Barry wrote:
Relax Alex, it was a typo. I meant 2008 -- as in the JPL Press Release I posted. As far as a lander or orbiter? Any life science mission is important, though I suppose the Mars Exploration Rovers have enough instrumentation capable of revealing the signiture of extant or extinct life.

Alex writes:
OK, but perhaps you should give your definition of a "life detection" mission, either orbital, aerial, or landed. In principle, if one's threshold is set low enough, any mission has the potential of being a "life science mission." I was utilizing the Viking analogy for a dedicated, life sciences/biology mission profile, not life detection as a byproduct of some other mission science focus.

Barry wrote:
What have you heard on the status of the Mars Exploration Rovers? SpaceDaily published an article ny Bruce Moomaw doubting the launch of the probes in 2003. Can you confirm anything either way?

Alex writes:
Only what I hear, namely that both rovers are on schedule for their respective launch dates. There was some concern over the airbags, but the latest tests went OK. From a science standpoint, the instruments are undergoing final testing before being integrated onto the rovers and later shipped to the Cape for further testing and assembly. The biggest hurdle as of now is the selection of two suitable landing sites. In a little less than a month from now, the fourth (and final) MER landing site selection workshop is scheduled to be held in Pasadena. This will lead to a recommendation from the science community, which will then be forwarded to NASA HQ for final approval. My personal favorite is Gusev Crater, but it might have some engineering constraints (e.g., potential excessive shear winds that could tax the airbag system).

Alex R. Blackwell
University of Hawaii