Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 51

Thread: Watch NASA’s Perseverance Rover Land on Mars!

  1. Top | #31
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    2,959
    Archived
    7,585
    Total Posts
    10,544
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    That's 5 landings and all without failure.
    If you play russian roulette five times with a six-shooter, you'll survive about 40% of the time.
    Five in a row doesn't demonstrate "reliable".
    5/6 success rate IS definition of "reliable" when it comes to landing on other planets.
    And they not only landed but exceeded the mission expectations by a large margin.
    And don't forget that NASA had a number of other recent (Pluto, Jupiter, Saturn, Mercury) planetary missions which all (including one with Titan landing) were successful.
    Seriously, when was a last failure of any kind? NASA has been a raging success in the last 20 years.
    Sorry, Titan landing was ESA, not NASA.
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    NASA lost a couple of earth orbiting missions due to a fraudulent aluminum business.

    An infrared mission called WIRE burned off all of its cryogen shortly after launch.

    There may be others but those are off the top of my head.
    That's 1999 launch, more than 20 years ago. And it is 1 out of how many?
    I’m not saying they aren’t doing a great job. But it’s not like there have been exactly zero failures in twenty years. I guess I’m showing my age of thinking of WIRE as more recent. Sorry on that one.

    ETA: the fraudulent aluminum is really not NASA’s fault so I’ll grant you there may be zero or close to zero failures in last 20 years. I’d have to look into it to know for sure.

  2. Top | #32
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,806
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    15,552
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    I don't think NASA have crashed anything on Mars in 20 years. And this is a second use of the same system - 2 out of 2.
    Yes, modern era starts with pathfinder in 97. That's 5 landings and all without failure.
    There's been plenty of failed Mars landings. What makes NASA special isn't any unique technology or research that the other countries don't have. It's just a question of them having more money and not cutting corners. The Beagle 2 mission failed because mid project funds were cut, and they had to spend time chasing more money, rather than what they should have been doing, testing more. If funding would have been secured all the time and they had been focused on what they should have been doing, according to plan, it most likely would have succeeded.

    Beagle 2 failed for such a bullshit reason. Two of the solarpanels failed to deploy in such a way it blocked the communications antenna, preventing it being fixed from Earth. Easily caught in testing
    Next time NASA sends a robot it shout take a small detour and fix Beagle so it can complete its mission.
    There's a couple of problems with that.

    1) Mars continually has dust storms of very fine dust (regolith). A result is that, over time, solar panels get ground down until they are completely opaque. So that'll be the situation now.

    2) They don't know what the problem with Beagle 2 is. They know that two solar panels failed to deploy. They don't know why. How are they going to trouble shoot?

    3) Perseverance is on the same mission. It makes no sense to help fix Beagle 2 to collect data that Perseverance is better equipped to do.

  3. Top | #33
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,806
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    15,552
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_Mars

    Interesting, first successful landing was done by russians, take that , NASA!
    The Russians were first with almost everything in space.

  4. Top | #34
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    16,221
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    33,050
    Rep Power
    97
    Titled link: Video shows Perseverance rover's dramatic Mars landing - BBC News
    Has several camera views:
    • From backshell upward: saw parachute deploy
    • From rover downward: saw Mars's surface after jettison of heat shield
    • From rover upward: saw skycrane separate and later depart
    • From skycrane downward: saw rover

    A lot of video, yes, and it will be useful as diagnostic information, especially if something goes wrong.

    NASA Perseverance Rover Lands Safely On Mars | FULL LANDING SEQUENCE - YouTube
    Entry coverage proper starts a little before 1 hour into the video. The landing itself is about 1h 30m in the video. A few minutes later, some pictures arrived, showing the planet's rocky-desert surface.

    Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover - NASA Mars

    Sounds of Mars - NASA Mars - some sounds captured by microphones aboard the rover, and also simulations of Earth sounds on Mars. High frequencies are expected to be rather muffled in that planet's atmosphere.

    Mars Perseverance Rover | NASA

    NASA’S Perseverance Rover’s First 360 View of Mars (Official) - YouTube

  5. Top | #35
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    16,221
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    33,050
    Rep Power
    97
    NASA’s Mars Helicopter Reports In | NASA
    Mission controllers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California have received the first status report from the Ingenuity Mars Helicopter, which landed Feb. 18, 2021, at Jezero Crater attached to the belly of the agency’s Mars 2020 Perseverance rover. The downlink, which arrived at 3:30 p.m. PST (6:30 p.m. EST) via a connection through the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, indicates that both the helicopter, which will remain attached to the rover for 30 to 60 days, and its base station (an electrical box on the rover that stores and routes communications between the rotorcraft and Earth) are operating as expected.

    ...
    After Perseverance deploys Ingenuity to the surface, the helicopter will then have a 30-Martian-day (31-Earth-day) experimental flight test window. If Ingenuity survives its first bone-chilling Martian nights – where temperatures dip as low as minus 130 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 90 degrees Celsius) – the team will proceed with the first flight of an aircraft on another world.

    If Ingenuity succeeds in taking off and hovering during its first flight, over 90% of the project’s goals will have been achieved. If the rotorcraft lands successfully and remains operable, up to four more flights could be attempted, each one building on the success of the last.
    This helicopter is an experiment, but if it works well, we could see similar flying vehicles on Mars and on Titan, Saturn's largest moon.

    Being able to fly will mean seeing more terrain, and also acting as a scout for a rover.

  6. Top | #36
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    The Perseverance Rover weighs 2,260 pounds. 100 times more than the Pathfinder's Sojourner rover.
    Earth gets lighter and lighter, while Mars gets heavier and heavier.
    Mars is probably losing its atmosphere faster than it is gaining rovers.
    Impacts will bring in an awful lot more than our rockets.

    And the rovers aren't even the majority of what we sent to Mars--less than 1/3 of the Mars 2020 made it to the surface in one piece. The cruise stage (burned in), heat shield (hard landed), parachute (anchor destroyed by explosives, I would assume the canopy itself is intact) and landing propellant are twice the mass of Perseverance (not counting any fuel still left on the cruise stage.) There's also the skycrane (hard landed) whose mass I'm not as easily finding.

  7. Top | #37
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Beagle 2 failed for such a bullshit reason. Two of the solarpanels failed to deploy in such a way it blocked the communications antenna, preventing it being fixed from Earth. Easily caught in testing
    You're assuming the failure was present at launch. Things happen in flight. It's purely a matter of luck whether a space probe runs into something or not. Most of the damage will not matter, but there's always a chance it gets something important.

  8. Top | #38
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    6,475
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    19,451
    Rep Power
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Beagle 2 failed for such a bullshit reason. Two of the solarpanels failed to deploy in such a way it blocked the communications antenna, preventing it being fixed from Earth. Easily caught in testing
    You're assuming the failure was present at launch. Things happen in flight. It's purely a matter of luck whether a space probe runs into something or not. Most of the damage will not matter, but there's always a chance it gets something important.
    True, from the videos I've seen just lift-off from Earth would put the payload through a lot of stress... sorta like putting an instrument on the end of a stick and shaking it back and forth as hard as you can.

  9. Top | #39
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,806
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    15,552
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Beagle 2 failed for such a bullshit reason. Two of the solarpanels failed to deploy in such a way it blocked the communications antenna, preventing it being fixed from Earth. Easily caught in testing
    You're assuming the failure was present at launch. Things happen in flight. It's purely a matter of luck whether a space probe runs into something or not. Most of the damage will not matter, but there's always a chance it gets something important.
    Sure. But testing is about minimizing risks and unforseen events. Colin Pillinger has said in interviews that the team had to spend months chasing money. Time that they in planning was were supposed to be spending testing. Hinting at that being the real reason. The testing phase got compressed due to time restraints. And since it's two years between launch windows the choice was made to launch instead of postponing for the necessary tests.

  10. Top | #40
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Beagle 2 failed for such a bullshit reason. Two of the solarpanels failed to deploy in such a way it blocked the communications antenna, preventing it being fixed from Earth. Easily caught in testing
    You're assuming the failure was present at launch. Things happen in flight. It's purely a matter of luck whether a space probe runs into something or not. Most of the damage will not matter, but there's always a chance it gets something important.
    True, from the videos I've seen just lift-off from Earth would put the payload through a lot of stress... sorta like putting an instrument on the end of a stick and shaking it back and forth as hard as you can.
    Yeah. Spaceflight is about building a brick shithouse a kid can pick up and carry.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •