Article about JPL and Mars/Venus missions

[Frabjous]

From the Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/scie...a-jpl-space-exploration-challenges/?itid=sr_3

Does anyone disagree with the idea “that the lab simply has too many missions and not enough experienced engineers to pull them off” ?

 

[Klystron]

From the Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/scie...a-jpl-space-exploration-challenges/?itid=sr_3

Does anyone disagree with the idea “that the lab simply has too many missions and not enough experienced engineers to pull them off” ?

Difficult to argue with that premise as

1) NASA and other space agencies maintain backlogs of interesting and potentially useful missions that may not be funded yet still influence future mission selections.

2) Experienced engineers and scientists can be considered a resource with competing career demands.

Many of the most savvy engineers I worked with at NASA tried to optimize their STEM careers in balance with maximizing compensation to support their families. The WaPo article alludes to this dilemma with descriptions of engineers working on JPL missions, then working for corporations presumably to improve income, then returning to JPL in order to participate in the great endeavor of scientific research.

Specific to Venus missions, word around the campfire late 20th Century cautioned the Venusian environment too deadly and unforgiving for existing technology. Contrast the serial failures and short working lives of Soviet Venera planetary probes with recent international Mars rovers operating at greater distances but in a significantly less harsh environment.

Even given the scientific riches hidden within enveloping Venus atmosphere, given the stated competition for funding and human resources, destination Venus includes daunting challenges that influence individual career choices and interplanetary mission selection.