RocketSTEM Issue #9 - October 2014 | Page 16

experience kit. What helped me the most was that I had the ability to simplify almost anything. No matter how complicated a problem was, I could simplify it to two or three essential parameters. Then I could use those “rules of thumb” to bootstrap myself into each new challenge. “It’s basically about developing what we call an ‘expert system’, like the ‘Prospector’ computer programme developed at the time in the oil industry to deal with drilling problems, based on expert consultants’ solutions for different situations. It consisted of statements such as ‘If such and such happens, then do this’. They discovered that the consultants operated on no more than about 200 to 300 rules of thumb. It was found that the same was true for surgeons or rocket scientists. I knew what those principles were for rocket science and space mission design. With the ability to simplify, I was like an ‘if … then … else’ computer programme, which helped a lot.” RS: It must have been more difficult when you moved from Ranger onto the Mariner Venus programme in 1962, aiming for another planet, rather than the Moon? KOHLHASE: “Not really, because the principles carry across, whatever the target. Venus had a different mass and the approach speeds were different, but it was easy to translate the targeting concept from the Moon to a planet, taking into account gravity, celestial mechanics, Kepler’s laws and so forth. Also, as the technology improved and we gained more experience, we felt more comfortable taking on more complex missions. Although we had fewer people to do the testing back then, it has always been my nature and that of most of my colleagues to check everything so carefully that nothing could possibly be overlooked, so most of the missions thereafter were successful, from the mid-1960s, when my own role carried more responsibility, through to the successful Cassini launch and Mars Pathfinder missions in 1997. “However, we really wanted the Mariner-Venus mission to succeed at JPL, after the Ranger failures. Mariner 2 Mariner 7, following Mariner 6’s flyby on July 31, had its closest approach at a distance of 3,524 kilometers, in what was the first dual mission to a planet. By chance, both craft flew over cratered regions and missed both the giant northern volcanoes and the equatorial grand canyon that were discovered by Mariner 9. Their approach pictures did, however, show that the dark surface features long seen from Earth were not canals, as once thought in the 1800s. was the first successful planetary mission and it passed Venus more or less where we intended it to (within 22,000 miles of the planet). That was my first planetary mission, although I did yet not have a management role on it.” RS: Was the mood of excitement comparable with, say, that of the recent landing of Curiosity on Mars? KOHLHASE: “We were excited that the spacecraft worked long enough to achieve the first planetary fly-by, but there were many fewer people then following the mission. It took time to establish confidence in the fact that we could successfully capture scientific results from far-away planets.” RS: And Mariner 2 did deliver good scientific observations from both Venus and the interplanetary environment during the cruise. Mariner Mars ’69 flyby model used in displaying the Mariner 6 and 7 encounters with the red planet. Credit: Charles Kohlhase 14 14 KOHLHASE: “It did and from then, as we began to succeed with each follow-on mission, the press began to take more interest, especially on Mariner 6 and 7, the first dual mission to Mars in 1969. First, thoug