What "weed need" is a space mission!

[LaurV]

Are we there yet?

[retina]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Are we there yet?

Also this is interesting IMO.

https://youtu.be/GhsZUZmJvaM

[diep]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Are we there yet?

Cool video. Note i'm a bit amazed he shows a thing he designed there - i design stuff like that so to speak in 1 day in CAD here - with probably far more primitive CAD as i can't afford the better CAD software...

Now some might not realize how tough it is to land on Mars as it is a total unlivable planet - yet i'm a bit amazed that they use another special vehicle to land the rover on Mars to go down from 200 km/hour to some sort of normal touchdown there.

That last thing with the rockets and some ropes to lower the rover looks like a vehicle from a science fiction series :)

Yet are they sure that lowering the rover on a rope below some rockets that give thrust upwards is the best idea?

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Are we there yet?

Perhaps "CRASH COURSE" was not the best choice of words...

Interesting to have an exhibit of hardware items, many of whose designs did not work. That can be a real time-saver.

[diep]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

Perhaps "CRASH COURSE" was not the best choice of words...

Interesting to have an exhibit of hardware items, many of whose designs did not work. That can be a real time-saver.

I would guess that's possibly secret - because other than NASA not many other nations so far managed to land a rover there...

So they show a few simple adapters and that's it.

(edit: AFAIK all other nations crashed into Mars with all missions that tried to land on the planet with rover type hardware - so we'll see whether the Chinese do better there than the amateurs of ESA - and for all those ESA, NASA and similar type governmental organisations - if you give that rover design to a team of SEAT - they'll redesign it in 3 days with half the components and a lot lighter in weight)

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by retina

Also this is interesting IMO. https://youtu.be/GhsZUZmJvaM

Indeed. Thanks for sharing.

Engineers tend to "thread the needle" between what is the bare minimum and what is too expensive to build.

Along with Scientists, they (IMHO) should be listened to more.

P.S. Somewhat amusing, my grammar correction AI is telling me my above should be s/be listened to more/listen more/; # Incorrect, but thanks for the advice...

[firejuggler]

Today, we try to land a robot on Mars. With success I hope!

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by firejuggler

Today, we try to land a robot on Mars. With success I hope!

Done it before with the same basic system. This will be the USoA's 9th lander (and 5the rover) to succeed.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Done it before with the same basic system. This will be the USoA's 9th lander (and 5the rover) to succeed.

[taps knuckles on side of head] Knock on wood...

My understanding is, the Soviet Union actually achieved a "soft landing" on Mars in 1971, but the lander (Mars 3) only transmitted data for a short time (20 seconds? 45 seconds?) after landing.

[retina]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

My understanding is, the Soviet Union actually achieved a "soft landing" on Mars in 1971, but the lander (Mars 3) only transmitted data for a short time (20 seconds? 45 seconds?) after landing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_3

After 20 seconds, transmission stopped for unknown reasons.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

My understanding is, the Soviet Union actually achieved a "soft landing" on Mars in 1971, but the lander (Mars 3) only transmitted data for a short time (20 seconds? 45 seconds?) after landing.

And there was no scientific data in that. Nor with any other non-'Merican lander. The Mars 2020 mission (aka Perseverance) is using the same method as MSL (Curiosity) to land. This time, though there is better software and more capability to avoid hazards on the way in. So the likelihood of a successful landing is much greater. And the likelihood of a landing in the center of the desired area is much better too.