As the European Space Agency (ESA) mulls over what caused its Schiaparelli Mars landing demonstrator to crash, at stake is the second part of its ambitious .
This involves sending a large rover to the Red Planet, one equipped to launch the most comprehensive search so far for past and present life there.
Schiaparelli’s destruction has cast some doubt on that ambition because the rover will use the same landing technology. But let´s put the crash into perspective.
Advertisement
Landing anything on Mars is a grand challenge and intrinsically risky. Out of 18 landings attempted so far, only seven were successful. That´s why this small demonstrator craft was sent ahead of the rover, currently scheduled for launch in 2020 and landing in 2021.
This vehicle is eagerly awaited. It will carry a groundbreaking suite of instruments to comprehensively characterise the Martian near-surface environment, enabling it to address the first objective of the ExoMars mission: searching for signs of life.
Subsurface secrets
Of particular importance in this regard is the (MOMA), which uses mass spectrometry and gas chromatography to spot chemicals of biological origin, and the , which also identifies chemicals of interest.
Finally, there’s the , which can reach 2 metres down, allowing the recovery of subsurface sediment samples for the first time. This is extremely significant from an astrobiological viewpoint – we would expect the only extant habitats to be at such depths below the Martian soil because of the harsh surface conditions.
With this kind of novel instrumentation, never flown before on a Mars mission, we might indeed find signs of life.
Of course high scientific payoff is usually associated with higher risks. However, ESA should be encouraged that the other part of the ExoMars 2016 mission, the Trace Gas Orbiter, is functioning flawlessly. That orbiter will try to answer the question of whether there is methane in the Martian atmosphere, and will also be used to relay signals to and from the rover.
ESA’s inquiry into Schiaparelli’s crash is due to report in mid-November. Then , the agency will ask its 22 member states to stump up the cash to progress the mission – another €300 million.
Fear of failure
At that point there should be no doubt about continuing with ExoMars 2020. What would be the alternative? An almost finished rover with a collection of finished or nearly finished state-of-the-art instruments parked in a museum after spending more than a billion euros?
That would not only be a scientific but also a public relations disaster – it certainly wouldn’t encourage countries to contribute to European space exploration in the future.
This should not happen. Of course the have to be analysed in detail, and modifications to the landing mechanism of the ExoMars rover implemented if needed.
That might cause a slight delay, but we cannot allow discontinuing the mission because of fear of failure. The ExoMars rover has the potential to harvest more scientific bounty in the field of astrobiology than all previous Mars missions together. It must roll on.
