Curiosity: Where are the results from the Cumberland drilling?

(The automatic cross posting from sci.astro.amateur to Space Banter seems to not always function. A good 26 hours ago I posted the following article to sci.astro.amateur at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...ur/hBuFzJL3jY8 ):

Strangely, there exists a huge difference in the time needed by the Curiosity science team to analyze the John Klein drill sample as compared to the time it needed and still keeps needing to analyze the Cumberland drill sample.

The John Klein sample was drilled on Feb. 8th. And according to http://www.universetoday.com/100579/...esults-on-tap/ , it was then kept inside of CHIMRA for an entire 14 days before being introduced into CheMin and SAM on Feb. 22nd and 23rd, respectively. But then, on Feb. 28th, came the memory glitch of the A computer, and Curiosity went into safe mode until March 2nd. And then, on March 7th, came the solar storm due to which she was shut down again for a few days. I don´t know when she came out of the safe mode on this second occasion, but there were no images from Mars between Feb. 28th and March 13th (incl.). And on March 12th the so called “preliminary results” from the John Klein sample were announced in a press conference. So if we assume two days for the solar storm and one day to prepare the charts etc. for the conference, they had a maximum of 12 days to analyze the John Klein sample.

By contrast, the Cumberland sample was drilled on Sunday, the 19th of May. Four days later, on May 23rd, the front Hazcams showed the first contact science with APXL and MAHLI. So by then, the sample ought to have been delivered to CheMin and SAM (because otherwise it would have become displaced within CHIMRA). And since then, there have been no computer glitches, solar sorms or whatever such calamities.

And today is Sunday, the 28th of July. In other words, the Cumberland sample has been drilled exactly 10 weeks or 70 days ago. And there still is no word about the results from that sample. The last news item on http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/news/whatsnew/ which mentioned the Cumberland sample was on June 5th, where it simply says that “Scientists are analyzing laboratory-instrument results from portions of the Cumberland sample.”. So how long do they want to keep analyzing them?

Or do they perhaps believe that the interested public will simply forget about the Cumberland sample? If this were the case they are mistaken, because I will repost this or a similar article here every 4 to 6 weeks, until either the results from that sample will be on the table or I will be run over by a truck. And just like this time, a copy of the article will be sent to the Curiosity team via http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/sendmessage/ . After 10 weeks of waiting, I don´t think that this means being pushy.

Now I am not a fan of conspiration theories. What I really want are data. But the older this issue gets, the fishier it smells. And with every week that passes without the results from Cumberland the temptation to speculate becomes stronger for me. I know that I should not expect wonders from the Cumberland sample, even though by surface inspection it was a little bit different from John Klein (more globules). But sometimes I think that Grotzinger & Co. “already” know the ingredients of the Cumberland sample (how could they not?), but don´t want to make them public due to fear of controversy. And this is where I better stop writing and you better not tempt me.

Peter

Originally Posted by Peter_H

(The automatic cross posting from sci.astro.amateur to Space Banter seems to not always function. A good 26 hours ago I posted the following article to sci.astro.amateur at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...ur/hBuFzJL3jY8 ):

Strangely, there exists a huge difference in the time needed by the Curiosity science team to analyze the John Klein drill sample as compared to the time it needed and still keeps needing to analyze the Cumberland drill sample.

The John Klein sample was drilled on Feb. 8th. And according to http://www.universetoday.com/100579/...esults-on-tap/ , it was then kept inside of CHIMRA for an entire 14 days before being introduced into CheMin and SAM on Feb. 22nd and 23rd, respectively. But then, on Feb. 28th, came the memory glitch of the A computer, and Curiosity went into safe mode until March 2nd. And then, on March 7th, came the solar storm due to which she was shut down again for a few days. I don´t know when she came out of the safe mode on this second occasion, but there were no images from Mars between Feb. 28th and March 13th (incl.). And on March 12th the so called “preliminary results” from the John Klein sample were announced in a press conference. So if we assume two days for the solar storm and one day to prepare the charts etc. for the conference, they had a maximum of 12 days to analyze the John Klein sample.

By contrast, the Cumberland sample was drilled on Sunday, the 19th of May. Four days later, on May 23rd, the front Hazcams showed the first contact science with APXL and MAHLI. So by then, the sample ought to have been delivered to CheMin and SAM (because otherwise it would have become displaced within CHIMRA). And since then, there have been no computer glitches, solar sorms or whatever such calamities.

And today is Sunday, the 28th of July. In other words, the Cumberland sample has been drilled exactly 10 weeks or 70 days ago. And there still is no word about the results from that sample. The last news item on http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/news/whatsnew/ which mentioned the Cumberland sample was on June 5th, where it simply says that “Scientists are analyzing laboratory-instrument results from portions of the Cumberland sample.”. So how long do they want to keep analyzing them?

Or do they perhaps believe that the interested public will simply forget about the Cumberland sample? If this were the case they are mistaken, because I will repost this or a similar article here every 4 to 6 weeks, until either the results from that sample will be on the table or I will be run over by a truck. And just like this time, a copy of the article will be sent to the Curiosity team via http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/sendmessage/ . After 10 weeks of waiting, I don´t think that this means being pushy.

Now I am not a fan of conspiration theories. What I really want are data. But the older this issue gets, the fishier it smells. And with every week that passes without the results from Cumberland the temptation to speculate becomes stronger for me. I know that I should not expect wonders from the Cumberland sample, even though by surface inspection it was a little bit different from John Klein (more globules). But sometimes I think that Grotzinger & Co. “already” know the ingredients of the Cumberland sample (how could they not?), but don´t want to make them public due to fear of controversy. And this is where I better stop writing and you better not tempt me.

Peter

Hello Peter,

I too am VERY FRUSTRATED with the resistance of both NASA and JPL to furnish the results of the Cumberland drill test (No. 2). I have contacted both NASA and JPL and neither of them will provide the information that both you and I want. Something is definitely fishy here. Really makes me question ALL of the so called "results" that are being presented.

Richard

P.S. - Have you received the info that you have requested?