Achieving Success: Mariner

Although NASA and the Soviet Union both sent missions to Venus, they both made Mars the overarching priority. For years, Soviet scientists and their politi­cal masters “consistently targeted the planet Mars as the singular most impor­tant objective in plans to explore space.” First, they would send robotic space­craft, and then they planned to dispatch human explorers.12 The Soviets, like the Americans, believed that the nation to be the first to not only get to Mars but find life would have a scientific and propaganda victory of historic proportion.

The Soviets had sought unsuccessfully to reach Mars in i960. They tried again in 1962. Again they failed. The next launch window was 1964, and the Soviets were sure to try once more. This time, the United States intended to

be ready to make an attempt at a flyby. NASA was fully aware of the difficulties. JPL referred to a “Great Galactic Ghoul” lurking in space between Earth and Mars, ready to devour all spaceships that sailed into its lair.13 NASA, under­standing risk, if not the ghoul, planned to send two spacecraft.

NASA and its various constituencies were unsure what the flyby would reveal of Earth’s mysterious neighbor. The media attention was frenetic and reflected the substantial public and scientific interest. In October 1962, the National Academy of Sciences Space Science Board called Mars the “primary goal . . . in the exploration of the planets.” One month later, NASA gave the official go – ahead for a 1964 launch. JPL was well along in its preparations. Casani contin­ued his association with Mariner Mars. However, Pickering appointed as overall project manager a well-regarded division manager, J. N. James. He was able to attract some of the best and brightest of JPL’s engineering talent to the effort.14

In 1964 NASA sponsored a summer study, one aim being to nurture the exobiological community. Lederberg was there. So was Carl Sagan, 30 years old, blending astronomical and biological interests with exceptional eloquence. He was already articulating an intense belief that life was possible on Mars. Among the scientists who attended was Gerald Soffen, then 38, who had joined NASA in 1961 soon after getting his PhD in biology from Princeton.

Mariner 3, launched in November 1964, failed soon after launch. A few weeks later, NASA tried with Mariner 4, this time successfully launching the space­craft. The Soviet Union also launched in this year and again failed. The United States had an open opportunity for a first after trailing the Soviet Union in most other aspects of space.

On July 15, 1965, Mariner 4 sped past Mars, snapping photos as it went. Politicians called this event an important Cold War victory. Virtually everyone hailed Mariner 4 and congratulated NASA and JPL. Pickering, seen by most observers as the key leader behind Mariner 4, won special praise, including a profile in the New York Times and the cover of Time magazine.15

But from the perspective of those academic scientists, media, and NASA/JPL personnel anxious to find evidence of life, the Mars photographs were a disap­pointment. Where were the canals? Instead, the photos showed craters. Also, Mariner 4 sensors found no significant magnetic field, as well as an atmosphere so thin it would allow radiation to reach Mars that might well kill anything on the surface. The media pronounced Mars boring. In effect, said the media, NASA looked for Mars and found the Moon! Pickering tried his best at a press conference following the flyby to emphasize how little of the Mars surface was viewed. Mariner 4 was not intended to deal with the life issue, he said. Hence, as far as he was concerned, “the evidence of possible life on Mars … is still there.”16

Still, reaching Mars first was a great accomplishment, and President Lyndon Johnson wanted to make the most of it for public relations and propaganda purposes. Johnson had taken power when Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, and he promised to continue the journey to the Moon. He also understood the importance of Mars from a political perspective. Webb, anxious to maximize NASA’s advantage from Mariner 4, coached NASA/JPL officials and scientists on how to deal with the president, Congress, and media. Bruce Murray, Caltech and Mariner scientist and later JPL director, was impressed with Webb. He was “shrewd and skilled in negotiating Washington’s corridors of power.” He could play the informal southern politician with Congress, but in the privacy of the NASA meeting room, he was “crisp,” all “Washington, DC.” “He left no ques­tion as to who was in charge and what was expected of us.”17

A few days after the encounter with Mars, NASA and JPL officials, along with various scientists associated with Mariner 4, met with Johnson. He gave the Mariner team medals for their good work and was attentive when Pickering explained what the pictures of Mars revealed. Johnson did not express unhappi­ness with the failure to find Lowell’s canals. “As a member of the generation that Orson Welles scared out of its wits,” he declared, “I must confess that I’m a little bit relieved that your photograph doesn’t show more signs of life out there.”18

The New York Times and other general media called Mars “dead.”19 But what incensed many scientists of the exobiology camp was the “I told you so attitude” of some other scientists. Phil Abelson, editor of the prestigious Science maga­zine, had written an editorial on February 12,1965, predicting that searching for life on Mars was a fool’s errand. “In looking for life on Mars, we could establish for ourselves the reputation of being the greatest Simple Simons of all time,” he wrote.20

Sagan was offended and angry. He said a photo of Earth taken from 6,000 miles out (as Mariner did for Mars) might show that no life existed on Earth. Sagan could think of all kinds of possibilities for life that Mariner 4 did not ad­dress. What about life “beneath the surface,” asked Sagan, “where there might be ice deposits and, in some places, even pockets of liquid water?” He suggested that there might even be underground lakes and other habitats where life could thrive which would have been absolutely undetectable to Mariner’s instruments. “Sagan insisted that critics who called Mars ‘dead’ were making more out of the data than anyone had a right to do.”21

Like Pickering, Sagan pointed out that Mariner 4 had taken photos of only a small portion of the Red Planet. As he later recalled, “So I took it as my respon­sibility, maybe a quixotic mission, to point out the possibilities [of Martian life], which were being excluded.”22 It was a remarkable personal decision. He opened himself to media interviews and used his rare communication skills to advantage on late-night television talk shows. His campaign to rouse interest in space and especially the search for life would cost him professionally with a number of his scientific colleagues. He did not get tenure at Harvard, but secured a position at Cornell. His lifelong public advocacy, beginning with Mariner, would contrib­ute to his fame, fortune, and ridicule.

Along with other self-described “diehards,” Sagan was frustrated and in some ways desperate to reframe the life debate after Mariner 4. Exobiologists chafed at the writing off of life on Mars and Abelson’s negativism. They concluded that if life did not exist, then it was important to discover, “why not?” This ques­tion was scientifically important, monumentally so, they avowed. As scientists, they needed to get at the truth. The Mariner program had to continue, in their view, and produce better photographs over far more of the Mars surface, and eventually a lander had to go.23 The academic exobiologists were at the forefront of Mars advocacy in the wake of Mariner 4. Among agency insiders, Pickering continued to play the lead role, writing, lecturing, and seeking support.

The Mariner program continued. It was indeed a “program,” not a single mission, and seen as such inside and outside NASA. NASA and JPL—with JPL as locus of decision making most of the time—planned additional Mariner flights for later in the decade. Pickering saw Mariner 4 as a critical milestone in technological development of spacecraft. “We now know how to do it,” he stated.24