. The InSight mission, previously known as the Geophysical Monitoring Station or GEMS, is due for launch in 2016, with a cost cap of $425 million.
InSight won out over two other proposed missions that would have sent probes to the hydrocarbon seas of the Saturnian moon Titan or to the surface of a comet. Today's selection comes amid the wild success of NASA's Curiosity rover on Mars, as well as deep questions about the future of Mars exploration.
In a statement, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden made clear that Mars would be as much of a priority for future exploration as budgets will allow.
"The exploration of Mars is a top priority for NASA, and the selection of InSight ensures we will continue to unlock the mysteries of the Red Planet and lay the groundwork for a future human mission there," Bolden said. "The recent successful landing of the Curiosity rover has galvanized public interest in space exploration, and today's announcement makes clear there are more exciting Mars missions to come."
The future of Mars missions
After Curiosity, the only other future Mars probe on NASA's list is the MAVEN orbiter, which is due for launch in late 2013 and will study Mars' upper atmosphere. Citing budgetary concerns, NASA has withdrawn its support from the European-led ExoMars project, which is aimed at sending spacecraft to the Red Planet in 2016 and 2018 to set the stage for the eventual return of Martian samples to Earth.
NASA is currently in the midst of retooling its long-range Mars exploration effort, and a report on that topic is expected to be released later this month or next month.
InSight is actually an acronym of sorts, standing for "Interior Exploration Using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport." The mission would place a lander on Mars with seismic instruments that could determine whether the Red Planet has a liquid core like Earth's, confirm whether or not Mars has tectonic plates like Earth's, and provide insights into the geological evolution of terrestrial planets such as Mars and Earth.
"InSight will get to the 'core' of the nature of the interior and structure of Mars, well below the observations we've been able to make from orbit or the surface," John Grunsfeld, NASA's associate administrator for science, said in today's statement.
Grunsfeld told reporters that seismological studies have been a standard method for learning about the interior structure of Earth. "We have no such knowledge for Mars," he said. Seismometers were installed on the two Viking landers that were sent to Mars in the mid-1970s, but they sent back little data about Mars' seismicity. (One didn't work, and the other mostly registered wind-induced vibrations because it was placed on one of the lander's legs.)
InSight and the others
Jim Green, director of NASA Headquarters' Planetary Science Division, said the InSight mission is slated for launch in March 2016, with landing expected in September 2016. The landing site has not yet been selected, but it will be in a flat, near-equatorial region of the planet, Green said. The mission is due to last one full Martian year, which is nearly two Earth years.
The scientific payload includes a robotic arm, a geodetic instrument to determine Mars' rotation axis and two cameras, plus a French-built seismometer to measure deep seismic waves and a German-built "mole" that can burrow down through several yards (meters) of Martian soil to monitor subsurface heat.
The mission team's leader is W. Bruce Banerdt of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Discovery-class missions are capped at $425 million in 2010 dollars, excluding the cost of the launch vehicle. NASA created the Discovery program to support relatively low-cost planetary missions, as opposed to more costly flagship missions such as the $2.5 billion Curiosity rover. Other Discovery-class missions include the Dawn probe, which is currently at Vesta and will head for the dwarf planet Ceres; Messenger, which is orbiting Mercury; and Stardust, which returned samples from Comet Wild 2. Until now, proposals for Mars missions were excluded from Discovery-class consideration.
NASA received 28 proposals for Discovery-class missions, and narrowed the field to three missions last year. InSight as well as the two others received $3 million each for preliminary design studies. Grunsfeld said InSight was the "most competitive" proposal among the three, which also included:
- Titan Mare Explorer (TiME), which would have provided the first direct exploration of an ocean environment beyond Earth by landing in, and floating on, Titan's sea of methane and ethane.
- Comet Hopper, which would have studied cometary evolution by landing on a comet multiple times and observing its changes as it interacted with the sun.
Grunsfeld said outside reviewers gave the InSight mission the "highest probability" that it could actually be performed on schedule and on budget. In the current climate of tight budgets, "that was a pretty major distinguishing feature," he said. Green and Grunsfeld said InSight's precise mission cost would be determined next year. Meanwhile, the also-rans could be reconsidered for future opportunities.
The fate of the Mars exploration program is a separate issue, but the fact that InSight was selected as a Discovery-class mission would probably rule out the selection of a similar geophysical station as part of the program's future lineup, Grunsfeld said.
InSight's selection was hailed by U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who has been critical of NASA's cuts in the Mars exploration program.
"This is fantastic news for our Mars exploration program, and will answer several key questions about Martian geology and may help us to understand better the processes that led to Mars and the Earth evolving in such different directions, even though there is evidence that abundant water once flowed on the surface of Mars," Schiff said in a statement. "Also, by announcing this new mission soon after the landing of Curiosity, NASA will help to preserve the entry, descent and landing capabilities that were so spectacularly demonstrated by the scientists at JPL, whose talents will be crucial to future planetary exploration."
More about Mars:
- Mars surface has shifting plates, too
- Curiosity shoots Martian rock with laser
- Search for life to shape future Mars missions
Alan Boyle is NBCNews.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. To keep up with Cosmic Log as well as NBCNews.com's other stories about science and space, sign up for the Tech & Science newsletter, delivered to your email in-box every weekday. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.


Seriously needs a soundtrack with explanatory voice-over...
Now that they're in line to get $425 million, they can afford a soundtrack on the video ;-)
I put in a new video that goes more into depth about the mission (and has lots of explanatory voice-over.
The mission sounds very cool and I'm sure they'll have to dig pretty deep to find the Giant Sand Worms. Their burrows are quite deep to avoid the radiation.
But I was disappointed to learn that the mission to Titan lost out. I am as fascinated with Titan and the possibility of unique life-forms on that moon as I am Mars and the Giant Sand Worms.
Can't wait.
There will be worms.
Skip, I think your dog needs worming.
Maybe just a Eureka fanatic. :-)
Tunein Radio has 70,000 internet Radio stations around the World in places such as Timbuktu and one even in Antarctica. Why not one on Mars on the next Rover. Set up a station using memory bites and play music, Mars weather and play audios of Marvin The Martian an hour once a week. Charge people lets say $2.99 a month to listen in. Get 10 million folks to buy in and it pays for the cost in just over a couple of years. Also a live video once a day direct from Mars. Coming to you live from Mars Station Zebra. Or we could call it Alan Boyle presents internet Radio from Mars. I'd pay for that service. Think about it.
They could also do "War of the Worlds" from Mars once a year.
I honestly, really look forward to the day that this happens. I'd like to know if Mars has organisms that are alot like ours here on Earth.
I agree. Can't wait. I hope they also bring along the infrared cave detector instrument, because if the lander happens to land on top of a big cave, the seismic instrument may not be able to hear the core of the Mars.
And, large caverns could retain some moisture. (Although mostly hopeful wishing but still, it would be as good as any other area to look for life.)
Im assuming its partly for the possibility of subterranian (terra acceptable on mars??) sheltering in future manned missions.
I think that's subaresian.
Titan Mare sounds so much more interesting! Ever since Huygens I've been very interested in Titan, but that's just me. I'm guessing that since NASA had a lot of good press with curiosity, they needed another Mars mission to keep the public's interest. That's okay, public interest is good. If it keeps NASA funded, then maybe a Titan mission will be possible in a few years. Besides, Mars is pretty interesting too.
I dont think either of these missions will come around again any time soon. These missions are pretty specific to the opportunity. I think NASA just passed up 2 golden opportunities for scientific discovery in exchange for a Pasadena California welfare program.
Well do you know any other city besides Pasadena that has the Jet Propulsion Lab and can put robots on Mars successfully? Maybe you're from Florida and bitter that the Shuttle welfare program went belly up.
So why doesn't some billionaire (or even a multi-millionaire) out there throw a bunch of bucks into a mission to Titan, or another mission to Mars, or a probe to Europa?
NASA is finding new ways to piss away taxpayer dollars... on low priority science
NASA already has a Mars Program that is pissing away billions. Now they are actually wasting the money that was actually producing discoveries from elsewhere in the solar system on Mars as well.
Better pissed away by NASA's low priority science than some congressman's high priority expense account.
too bad the energy tycoons of earth don't realize the future potential of all those hydrocarbons on titan, if they even thought they could get their hands on some dollars or rubles or yen as a direct result of a nasa mission to titan....zooom....boots on the ground in no time. Still, maybe it a good thing. after all, bolden won't be there forever, I hope he leaves (or gets tossed, whichever comes first...could be worse, thank god golden is gone) with enough time for lienbach to take the top position and really get some science lined up.
I am glad the insight mission is a go....I would say to keep all plans flexible, we do not know what oscy is gonna find. Absolutely clueless in fact. Out true nature is our ability to adapt, and so we should keep several contingencies in mind right up to launch date. As an offhand, what if some discovery from curiosity shows that a ten pound bag of sugar mixed with martian soil would yeild more energy than two rtg generators.....exactly a reason to remain flexible. No hardliner ever had the ability to adapt, it's always my way or the highway and I have never been wrong. WEll, I have been wrong before, I will be wrong again, but this time, I, ray smith, kinda have a feeling that I might, I say just might there boy, be right.
Meanwhile it must be a tuff job at nasa, always in the spotlight, good and bad, and everday it seem like another opportunity for a great big ph-u, which everyone knows is not worth 10,000 atta boys....and usually the best you can hope for is one more atta boy on any given day....we are politically hard on nasa when they fail, yet they are THE risk taking agency, specifically set up TO take the risks. And when they succeed? every politician raises his hand to say how much they helped...phoooey....nasa helped each and everyone of them get elected in one way or another. It is not often obvious.
I have often wondered what would really happen if nasa were to put it's plans out for popular vote. Would we have a moonbase? would we close down all the teams behind the probes and robots and manned missions? I have concluded one thing for certain. I really do not want to know. If anything can save us now, it's the best and brightest of our engineers, and they got their damn hands full fighting for their jobs at the hands of political fools whose only wish is election or re-election. You know how I an tell? cause I am watching two grown men duke it out for the 350,000$ by tossing around close to a billion each....and one of em has done this three times before....a three time loser, spending more money than I'll ever even see in a photograph, for a job that pays what? 250,000? give or take some $ I guess. I hate to think of any of them as having any control over golden, bolden, leinbach or whomever........sorry for that rant, I consider it more antipolitics since I rail against all of em. It must be a tuff job at the top of nasa. Bolden has more of the right stuff than a lot of us. And I mean a lot of us.
see my post on Mars and tectonics at the therockdoctor.org
Let's see, after delivering the last Mars lander 2 years behind schedule, and a billion dollars over budget, NASA chooses to reward such behavior by giving JPL another Mars lander of marginal scientific justification. What kind of top level management at NASA doesn't look at this and see the handwriting on the wall. If this mission was so urgent, why wasn't it funded using Mars Program Office money? They have an entire billion dollar program dedicated to exploring Mars, and yet they didnt feel this mission was valuable enough to dip into that account? There is no way that the 7th Mars lander will unlock the same kind of fundamental discoveries that the 1st Comet lander, or 1st exporation of an methane lake would have produced. NASA made the wrong choice of science, budget, and schedule with this one. Great job, you usually only screw up 2 of those.
I think NASA made very good decision on this. It is hard to agree on which discovery is the most important one, since people want different things. So let's talk about technical reality. Our space exploration technology is still in the development stage, Mars is the closest target and our rate of success to land on Mars is only 50% so far. If we choose a long distant target right now, here is what will happen: we will spend few years to develope and launch the lander, then we have to wait for many years just to find out if the lander miss the target. You know why our space technology develope so slowly, because many people think space exploration is waste of money, they refuse to fund missions. They think we human should just live off what we inherited then die.
I think the public should be able to vote on which missions get the go-ahead and which don't. It is our money after all.
Great idea, if we could also vote for which wars we fight, what weapons we build, which bridges get fixed, person-by-person who should get food stamps, and so on.
@Michael,
Maybe that wouldn't be such a bad idea. General pop would probably make better decisions than the wacky elitist republicrats that we've got running the show now...
Can we also vote on which elected officials get raises?
Fading Light, I think we should be able to direct our tax dollars to the programs we want the money going to, or at least half of our taxes.
OneVoice, if the general public were voting for each and every thing, we would turn our government into one big reality show. Actually, come to think of it, we are pretty close to that already.
Never underestimate the stupidity of a mob OneVoice.
Well, unless it's Mob_Barley, he's pretty smart.
Mitchell
I guess a good size meteor strike will help a lot in doing Mars seismology. Otherwise, I guess they are just listening for mars quakes.