How JPL keeps the 13-year-old Curiosity rover doing science
115 points
4 hours ago
| 5 comments
| spectrum.ieee.org
| HN
rented_mule
2 hours ago
[-]
The total cost of Curiosity to date is well under 5% of the cost of the recent trip humans took around the moon (something like $3B vs. $90B, or $20 vs. $600 per US taxpayer). Imagine the amount of science that could get done if we gave even half the budget of crewed spaceflight to rover / probe style exploration.
reply
zitterbewegung
4 minutes ago
[-]
Much easier to get a moon mission due to politics .
reply
thegrim33
50 minutes ago
[-]
Yes, and Curiosity weighs 899kg, whereas a single SLS launch can put 26,988kg of robots, cargo, and humans into trans-lunar orbit.
reply
ccamrobertson
15 minutes ago
[-]
...and further imagine the science that could be done if we mass manufactured probes rather than using experimental engineering for each one. We could have had dozens of Voyager probes in the outer reaches of our solar system by now.

I would have loved to see more Huygens probes dropped to the surface of Titan or more New Horizons zoom past Pluto.

I don't think human spaceflight is to blame, rather it's what connects taxpayers to space exploration as an inspirational human pursuit. But, I do agree that can be more efficient with how we spend those dollars all around.

reply
andyjohnson0
1 hour ago
[-]
> Curiosity [...] has traveled nearly 37 kilometers, drilled into and sampled 42 different rocks, and as of publication has snapped nearly 763,000 photos.

Without in any way minimising the amazing scientific and engineering achievements of the team and the rover: we need crewed space exploration because people on Mars would be able to do the above in significantly less than thirteen years. Or, to put it another way, would do much more science in the same amount of time.

reply
Thrymr
1 hour ago
[-]
> much more science in the same amount of time.

I'm not convinced by the time argument, as astronauts would have limited time on Mars dictated by orbital mechanics and return schedules, but the bigger problem is cost. You are replying to a comment about how rovers and probes are cost effective; there is no way that crewed exploration could accomplish more science than Mars rovers without orders of magnitude more cost.

reply
tkcashman
52 minutes ago
[-]
A manned mission to Mars isn't even on the table yet (sorry, Elon) until we solve several huge problems, including cosmic radiation, landing heavy payloads, and a feasible alternative to chemical propulsion (most likely nuclear, but untested).
reply
rented_mule
1 hour ago
[-]
And if we're keeping costs proportional, send orders of magnitude more rovers and that helps the time argument for rovers as well.
reply
jahnu
20 minutes ago
[-]
I’m no expert of course but I get the impression that we’re trying to run before we can walk. Many more robotic missions and way more basic research done more scientifically first could quite plausibly get humans there quicker in the end. Reading A City on Mars I found myself thinking this is many orders of magnitude more complicated than Apollo and will take more time.
reply
zbendefy
2 hours ago
[-]
Maybe we would get a microphone on mars. Just kidding i know air pressure is vastly different, but still it would be cool to listen to ambient sound from there
reply
boxfire
2 hours ago
[-]
Mars 2020 has a microphone. You can probably find audio out there but here’s some:

https://science.nasa.gov/mission/mars-2020-perseverance/soun...

reply
ceejayoz
1 hour ago
[-]
reply
drstewart
36 minutes ago
[-]
Suddenly HN is very pro automating human jobs with machines because it's cheaper
reply
squeedles
49 minutes ago
[-]
Was excited to hear that they have a lower power rad-hard snapdragon system going into the new missions! The RAD 750 is basically a 30-year old IBM RS-6000. Very well known, but has been the goto CPU for way longer than I thought it would be.
reply
ezst
2 hours ago
[-]
Curiosity is a teenager now? Damn, I didn't need to feel this much older today..
reply
MinimalAction
2 hours ago
[-]
I am happy to know this emblem of knowledge stream keeps coming until 2035. It is wonderful to know our innovations have flown 200 odd million miles and work for so long!
reply
beastman82
1 hour ago
[-]
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, for those who are missing basic writing standards.
reply
xp84
1 hour ago
[-]
JPL has been around for over 80 years now -- I'm not sure that assuming basic familiarity with it, among people who would care about the Curiosity rover, is even a controversial choice, let alone 'substandard' writing.

I think especially for an organization like JPL, where the name is far from a full description of what they're currently about anyway, people tend to just think of them as 'JPL' rather than how we think of, say, the United Nations.

Edit: Also, all a reader even needs to know is what the sentence already directly implies -- that "JPL" are the ones in charge of operating Curiosity. It's like saying "How AMR Corp keeps American Airlines flying during challenging times for aviation"

reply
DharmaPolice
41 minutes ago
[-]
I do care about the Curiosity rover but I'll be honest that I only know JPL from The Martian.
reply