And now NASA's Planetary Senior Review panel is asking if the $2.5 billion Curiosity Mars rover, known as the Mars Science Laboratory, is getting us the science we paid for. So far Curiosity has examined five surface samples over a two year period and is expected to analyze eight more as part of this mission. The panel noted:
The panel even criticized the Curiosity team for not taking the panel meeting seriously and not sending the lead Project Science to the meeting. In the letter, the panel stated, "This left the panel with the impression that the team felt they were too big to fail and that simply having someone show up would suffice." Ouch!It was unclear from both the proposal and presentation that the Prime Mission science goals had been met. In fact, it was unclear what exactly these were. Upon detailed questioning, the team noted that the Level 1 requirements were actually engineering capability requirements with which the mission launched and are not reflective of the state of fulfilling mission success criteria, which were not addressed quantitatively.
The Curiosity team received more funding to continue with parts of its mission, but was told to come back with a plan showing how it could justify continued funding. Not a very good place to be considering all the cheers two years ago.
Hopefully, NASA will take away a few lessons that can be applied to the Mars 2020 Rover mission (shown below), which is still being planned. In fact, the press release for the new rover states "The Mars 2020 mission will be based on the design of the highly successful Mars Science Laboratory rover, Curiosity, which landed almost two years ago, and currently is operating on Mars." Let's hope the design will be a little different to address the concerns of the review panel. And maybe upgraded tires would help.