An impressive animation from the JPL. As a side note, it's a bit startling to note how "non-aerodynamic" the craft travelling to Mars is (a flattish disk moving face-first). Of course, in the "emptiness" of space, there's no need for tapered noses and long cylindrical bodies.
You made a comment about not needing streamlining in space. You should also add a comment about there being no sound in space, too. The sounds in the video are there for illustrative purposes only.
ReplyDeleteAmazing animation! But what'll be truly amazing is if it arrives as depicted, intact and ready to roll (they had quite the bad history with Mars prior to the recent two rovers). So many things to go wrong each and every step of the way!
ReplyDeleteAnd I hope to live long enough to see the sub go through Europa's ice sheet and see something swimming by one of its cameras- and maybe peering back at us...
Yes amazing, this is the first time such a landing will be attempted and for something weighing 1 ton, about the size of a small car. It will also be using a nuclear power pack instead of solar panels which were used on previous rovers. Here is some more cool info about it, from the NASA e-mail subscription service:
ReplyDeletehttp://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2011/26nov_msllaunch/
As Stan B. mentioned, mankind does not have the best record for successfully getting craft to Mars. There was a really impressive infographic at io9 the other day regarding this:
ReplyDeletehttp://io9.com/5855793/a-mind+boggling-infographic-of-all-the-missions-from-earth-to-mars-and-where-they-wound-up
You'll have to expand the graphic to fully appreciate it. A lot can be said about it, but I think it definitely illustrates the perseverance of the Soviet/Russian space program.
That is an interesting graphic, Leprae. There is one recent one without data, but it looks like otherwise 18 of the last 25 have done o.k. (assuming a flyby was the true goal).
ReplyDeleteWhat is really amazing about this is the "skycrane" they use to lower the rover onto the surface. There is a nice infographic of that landing sequence here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.space.com/13673-mars-science-laboratory-curiosity-rover-landing-infographic.html
The "airbag landing" that was used for Spirit and Opportunity wasn't possible because of this rover's size, and parachutes alone can't suffice in the thin martian atmosphere. Hence the skycrane! This is like deploying a helicopter on another planet, it's crazy, which must mean it's genius :)
And on a side note, not only is there no need for tapered noses, but there IS a need for a blunt conical shape like this to dissipate a maximum amount of energy in the form of a shock wave in front of it. That way not only is the craft slowed down more effectively, it also heats up less.
To see these shock waves, here are some "Schlieren" pictures of wind tunnel tests for project mercury:
http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/LARGE/GPN-2000-001938.jpg
My roommate, an aerospace engineering graduate student at California Polytechnic State University, did an internship at JPL and worked on this program. He laughs when people lament that we won't return to the moon.
ReplyDeleteMost interesting to me is that at 03:17, when the 'crane' flies away into the distance, it's not going anywhere -- after it deploys the rover, it's garbage; they just make it fly into the distance to make absolutely sure it doesn't crush the rover. After a minute or so, it turns off its propulsion and smashes into the martian surface.
That is an astounding animation, perhaps the best I've ever seen of anything. And what an ingenious design for the landing! From Earth orbit to landing, it reminds me of a set of Russian dolls, with one piece after another coming off to reveal a whole new part of the assembly.
ReplyDeleteThanks, all, for the additional information, especially the superb infographics.
I'm not sure what's happening with what looks like a laser inside the lander. Is that just a different view of the drill (which is presumably taking samples)? That part's a little confusing.
--Swift Loris
BTW, there's a longer version of this, 11 minutes, that shows more of what it's going to do once it lands (including a very cool bit in which it "phones home"):
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4boyXQuUIw
--Swift Loris
Sound effects in space? I am so disappointed with the JPL...
ReplyDeleteAnd now a message from Debbie Downer.
ReplyDeleteThere are about 100 things that could go wrong with that mission that would end it (no redundancy). Speaking as an engineer, it seems needlessly complex and revolutionary rather than evolutionary over things that are known to work. It's characteristic of the NASA hubris that brought you the myopic Hubble, the Mars probe the burned up in the Martian atmosphere due to a units error, the replacement space telescope that is something like 6 times over budget and 14 dead astronauts.
But if they pull it off, hats off to them.
Bub, I was thinking the same thing (although not from an engineer's perspective). An awful lot of complicated brand-new contraptions have to work perfectly just to get the thing on the ground safely, let alone complete all its projects successfully.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what kind of discussions they went through in the planning stages. Surely some voices were calling for simpler, older, tried-and-true approaches. Would be fascinating to know the backstory.
Nevertheless, that's such a stunning animation they ought to give it some kind of special Oscar. Maybe if the mission fails, they can build a science-fiction film around the animation footage and make some of the money back...
--Swift Loris
We never did get our flying cars, but this sure is neat.
ReplyDeleteBub, if you have a simpler solution I'm sure NASA would be thrilled to hear from you.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure these guys are aware of the risks involved and try to find the solution that is most likely to work!
I'm pretty sure these guys are aware of the risks involved and try to find the solution that is most likely to work!
ReplyDeleteThese are the same guys who thought a 2-lb piece of insulation moving at 12,000 miles an hour was harmless. This is also interesting: http://www.fotuva.org/online/frameload.htm?/online/challenger.htm
I'm sure they did the best they could given the constraints that were handed them (as Dilbert does with the Pointy-haired boss). Once the rover got to be the size of a VW bug their choices became limited. But, to use one example of 1960s technology known to work, the lunar excursion module got to the moon and sent a big piece of itself back into space. But in this case, it probably couldn't have gotten something the size of the future (we hope) Mars rover to Mars within a couple of years, so they couldn't use it.