3 ms·
Just no. The issue is not power budget, bandwidth or optimisation between function and vanity. Moon has plenty of sunlight, the bandwidth on an Earth-Moon link
by emilfihlman 8y ago
Just no.
The issue is not power budget, bandwidth or optimisation between function and vanity. Moon has plenty of sunlight, the bandwidth on an Earth-Moon link is very good and there's really no difference between vanity and function in terms of implementation here.
The real reasons here are a) the Space Grade™ plague, b) radiation hardening and durability and c) limited value in high quality photos.
non-web engineering on big total budget but limited per part projects is very, very conservative.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago> the bandwidth on an Earth-Moon link is very good The rover is on the far side of the moon. It relies on a single relay satellite at the Earth-Moon L2 [1]. This relay satellite had to be installed specifically for this mission. > Moon has plenty of sunlight Spaceflight is expensive. Every watt for a better camera means a watt away from scientific equipment. Power on such missions is micromanaged by necessity. The functional purpose of the camera is in assisting dis-mounting and post-dismounting inspection. It did that. It also sent home good pictures. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chang%27e_4#Components https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chang%27e_4#Components
- TeMPOraL 8y ago> Spaceflight is expensive. Every watt for a better camera means a watt away from scientific equipment. Power on such missions is micromanaged by necessity. Also every watt that you can add to the system without taking it away from something else is another watt you need to radiate away after it's done its job. Thermal management is paramount in space missions.