1977
DOI: 10.1029/js082i028p04452
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The geology of the Viking Lander 2 site

Abstract: Viking Lander 2 landed on a flat plain of fine‐grained sediment overlain by dispersed, evenly distributed boulders. The fine‐grained material is probably part of a high‐latitude mantle comprising material swept south from the polar regions. The boulders, which have distinctive deep pits, or vesicles, may be the residue of an ejecta deposit from the crater Mie. Alternatively, they may be the remnants of lava flows which formerly covered the region. Polygonal sediment‐filled cracks may have been formed by ice we… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
105
1

Year Published

1979
1979
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 181 publications
(109 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
3
105
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The rocks of this type are typically not lying on the surface but appear to be almost completely (Scooby Doo) or partially buried (Casper). The morphology of this unit is consistent with a chemically bonded crust or hardpan, similar to that reported at the VL-2 site (32). Digging tests with the rover wheels failed to dislodge any material from Scooby Doo, indicating at least a partially cemented or highly compacted material.…”
supporting
confidence: 62%
“…The rocks of this type are typically not lying on the surface but appear to be almost completely (Scooby Doo) or partially buried (Casper). The morphology of this unit is consistent with a chemically bonded crust or hardpan, similar to that reported at the VL-2 site (32). Digging tests with the rover wheels failed to dislodge any material from Scooby Doo, indicating at least a partially cemented or highly compacted material.…”
supporting
confidence: 62%
“…The crusty-to-cloddy material was similar to the blocky material in that it appeared to consist of cemented grains of finer material but seemed more consolidated. The overall conclusion that was reached at the time of the Viking landings was that the geological processes that were identified from orbiter images could not be identified uniquely from lander images [Masursky and Crabill, 1976a,b;Binder et al, 1977;Mutch et al, 1977]. That is, the processes that were responsible for the 100-m-scale features were not necessarily the same as those that were responsible for the decimeter-and meterscale features.…”
Section: Geology Of the Viking Landing Sitesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The surface features on these rocks have been generally interpreted as volcanic vesicles only slightly modified by wind action Mutch et al, 1977]. Some of the rocks do appear to contain irregularly shaped but closely spaced pits with overhanging external canopies.…”
Section: Viking Comparisonsmentioning
confidence: 99%