What should astronauts do first when they reach Mars?

Our January 2026 conversation about the goals for a crewed mission to Mars. Plus, updates on NASA's mission to survey the asteroid Psyche.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  WNYC is supported by Bayer. Science is about asking questions, testing, trying again. It's not easy, but it's relentless. It evolves, and that's why science delivers. Learn more at sciencedelivers.com.

• 0:17Speaker 01

  Hey, it's Flora, and you're listening to Science Friday. I feel like 2026 has been all about moon fever, but some scientists are looking ahead to our next celestial stop. And I keep thinking about this conversation I had last winter with this badass planetary scientist about going to the red planet and so much more. I hope you enjoy it. When someone steps off a spaceship onto the surface of Mars, what should they do first, you know, after the selfie? My next guest and 100 or so of her scientist colleagues have thought a lot about that question, and they've come up with some recommendations. It's all in a report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

• 1:01Speaker 01

  Here to talk with me about it is the person whose name is at the top of that report. Dr. Lindy Elkins-Tanton is a planetary scientist, a very busy planetary scientist. She's the director of UC Berkeley's Space Sciences Laboratory and the head of NASA's Psyche Mission, a $1.2 billion program to investigate the Psyche asteroid. And she's the co-chair of the committee that came up with the Mars plan called "A Science Strategy for the Human Exploration of Mars." Lindy, welcome to Science Friday.

• 1:31Speaker 02

  Thank you so much. It's great to join you.

• 1:33Speaker 01

  This new report suggests that the top priority for going to Mars is searching for life. How do we do that?

• 1:43Speaker 02

  Yes, searching for life is a part of a number of top priorities. NASA asked us to put them in priority order. Number one is search for life. That doesn't mean that number two isn't super important. And the great thing about this is the samples and the investigations we need to do to search for life are also going to teach us so much more about Mars and also about habitability and what it's going to be like for humans there. Because in the end, isn't this all about humans? It's about this unbelievable, gigantic, aspirational, inspirational moment in human history when humans go to Mars and we actually become interplanetary. And so-

• 2:26Speaker 01

  But wait, can I ask, can I press on that? Is that what it's all about? Because you also have dedicated your life to an asteroid, which is not about humans.

• 2:37Speaker 02

  Here's what I believe from the bottom of my heart and the way that I've thought about my whole life is that everything that humans do is an endeavor about humans.

• 2:47Speaker 01

  OK, fair. Look, I'll be optimistic. When we do send people to Mars-

• 2:52Speaker 02

  There we go.

• 2:53Speaker 01

  There we go. What would that mission look like? Like, how long would they stay? Where would they live? I don't have any sense of how to picture it.

• 3:01Speaker 02

  So here's the image that we're coming up with in concert with NASA. Humans are going to go, launched by a really big, strong rocket. And there are two options for going to Mars. Depending on where the orbital dynamics put the Earth and Mars relative to each other at the time, there are certain ways to get to Mars where you get to stay on the surface for just 30 to 90 Mars days, let's say. And then there's other ways to get to Mars, or another way to get to Mars, where you end up spending 300 to 500 Mars days on the surface before you can come back again. So there are the short stays and the long stays.

• 3:42Speaker 01

  Wow.

• 3:42Speaker 02

  And what, right? It's quite a choice. It's quite a choice. And so what we're imagining is that our first human campaign to Mars would be three missions. And the first mission would be a 30-day stay just to make sure stuff works and look around and get some initial measurements and pick up some samples and take in what it is to be on another planet. And then two more missions on top of that, either a cargo mission or a short mission or a long mission. It's going to look like staying in the lander or having a sort of permanent habitation. So there's options, and it would certainly be a building exercise, one mission building on the next.

• 4:25Speaker 01

  What about the premise itself? I mean, if the top priority is looking for life on Mars, do we need people to do that? There's a cool sample return mission that we could send back.

• 4:34Speaker 02

  Oh, I know. I know we so hope those samples come back. That would be so good.

• 4:42Speaker 02

  Everything that we do in space with humans is done in concert with robots. We call them agents in our report. You know, anything in that giant spectrum of our technological helpers, it's going to be humans and agents together. But there are still things that humans do so much better. And it's been shown over and over again in studies, actually. Humans' eyesight, for example, so much more effective in person than when relayed through a robot. Our ability to make decisions and change our minds and deal with unexpected events, so much more agile. And so we need humans there to be looking closely at the things that we're sampling.

• 5:26Speaker 02

  We need humans there to repair things that are difficult to repair, to quickly change the plan when something unexpected happens. And so going with humans and robots is going to be so much more effective.

• 5:39Speaker 01

  Would you go yourself?

• 5:41Speaker 02

  Would I go? Oh, my gosh. I struggle with that. I think if it was me, just me, I would absolutely go. I love the extreme. I love the unexpected. I love something that's new, it's not been done before. But because of friends and family here on Earth, I think I wouldn't go. I'd rather stay with my friends and family.

• 6:05Speaker 01

  Live your life here on the planet we know and love.

• 6:09Speaker 02

  Yep. The Earth is always going to be the nicest place to live that humans know of.

• 6:16Speaker 01

  Let's talk about your baby, the Psyche mission.

• 6:19Speaker 02

  The Psyche mission?

• 6:20Speaker 01

  So this is a robotic spacecraft launched to the Psyche asteroid. It left Earth in 2023. It's on its way due to arrive 2029.

• 6:30Speaker 02

  Yes.

• 6:31Speaker 01

  Why Psyche? What's special about it?

• 6:35Speaker 02

  One of the great things you get to try to do when you propose a mission to NASA is try to imagine what is the most important science we could do with these precious taxpayer dollars? What's the thing that really hasn't been done? And think about the places that humans have sent robots, or in some cases, other humans. So rocky objects, like the moon and Mars and Venus and Mercury, we've investigated. Objects made of gas and ice, icy moons and gas giants. But we've never seen an object with a metal surface. And that's what we think that Psyche is. And to me, that was just irresistible. It's a way that we can, we think, although who knows? When we get there, it could be a total surprise. That's part of the thrill.

• 7:19Speaker 02

  We think it's probably the part of a metal core of a little tiny planet that didn't become part of our bigger, growing planets early in the solar system, but instead got broken up and stranded in the asteroid belt.

• 7:29Speaker 01

  Really? It's the center of a planet?

• 7:32Speaker 02

  That's what we think. Well, we call it a planetesimal, a little tiny planet, something the size of a city or a continent, of which there were thousands in the early solar system. They were the feeding material that built up the Earth and the other rocky planets. But some of them didn't get properly incorporated, and they just got stranded, like the leftover bits and pieces of planet building got stranded in the asteroid belt. And so that's what we think it is. We think it's part of the metal core, the first generation of cores that ever existed in our solar system. And if we're right about that, it's the only core humans are ever going to see because we're never going to get to the cores of our planets.

• 8:06Speaker 01

  Journey to the center of the Earth, but to Psyche.

• 8:10Speaker 02

  Exactly. My husband says we're going to outer space to explore inner space, which I kind of love.

• 8:16Speaker 01

  Why is that interesting?

• 8:18Speaker 02

  It's interesting for the fundamental questions of how do we build rocky planets? What are the insides made of? And then because our magnetic field is created in the Earth's metal core, and it's part of what makes our planet habitable, we really want to learn more about the core as we try to learn about what makes other planets habitable in other solar systems.

• 8:46Speaker 01

  Okay, we got to take a quick break, but don't go away because when we come back, how do you actually pull off a mission like Psyche? What does it take to get hundreds of people growing in the same direction? We'll find out.

• 9:05Speaker 03

  Today, when it comes to transplants, science can feel like science fiction. We've got face transplants, pig parts in people, whole entire eyeballs. It's like, what the heck is happening in medicine right now? Join Radiolab for a live podcast taping all about the science of transplants, featuring Dr. Avir Mitra and science writer extraordinaire Mary Roach, live in New York City at The Greenspace, November 5th, 7:00 PM. Tickets at wnac.org/events. No transplants will happen onstage.

• 9:39Speaker 01

  I'm really interested in the timeline of this mission because it was launched 2023, right?

• 9:45Speaker 02

  Right.

• 9:45Speaker 01

  But you must have been dreaming it up for many years before that. And it's not going to get there till 2029. So that's a long time to wait. Is that you? Are you good with delayed gratification? Is that part of your personality?

• 10:02Speaker 02

  No, not it, not even in the slightest, not even in the tiniest part, no.

• 10:08Speaker 02

  And I guess I would say when I got into this business, I really had no idea what I was in for. I had actually never really thought about being the lead of a full-on NASA mission. I was leading academic departments, companies. I was leading teams of people. And then I got an email from two scientists at Jet Propulsion Laboratory saying, "We really thought that paper you just published with your colleagues Ben Weis and Maria Zubor was so interesting. We wonder if you'd like to work on a mission proposal to test your scientific ideas in that paper." And so, you know, speaking of not delayed gratification, my instant answer to that is yes, I would. Let's find out what this is about. This sounds great.

• 10:52Speaker 02

  And so we started on this process back in 2011. And let's see, three years later, we entered into the NASA competition process with our proposal. And we competed for three years. And we were so excited and was unexpected and thrilling to get into step two. And then we had to write a 1,000-page proposal with over 100 people, everything that this mission would be.

• 11:16Speaker 01

  That's a nightmare. Can I just stop for a second? A 1,000-page proposal with 100 people is my definition of nightmare.

• 11:23Speaker 02

  And anyone who's ever written or edited anything thinks that that is a nightmare.

• 11:30Speaker 01

  I mean, I'm interested in this sort of teams aspect of this because collaboration can be hard, you know, rewarding but hard. I know you care about teams. You have got a book coming out on teams this year.

• 11:44Speaker 01

  But there's also this, there can be a triteness to like, teamwork makes the dream work. So what interests you about teams? And what have you learned about what makes a good team?

• 11:56Speaker 02

  I know. It can seem, it can seem like one of those inspirational photos with the kitten hanging from the bar or something like this.

• 12:06Speaker 01

  Exactly, yes.

• 12:07Speaker 02

  No, but what it is, teams are, that's the fundamental unit of human experience, is relationships with individual other people. And those relationships get networked into a team. And we were fundamentally, in our brain, we are village people. We are, we work in teams, we live in teams. Our brains are constantly thinking about the people around us. And that has ended up being, I think, the most interesting thing of everything that I do. I really love the science. But getting people to work together is the hardest thing of all and the most rewarding.

• 12:39Speaker 01

  Well, what's your secret? What's the secret sauce, Lyndi?

• 12:41Speaker 02

  I totally, I have, I have no secrets, but I have lots of anecdotes. Yeah, so I have this book coming out in the spring. Thanks for mentioning it. It's called Mission Ready: How to Build Teams That Perform Under Pressure. And, and, and here's, I think, my most fundamental secret about teams is that you've got to drop the status signaling and the, and the, and the internal sense of hierarchy and go instead with a deep respect for every other person's individual expertise and what they've got to bring to the table. That way, you end up with the best solution for your project, but also the best outcome for every individual.

• 13:22Speaker 02

  And I'll give you a little example of how important this is. On a spacecraft, we're building a spacecraft that you're going to launch off the earth and it's going to fly through space for a decade or more. And no one's ever going to repair it again and ask to work. So you've got to know what's wrong soon enough to fix it before you launch. And so we used to say on Psyche, we still say it, that the best news is bad news brought early enough to fix it. So, so when people bring you problems, that's a gift.

• 13:54Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 13:55Speaker 02

  But bringing problems forward is notoriously dangerous because the messenger, you know, often gets shot, as they say. And so, and so you have to make it safe, not just for anyone to bring forward a problem, but for the most junior people to speak up and be heard. Because it's actually the person who is writing the line of code or soldering the wire who actually knows what's wrong. They are the ones who can tell you when something is actually wrong. And so making sure that the people who sit along the wall at meetings instead of at the table get invited to speak, making sure that all the managers listen. And I would say we were 80% successful with Psyche Mission Team.

• 14:38Speaker 02

  But we had some big fails that more or less proved my point.

• 14:41Speaker 01

  Like what? Give me an example.

• 14:43Speaker 02

  Yeah, so, so one of our most painful moments on the mission and one of the most difficult work moments of my life was when we missed our original 2022 launch date and had to slip to 2023. And that sounds like, you know, so many missions slip. It sounds almost like par for the course, but it's very expensive and very stressful. These are people who've been working flat out seven days a week to make it to this launch. And now suddenly they're told, not only aren't we ready for this launch, but you have to keep working just as hard for another year. Meanwhile, we're going to be reviewed and we might just be canceled. And trying to keep team morale up during that, whoa. I mean, that's really hard. And I struggled internally and learned a lot of painful internal lessons.

• 15:28Speaker 02

  But here's the point of the story. The first, like the canary in the coal mine that let us know that we weren't going to make it is that it turned out a part of our flight software called Guidance, Navigation and Control was not going to be fully tested in time. You don't have to know anything about spaceflight to know that you don't fly without Guidance, Navigation and Control. It's totally central. And the, the lesson was that that team, incredibly hardworking, absolutely on top of everything, experts, did nothing wrong, missed nothing, had been warning us they weren't going to be ready for a long time. But the word was not coming up through the team in a way that we could understand. So they would say, "We absolutely cannot do this.

• 16:12Speaker 02

  We need more experienced people and more time, and we need this equipment." And the manager would say to the next manager, you know, "We are worried about hitting these metrics. You know, I'll update you again next week." And then that manager would say up to the leadership, "We're pretty confident they're going to catch up on their metrics."

• 16:28Speaker 01

  Yeah, the telephone game of...

• 16:30Speaker 02

  Right? Because nobody wants to bring the bad news. And so that failure of that fundamental idea that everyone needs to be able to speak up and be listened to when there's a problem, we failed at it. The leadership failed at it. And it caused inexpressible pain for the people on that team who were absolutely spectacular. And it caused us to slip by a year.

• 16:53Speaker 01

  Okay, I want to land with this question. I've been asking this a lot of our guests lately because the answers are varied and really interesting to me. And it's kind of big and thinky.

• 17:03Speaker 02

  Okay, I'm ready.

• 17:04Speaker 01

  I'm sorry in advance. What's the purpose of science, Lyndi?

• 17:09Speaker 02

  Oh, yeah, this I have thought about a lot. And, and knowing that I think about science as a set of tools by which we try to understand what's around us. One of the ways that we make progress as a species is to understand more about how the world around us works, how we work, how our universe works. And if we can get slightly more lasting answers, slightly more true answers, answers that give us a little bit more of a foothold toward understanding the next step, I think that is what science is good at, is that kind of knowing. It's a misunderstanding if you think that science is just about making absolute truths and knowing all the answers

• 17:54Speaker 02

  because really, science is knowing all the questions and keeping asking them.

• 18:00Speaker 02

  Almost everything that we discover as scientists is going to be amended, added to, changed, or completely overturned by new knowledge. But it is a way by which we can keep taking steps. We can grind inexorably closer to some kind of truth and absolute knowledge about things around us.

• 18:22Speaker 01

  Dr. Lyndi Elkins-Tanton is a planetary scientist. She's the head of NASA's Psyche Mission and director of UC Berkeley's Space Sciences Laboratory. Thanks for coming on the show today, Lyndi.

• 18:32Speaker 02

  Thank you so much. I really enjoyed it.

• 18:34Speaker 01

  Me too. This episode was produced by Annette Heist. And if you like the podcast, but only if you like the podcast, please rate and review the show wherever you listen. It really does help. We'll see you next time. I'm Flora Lichtman.