- 
   
   On Mars:
   Exploration of the Red Planet. 1958-1978
   
   - 
   
   
   
   -  
   
   
-  
   
   
- PREPARING FOR SITE
   SELECTION
   
   
-  
   
   
-  
   
   
-  
   
   
- [284] Besides considering the imaging
   system and discussing desired landing site characteristics at its
   October 1970 meeting, the landing site working group also
   considered what it could gain from Mariner 71. Dan Schneiderman
   introduced the group to the Mariner project, and Edwin Pounder
   reviewed mission operations plans for both the prime 90-day
   mission and the extended mission (for the remainder of the first
   year in Mars orbit). Pounder went on to outline problems and
   promises of the project, one of the promises being data that would
   assist the Viking team in landing site selection. Patrick J. Rygh
   and Robert H. Steinbacher briefed the working group on mission
   operations and participation by scientists. 
   
   
         -  
   
   
 - In turn, Hal Masursky and Carl Sagan told
   the Mariner specialists what the Viking team hoped to learn from
   Mariner 71. What they wanted was not in the written mission plans
   but was rather, How do we learn as we go along and then modify our
   plans accordingly? In NASA shorthand, this tactic was called the
   adaptive mode-acquiring data from a spacecraft and quickly using
   it to modify the mission. The Viking team was certain it would
   need this skill, and it would require discipline, planning, and
   timely responsiveness to succeed. In the plans for Mariner 71,
   data processing was not scheduled to catch up with acquisition for
   a year, and Masursky feared that unless adequately supported, the
   complete process could take 5 to 10 years, which was obviously too
   slow to be of value to Viking. Years of work had to be compressed
   into weeks. On occasion, time for data processing would have to be
   whittled down to days and even hours.12 
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - At its next meeting, 2-3 December 1970,
   the landing site working group made its initial recommendation for
   landing sites, so that Howard Robins' mission planning staff could
   proceed with its work. These proposed [285] sites had been chosen
   after only four months. Carl Sagan, who had been urging that the
   site selection process be completely documented, prepared a
   convenient summary of the thinking-as he saw it-that went into the
   choices. "The following is a preliminary attempt to integrate
   coherently a range of ideas which have been suggested on the
   Viking landing site question, to point out inadequacies in the
   existing data and to serve as guide for future discussion." He
   noted that the "present cycle of discussion on landing site
   selection is to aid development of the Viking Project Reference
   Mission #1," a theoretical model that would be used in planning
   mission operations and designing the spacecraft. Since in some
   respects this was a training exercise. there was no commitment to
   the specific landing sites they had selected.
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - In considering landing sites for the two
   Vikings, some factors would be certain to change. But those that
   would likely remain unaltered fell into two categories,
   engineering and scientific. Under the engineering heading, the 30ƒ
   south to 30ƒ north latitude range for landing sites was dictated
   by the angle at which the spacecraft would have to enter the
   Martian atmosphere to obtain optimum aerodynamic deceleration and
   proper thermal conditions. Second, nearly all of the working group
   members agreed that the lander should sit down where atmospheric
   pressures were the highest. As on Earth, high pressure corresponds
   with lower elevation, but whereas sea level pressure on Earth
   averages about 1013 millibars, surface pressures on Mars are 100
   times lower. Pressure at the lowest elevation was believed to be
   close to 10 millibars and at the top of mountains less than l
   millibar but the uncertainty in these values was 20 or 30 percent
   at the time. The Viking scientists hoped that Mariner photographs
   and ground-based radar studies would give them more exact
   information on atmospheric pressure relative to topographical
   features. A third engineering concern was the effect that Martian
   surface winds would have on the spacecraft. The Mars engineering
   model with which the team was working predicted winds of less than
   90 meters per second, but Sagan noted that newer calculations
   indicated the possibility of winds up to 140 to 200 meters per
   second.
   
   
-  
   
   
  - If such winds are encountered during
   landing maneuvers, the survivability of the spacecraft is very
   much in question; and such winds, even after a safe landing, might
   provide various engineering embarrassments. It will shortly be
   possible to predict which times and places are to be avoided.ŠSuch
   considerations obviously require further theoretical study and
   (with Mariner Mars '71) observational study. But they do indicate
   how new parameters, not previously considered, can severely impact
   landing site choices. Such considerations imply that any landing
   site selected at the present time should not be too firmly
   imbedded in the Project's thinking. 13
   
   
 -  
   
   
- Other technical factors affecting the
   choice of a landing spot included the time of day on Mars at
   touchdown, the size of the landing target, and a pair strategy
   calling for one very safe (but perhaps less interesting) site and
   [286] one of greater scientific potential. Depending in part on
   progress made in developing the lander tape recorder. Sagan
   thought that it might be desirable to land in the late afternoon
   to ensure that some lander images of the planet would be
   transmitted to the orbiter before it passed out of view of the
   lander, giving the team at the Jet Propulsion Lab maximum
   assurance of obtaining at least some initial pictures of the
   surface. They had to face the possibility that the lander could
   die while the orbiter continued on its way around Mars; it would
   be 24.6 hours before the orbiter passed over the lander a second
   time. Should a late afternoon touchdown be called for, those areas
   with dense cloud development at the time of day would have to be
   excluded. Turning to the target, or landing ellipse, Sagan
   indicated that it was currently 400 by 840 kilometers, which would
   eliminate areas appreciably smaller than this zone. The pair
   strategy had been devised for reasons of "survivability." One
   landing site would be selected with "safety considerations weighed
   very highly"; One landing site would be selected with "safety
   considerations weighed very highly''; if the first mission failed
   on entry, the team would want to have a preselected, extremely
   safe site for the second lander. "It is therefore necessary to
   consider some sites almost exclusively on engineering grounds."
   Sagan hoped planners could "back off from this requirement a
   little bit and seek out safe contingency sites with at least
   acceptable science.'' Alan Binder had made this same point earlier
   but somewhat more bluntly: "The engineering criteria must reign
   since it hardly need be mentioned that a crashed lander is not
   very useful even if it did crash in the most interesting part of
   the planet." 14 Sagan wrote, ''Before any Viking lander is
   committed to a given site, there must be reasonably extensive
   Mariner Mars '71 type data, including but not restricted to
   imagery." He thought that selection of alternative candidate sites
   should be based on Mariner 71 data, and certification of the
   various candidates should be based on Viking data, which would be
   of higher resolution.
   
   
  -  
   
   
 - Sagan's report then turned to the working
   group consensus on science criteria for the landing sites. Many
   members believed it would be useful to pair the first two landing
   sites in such a manner that each one would be a control for the
   measurements made at its companion location. A reason for varying
   from this plan would be positive results from the biology
   experiment on the first lander; then the Viking team might wish to
   land the second craft as near the first one as possible to
   determine if the results could be duplicated. The best guess at
   the time was that Martian life, "or at least that subset of
   Martian life which the Viking biology package is likely to
   detect,'' would be found where there was water near the surface.
   But there was still considerable debate about the nature and
   amount of water that might be found. Low atmospheric pressures and
   temperatures always below 0°C did not augur well for the
   presence of liquid water. Still, Sagan and others believed that it
   was possible to have life-sustaining water present in other
   forms.
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - The uncratered terrain observed in the
   Mariner 4  photographs was of possible interest. Sagan
   hypothesized that such terrain must have been [287] recently (in
   geological terms) reworked. "Whatever the cause of the reworking,
   but particularly if it is due to tectonic activity, such locales
   are much more likely a priori
    to have had recent outgassing
   events and therefore to be of both geological and biological
   interest." Taking into consideration all these factors, Sagan
   listed his six favorite landing spots, but several of his
   colleagues came up with other suggestions of their own.
   15
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - After considerable freewheeling debate of
   the kind that characterized many of the working group's meetings,
   the group recommended three sites for each lander. It wanted to
   find water and it wanted to land one craft in the north and one in
   the south. The mission planners indicated that it would be best to
   land the first Viking in the northern latitude, or during the
   Martian summer. Immediately following the working group sessions,
   the mission analysis and design team subjected the six candidate
   sites to a preliminary examination, and its first quick look
   revealed no apparent difficulties. On 7 December, Jim Martin
   directed Martin Marietta to proceed with the design of the two
   Viking missions using Toth-Nepenthes (15°N, 275°)
   * for the touchdown area of the first lander and
   Hellas (30°S, 300°) for the second craft.
   16
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - Early in February, Dan Schneiderman and
   Jim Martin signed a "Memorandum of Agreement for Viking
   Participation in Mariner '71 Operations." Two areas were
   identified for direct Viking participation-mission operations and
   scientific-data analysis. Viking personnel would work as part of
   the Mariner team. The Viking data analysis group would be housed
   in the Science Team Analysis Facility at JPL, and a Viking
   representative would act as an observer at the Mariner science
   recommendation team meetings, watching the interplay between the
   science advisers and the mission operations personnel.
   17
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - The Viking landing site working group did
   not meet again until April 1971. Meanwhile, the mission planners
   and the Martin Marietta Corporation evolved the "Mission Design
   Requirements Objectives and Constraints Document," which outlined
   for the first time in detail how the two missions would be
   conducted from launch through operation of the science experiments
   on Mars. Members of the landing site team and the Science Steering
   Group met in joint session on the afternoon of 21 April to discuss
   that document and mission planning in general, but earlier that
   day the landing site team had considered at length its
   participation in the Mariner 71 operations.
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - Tom Young opened the morning session,
   noting that Robert A. Schmitz would serve as manager of the
   Viking-Mariner Mars 1971 participation group. His duties included
   overseeing the Viking data analysis team, which would examine
   areas related to proposed Viking landing areas. This team would be
   drawn from two groups of scientists, those who would be working as
   part of the Mariner 71 operations team-Geoffrey [288] Briggs.
   Michael Carr, Hugh Kieffer, Conway Leovy, Hal Masursky, and Carl
   Sagan-and part-time participants from the Viking team.
   ** Schmitz also was to act as the Viking observer on
   the Mariner 71 science recommendation team, which would give him a
   much broader understanding of the entire Mariner project.
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - Hal Masurksy raised two problem issues in
   data management for Mariner 71, computer data processing and
   preparing Mars maps. The flow of data from the Mariner spacecraft
   would be so rapid that only one-fourth to one-third of the
   information could be processed in real time or near real time by
   the Mariner 71 system. At that rate, Masursky predicted it would
   take 18 months to get a complete set of reduced data records. a
   serious lag for Viking planners who wanted to use this information
   to land their spacecraft. And to prepare maps from Mariner 71
   photography, stereo -plotters and computers for analytical
   cartography, as well as more experienced cartographers, must be
   brought in. The photogeologist noted that these problems would be
   discussed with the JPL Mariner people later in the month. But at
   Carl Sagan's request, these issues were raised that afternoon at a
   joint session with the Science Steering Group. The advisory body
   agreed that modest expenditures of Viking funds would be justified
   if supporting Mariner 71 data processing would contribute to the
   success of Viking. Masursky would prepare a letter to Jim Martin
   that clearly defined items that needed support and justifications
   for using Viking funds. 18
   
   
 -  
   
   
 - 
   
   * Longitude on
   Mars is always determined in a westerly direction, 0-360°.
   For more on Martin place names, see T.L. Macdonald, "The Origins
   of Martian Nomenclature," Icarus 15 (1971); 233-40.
   
    -  
   
   
 - ** C. Snyder,
   T. Mutch, D. Anderson, W. Baum, A. Binder, B. Farmer, R. Hutton,
   J. Lederberg, H. Moore, T. Owen, R. Scott, J. Shaw, and R.
   Shorthill.
   
   
- 
   
   
   
   -  
   
   

