Table of Contents
- What Are Phobos and Deimos, Mars’s Tiny Moons?
- Shapes, Sizes, and Surface Features of Phobos and Deimos
- Orbits, Rotation, and Tidal Dynamics Around Mars
- Captured Asteroids or Impact Debris? Competing Origin Theories
- Regolith, Grooves, and Craters: The Geology of Two Small Worlds
- How Mars Shapes Its Moons: Tides, Eclipses, and Dust
- Observing Phobos and Deimos: From Earth and From Mars
- Discovery, Spacecraft Encounters, and Upcoming Missions
- Astrobiological Significance and Material Exchange with Mars
- How We Measure Mass, Density, and Structure on Tiny Moons
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Final Thoughts on Choosing the Right Mars Moon Science Questions
What Are Phobos and Deimos, Mars’s Tiny Moons?
Phobos and Deimos are the two small, irregularly shaped moons of Mars. Discovered in 1877 by astronomer Asaph Hall at the U.S. Naval Observatory, the pair has fascinated planetary scientists for well over a century. Although they are often mentioned together, the moons are strikingly different in their sizes, orbits, and surface appearances. Phobos—the inner moon—is larger and orbits very close to Mars, circling the planet in less than eight hours. Deimos—the outer moon—is smaller, smoother in appearance, and takes just over a day to complete one orbit.
Compared to Earth’s Moon, both Phobos and Deimos are diminutive. Phobos measures roughly 27 × 22 × 18 kilometers across its principal axes, while Deimos is about 15 × 12 × 11 kilometers. Their low mass means that surface gravity is extremely weak, and both moons are likely composed of a mixture of rock and void space with abundant regolith (loose surface material) blanketing much of their terrain.
Their origins remain one of the most discussed questions in planetary science. Are they captured asteroids, akin to the dark, carbon-rich bodies that populate the outer asteroid belt? Or did they coalesce out of debris after one or more large impacts onto Mars? The answers matter because they help us understand not only Mars’s evolutionary story but also broader processes of satellite formation in the inner solar system.
In the sections that follow, we will explore their shapes and surfaces, orbital mechanics, competing origin hypotheses, the geology etched into their crusts, and how Mars interacts with them through tides and eclipses. We will also look at practical observing advice, survey historical and upcoming missions, and consider the astrobiological implications of these intriguing worlds.
Shapes, Sizes, and Surface Features of Phobos and Deimos
Phobos and Deimos belong to a class of small, irregular bodies that show a mixture of heavily cratered surfaces, complex regolith dynamics, and porous interiors. Their basic characteristics—size, density, and surface texture—provide crucial clues to how they formed and how they have evolved.
Dimensions and bulk properties
- Phobos: Approximately 27 × 22 × 18 km, with a low density that suggests significant porosity. Its mass is sufficient to sustain a modest interior structure, but it is still dominated by weak gravity.
- Deimos: Approximately 15 × 12 × 11 km, with an even lower density than Phobos on average, indicating a high fraction of void space and loosely consolidated material.
Both moons have densities below typical solid rock, consistent with a “rubble-pile” or highly fractured internal structure. This porous nature helps explain their low surface gravity and the prevalence of fine-grained regolith.
Albedo and color
Phobos and Deimos are dark, with low albedos characteristic of primitive, carbon-rich material. Their spectral signatures share similarities with certain classes of asteroids, though the match is not exact and depends on wavelength. Observations from spacecraft and telescopes suggest the presence of fine dust and weathered material that can alter spectral signals over time.
Notable surface features
- Stickney crater (Phobos): A giant impact scar roughly 9 kilometers across, dominating one hemisphere of Phobos. The crater’s formation likely fractured the moon deeply and may have triggered secondary features like grooves.
- Grooves on Phobos: Long, shallow troughs tens to hundreds of meters wide and several kilometers long. Their origin remains debated—see the geology section for competing hypotheses.
- Smooth mantling on Deimos: Deimos appears smoother and more subdued than Phobos because its small craters often show infill by fine regolith, producing a gently rolling landscape with fewer stark contrasts.
The moons’ surfaces are dominated by impact craters of various sizes, evidence of continual bombardment by micrometeoroids and larger impactors. At such low gravity, impact ejecta behave differently than on larger worlds: material can escape more easily or travel considerable distances before settling back, smoothing slopes and burying older terrain.
Orbits, Rotation, and Tidal Dynamics Around Mars
Phobos and Deimos present a compelling case study in orbital mechanics. Both moons are tidally locked, meaning they rotate once per orbit and keep the same face toward Mars. That is similar to how Earth’s Moon behaves, but the details differ due to their proximity and the strength of Mars’s tidal forces.
Orbital periods and distances
- Phobos: Orbits extremely close to Mars, completing a revolution in about 7 hours and 39 minutes—faster than Mars’s day. From the surface of Mars, Phobos rises in the west and sets in the east multiple times per Martian day.
- Deimos: Much farther out, with an orbital period a bit over 30 hours—slightly longer than a Martian day. From Mars’s surface, Deimos rises in the east and sets in the west, but its slow movement makes it less dramatic than Phobos.
Both moons orbit near Mars’s equatorial plane and have nearly circular orbits. These characteristics are part of the evidence considered in debates on their origins.
Tidal locking and evolution
Tidal forces synchronize a moon’s rotation to its orbital period over time—a process evident here. But the tide-driven evolution of the orbits differs:
- Phobos is spiraling inward due to Mars’s tides. Its orbit is slowly decaying, shrinking by centimeters per year. Extrapolations suggest that within tens of millions of years, Phobos could break apart under tidal stress or approach the Roche limit, potentially forming a transient ring around Mars.
- Deimos is slowly moving outward, away from Mars, as tidal interactions transfer angular momentum from the planet’s rotation to the moon’s orbit.
Resonances and perturbations
Though not involved in a strong mutual resonance with each other, Phobos and Deimos experience gravitational perturbations from Mars’s non-uniform gravity field and from the Sun. Subtle changes in their orbits over time help scientists refine models of Mars’s interior (which affects its gravity field) and understand how small bodies evolve under the influence of a nearby planet.
For observers and mission planners, the short orbital period of Phobos means frequent opportunities to witness transits and eclipses as seen from Mars’s surface—topics we revisit in How Mars Shapes Its Moons.
Captured Asteroids or Impact Debris? Competing Origin Theories
The question of how Mars acquired its moons is still open, with two broad categories of hypotheses: capture and in situ formation from impact-generated debris. Each view explains some data well while struggling with other observations, which is why this debate remains active.
Captured asteroid hypothesis
Phobos and Deimos resemble primitive, dark asteroids in some respects. Their low albedos, irregular shapes, and carbonaceous signatures have been compared to D- or C-type asteroids. The capture scenario posits that Mars gravitationally captured one or more such bodies from heliocentric orbits.
However, simple capture is difficult to accomplish without a mechanism to dissipate energy, such as atmospheric drag (unlikely for body-sized objects in Mars’s thin atmosphere), three-body interactions, or capture during an era when Mars’s atmosphere may have been denser. Furthermore, their nearly circular, equatorial orbits are harder to reconcile with a capture event, which typically produces more inclined and eccentric orbits unless significant subsequent evolution circularized them.
Impact-generated debris hypothesis
Alternately, the moons could have formed from debris thrown into orbit by a large impact on Mars. Numerical models show that giant impacts can produce rings or disks of material. From such a disk, small moons can accrete in near-equatorial, near-circular orbits—matching a key trait of Phobos and Deimos.
This model dovetails with observations that suggest the moons contain a mixture of rock types and high porosity, which are plausible for re-accreted debris. The impact origin can also be tuned to produce more than one moon, with smaller bodies possibly forming farther out.
Hybrid and alternative ideas
Some researchers have proposed hybrid scenarios: for example, initial capture of a progenitor followed by fragmentation and re-accretion into one or both present moons, or multiple impacts that produced transient populations of small satellites over time. The diversity of ideas highlights the limited constraints available from remote measurements alone.
Future sample-return missions (see upcoming missions) could help break the deadlock by revealing the moons’ detailed composition, isotopic ratios, and the nature of their regolith and rock matrix. Such data would discriminate between asteroid-like material and mixtures consistent with Martian crustal or mantle debris.
Regolith, Grooves, and Craters: The Geology of Two Small Worlds
Despite their small sizes, Phobos and Deimos display a surprising range of geological features. Because there is no endogenic volcanism or tectonism in the conventional sense, the moons’ landscapes are shaped mainly by external forces: impacts, tidal stresses, thermal cycling, and space weathering.
Cratering and surface age
Both moons are heavily cratered. The high crater density indicates that their surfaces are ancient, though crater retention differs due to regolith processes. On Phobos, the dominance of Stickney and secondary craters—ejecta from the Stickney event that rained back down—hints at a major reshaping episode in the moon’s history. Deimos shows fewer large craters relative to its size but exhibits extensive regolith infill that softens topography.
Phobos’s grooves: Origins under debate
The origin of Phobos’s grooves is a long-standing puzzle. Several hypotheses compete:
- Impact ejecta hypothesis: Material thrown out by the Stickney-forming impact may have skimmed the surface and gouged long, shallow channels. Patterns radiating from Stickney support this idea, though not all grooves align perfectly.
- Tidal stress fractures: Mars’s tidal forces could stress Phobos enough to produce fractures that propagate along preferred orientations. This model explains systematic patterns but must account for the detailed geometry of the grooves.
- Rolling boulder tracks: Large blocks ejected during impacts may have tumbled across the surface, plowing furrows that later became partially filled and eroded.
No single theory explains every groove. It is likely that more than one process has contributed, potentially at different times, leaving a palimpsest of features that reveal Phobos’s mechanical properties and its ongoing interaction with Mars’s gravity.
Regolith properties and “ponding” on Deimos
Deimos’s surface is notable for its smooth, mantled texture. Fine-grained regolith appears to migrate downslope and collect in low-lying areas, a process aided by low gravity and seismic shaking from impacts. This redistribution can fill small craters and produce level, pond-like deposits that mute small-scale topography.
Thermal measurements and imaging indicate that both moons are blanketed in regolith of varying thickness—tens of meters in places on Phobos, possibly deeper in localized deposits. Fine particles are mobilized by micrometeoroid impacts and temperature swings that loosen surface grains.
Space weathering and spectral effects
As airless bodies, Phobos and Deimos are exposed directly to solar wind, cosmic rays, and micrometeorites. These agents alter surface minerals through sputtering and nanophase iron production, gradually darkening and reddening spectra. The combination of space weathering and regolith gardening complicates efforts to tie spectral data directly to composition without ground-truth samples.
How Mars Shapes Its Moons: Tides, Eclipses, and Dust
Mars does not merely host its moons—it actively shapes their evolution. The planet’s tides, shadowing effects, and larger environment influence how Phobos and Deimos orbit and how they look.
Tidal forces and long-term fate
Because Phobos orbits faster than Mars rotates, it loses orbital energy to tidal interactions and gradually spirals inward. Over long timescales measured in tens of millions of years, this decay could lead to tidal disruption or atmospheric entry if it persists. Deimos, being farther out and orbiting slower than Mars’s rotation, gains energy and drifts outward.
Eclipses and transits seen from Mars
From the Martian surface, Phobos frequently passes in front of the Sun—partial solar eclipses that have been photographed by rovers. Deimos can also transit the Sun, though less dramatically. These events are not total eclipses like those on Earth; the moons are too small to cover the solar disk, but they provide valuable geometry for calibrating instruments and refining orbital models.
Dust environments and tenuous rings
Models have long predicted that impact ejecta and regolith lifted by microimpacts from Phobos and Deimos should form tenuous tori or dust clouds along their orbits. Detecting such structures is difficult due to their faintness and the dynamic Martian environment. Spacecraft observations have revealed dust in Mars’s upper atmosphere and exospheric environment, but attributing a specific ring to either moon has been challenging. The topic remains an area of active modeling and observation.
These interactions connect directly to orbital dynamics and the moons’ surface processes, illustrating how environmental forces shape small bodies over time.
Observing Phobos and Deimos: From Earth and From Mars
For backyard observers, Phobos and Deimos are notoriously difficult targets. Their intrinsic faintness is less of a problem than their proximity to Mars’s glare. Even at favorable oppositions, the moons nestle close to the bright planetary disk, requiring careful technique and good conditions.
Visibility and brightness
- Typical brightness: Around magnitude 11–12 for Phobos and a bit fainter for Deimos during favorable apparitions. Actual brightness varies with Mars’s distance from Earth and solar phase angle.
- Angular separation: At close oppositions, Deimos can appear tens of arcseconds from Mars; Phobos is generally closer. Separation changes rapidly over hours due to their short orbital periods, especially for Phobos.
Techniques for visual detection
- Occulting bar: Creating a small occulting bar in the eyepiece or using a knife-edge mask can block Mars’s bright disk, improving contrast for the dim moons just beyond the limb.
- High magnification: Use steady, high power on nights of good seeing. Start by locating Mars’s limb and scan outward along the expected position angles.
- Filters: A red or neutral density filter can sometimes reduce glare. Avoid overly dark filters that suppress the moons’ light.
- Timing: Consult ephemerides to target maximum elongations of each moon, when they are farthest from Mars’s disk.
Even skilled observers may find detecting Phobos and Deimos challenging with small telescopes. Larger apertures and careful planning significantly improve the odds.
Imaging strategies for astrophotographers
- Short exposures + stacking: Capture Mars with very short exposures to avoid blooming. Combine with longer exposures for the moons, then blend carefully.
- Deconvolution and masking: Use image processing to suppress Mars’s halo while preserving point-like sources near the planet.
- Rotational alignment: For sequences spanning hours, account for the moons’ rapid motion relative to Mars when stacking frames.
Observing from Mars
Rovers and landers have imaged Phobos and Deimos transiting the Sun and moving against the stars. These observations refine orbital parameters, test camera calibrations, and provide dramatic reminders that Mars’s sky is a dynamic environment. From Mars’s surface, Phobos’s swift motion and frequent appearances make it a familiar sight, while Deimos is a slower, more distant companion.
For more on the interplay between geometry and observation, see eclipses and transits and the moons’ orbital characteristics.
Discovery, Spacecraft Encounters, and Upcoming Missions
The story of Phobos and Deimos combines 19th-century telescopic discovery with 20th- and 21st-century spacecraft exploration.
Discovery by Asaph Hall (1877)
Asaph Hall discovered Phobos and Deimos in August 1877 using the 26-inch refractor at the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C., during a particularly favorable opposition of Mars. The discoveries capped an intensive search motivated in part by the era’s improved instrumentation and interest in Mars.
Early spacecraft imagery
- Mariner 9 (1971–1972): The first spacecraft to orbit another planet, Mariner 9 imaged both moons, providing unprecedented close-ups and revealing key features like Stickney crater.
- Viking orbiters (mid-1970s): NASA’s Viking mission delivered additional high-resolution images and helped measure the moons’ shapes and orbits more accurately.
- Phobos 2 (1989): The Soviet mission returned data on Phobos before contact was lost. It contributed to our understanding of Phobos’s surface and environment.
Modern Mars orbiters
- Mars Express (ESA): Regular close flybys of Phobos yielded detailed images, topography, and gravity field constraints, informing models of internal structure and mass distribution.
- Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (NASA): The HiRISE camera captured high-resolution views of both moons and documented transits of Phobos and Deimos across the Sun and Mars’s disk.
- MAVEN (NASA): Focused on Mars’s upper atmosphere and interactions with the solar wind; observations of dust and plasma environments contribute context for understanding any tenuous dust populations associated with the moons.
Sample-return prospects
A sample-return mission can decisively address origin questions by providing pristine material for laboratory analysis. As of 2024, mission plans have included an emphasis on sampling Phobos’s regolith to test whether its material is asteroid-like or contains signatures of Martian crustal components. Precise timelines and mission designs are subject to change, but the scientific rationale remains compelling: a small scoop of Phobos could reveal the history of Mars’s satellite system.
These mission datasets will inform nearly every section of this article—from origins and geology to bulk properties and astrobiological significance.
Astrobiological Significance and Material Exchange with Mars
Neither Phobos nor Deimos is considered a habitable environment. They lack atmospheres and liquid water, and their surfaces are bombarded by radiation and micrometeoroids. Nevertheless, they are relevant to astrobiology because they likely contain material ejected from Mars over billions of years.
Martian ejecta on the moons
Large impacts on Mars can eject material at escape velocity or loft debris into orbits that intersect those of Phobos and Deimos. Some fraction of this debris would have been deposited on the moons’ surfaces, mixing with local regolith. Over time, the moons may have accumulated a record of Martian crustal material—including, potentially, altered minerals or organics—preserved in cold, airless conditions.
Why it matters
- Access to Mars’s history: Sampling the moons could provide indirect access to Martian geology without the engineering complexities of landing on Mars and drilling.
- Preservation potential: The moons’ regolith may preserve fragile signatures of chemical processes. Even if biological activity is unlikely, chemical biosignatures or prebiotic organics from Mars might be better preserved in the moons’ surface layers.
- Transport pathways: Understanding ejecta exchange helps quantify how material moves within planetary systems, a process relevant to panspermia hypotheses at a conceptual level.
This scientific payoff is one reason why future missions prioritize sampling Phobos’s regolith and analyzing its composition at high precision.
How We Measure Mass, Density, and Structure on Tiny Moons
Measuring the physical properties of small, irregular moons is nontrivial. Scientists rely on a suite of techniques, often combining data from multiple spacecraft and ground-based observations.
Mass and gravity field
A moon’s mass can be constrained by how it perturbs the trajectory of a spacecraft during a close flyby. By tracking the spacecraft’s velocity changes with Doppler measurements, mission teams infer the moon’s gravitational pull. Repeated flybys improve accuracy and can reveal variations in the gravity field that hint at internal structure (e.g., density heterogeneities).
Shape and topography
Imaging from multiple angles allows scientists to build three-dimensional models of the moons. Stereo imaging and photoclinometry (deriving slopes from shading) complement laser altimetry where available. Knowing the volume is essential to calculate bulk density when combined with mass.
Bulk density and porosity
Bulk density—mass divided by volume—offers clues to composition and internal structure. Densities of less than 2 g/cm³ are consistent with high porosity and rubble-pile structures composed of fractured rock and void space. Comparing density to plausible mineralogies helps test whether the moons are more asteroid-like or consistent with re-accreted impact debris.
Spectroscopy and composition
Reflectance spectroscopy across visible and infrared wavelengths probes surface composition. Features associated with hydrated minerals or carbon-bearing compounds can be diagnostic. However, space weathering and fine dust can mask or alter spectral signatures, making it challenging to draw firm conclusions without samples.
Thermophysical properties
Thermal inertia—how quickly a surface heats up and cools down—reveals the grain size and compaction of regolith. Low thermal inertia indicates fine, loosely packed dust; higher values indicate rockier or more cohesive surfaces. Combining thermal data with imaging maps regolith thickness and mobility.
Simple orbital period estimate (Kepler’s third law)
For readers interested in the mechanics, here is a simple pseudocode snippet showing how an idealized orbital period relates to orbital radius and Mars’s mass. Real analyses add many refinements, but the core relation is instructive.
# Given Mars's gravitational parameter mu (GM) and orbital radius a
# Period T = 2*pi*sqrt(a^3 / mu)
mu = 4.282837e13 # m^3/s^2 (Mars GM)
a = 9.376e6 # m (approximate Phobos orbital radius from Mars's center)
import math
T = 2 * math.pi * math.sqrt(a**3 / mu)
print(T / 3600.0) # hours
This idealized approach yields a period consistent with the observed rapid orbit of Phobos and emphasizes how close-in satellites move very quickly.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long will Phobos survive before breaking apart?
Phobos’s orbit is decaying by centimeters per year due to tidal interactions with Mars. Projections suggest that within tens of millions of years, Phobos could either break up under tidal stress (forming a transient ring) or continue to spiral inward. While the exact timeline depends on details of Mars’s interior and Phobos’s structure, researchers broadly agree that Phobos is in the late stages of its orbital evolution compared to geologic timescales.
Are Phobos and Deimos captured asteroids?
It is possible, but not certain. Their low albedos and irregular shapes resemble some asteroids, supporting a capture origin. However, their near-equatorial, near-circular orbits fit naturally with formation from a debris disk after a large impact on Mars. Current evidence does not decisively favor one model over the other, which is why sample-return science is so compelling. For a deeper dive into the competing models, see Captured Asteroids or Impact Debris?
Final Thoughts on Choosing the Right Mars Moon Science Questions
Phobos and Deimos sit at the crossroads of planetary science: small enough to exhibit low-gravity geology, close enough to Mars to be shaped by tides and ejecta, and enigmatic enough to keep origin debates alive. They challenge us to link orbital mechanics, impact processes, and regolith physics into a coherent history. From rapid orbits and tidal decay to grooves and mantled craters, the pair continues to surprise and inform.
As datasets accumulate from ongoing and future missions, we should finally resolve whether the moons are captured relics of the early solar system or the condensed remnants of catastrophic impacts. Either outcome will teach us about satellite formation pathways and the transfer of material between planets and their companions. For observers on Earth, Phobos and Deimos remain challenging but rewarding targets—tiny beacons near the Martian disk that hint at a larger story.
If you enjoyed this deep dive into Mars’s moons, consider subscribing to our newsletter. You’ll get alerts for future articles on planetary science, mission updates, observing guides, and the latest in solar system research—so you can continue exploring the cosmos with us.