6 ms·

Nasa proves its space helicopter can fly on Mars

79 points by oedmarap 8y ago

pintxo 8y ago
Side note: anyone tried to change his privacy settings on engadget.com? There seems to be a lot of bad ux at play.
- sdoering 8y ago
  Yes. They just do not enable you to do that. And do totally not comply with GDPR requirements this way. But non the less hope to come out unscathed because of their "opt in" popup. Well. As I have a strong hosts file as well as respective browser addons I do not care - their trackers do not see me.
- black_puppydog 8y ago
  I've just stopped bothering. The intersection between "sites that use dark patterns to get around gdpr" and "sites with content I really need to get, and from them" is empty (in my sample)
  - noneeeed 8y ago
    Likewise. I'm much more likely to just go "meh" and close the tab if I hit some shitty cookie dialogue that makes me manually untick 37 options before continuing. There are plenty of good sites out there who have either less or no tracking bollocks, I don't need to use the shitty ones.
- StavrosK 8y ago
  Whenever I see the Oath pop up, I just close the site.
  - jfk13 8y ago
    Same here. It's way beyond unacceptable; it's atrocious. I hope someone has the time and energy to pursue a GDPR complaint against them, as at least some Oath sites are clearly targeted at EU-based users.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Yeah. > Before you continue... > Engadget is now part of the Oath family. We (Oath) and our partners need your consent to access your device, set cookies, and use your data, including your location, to understand your interests, provide relevant ads and measure their effectiveness. Oath will also provide relevant ads to you on our partners' products. Learn More > Select 'OK' to allow Oath and our partners to use your data, or 'Manage options' to review our partners and your choices. Tip: Sign In to save these choices and avoid repeating this across devices. You can always update your preferences in the Privacy Centre. Not going to do that! And from the Google cache link: > 404. That’s an error. > The requested URL /search?q=cache:lT5Qm1nXpPcJ:https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/29/nasa-proves-its-space-helicopter-can-fly-on-mars/+&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/29/nasa-proves-its-space-he... was not found on this server. That’s all we know. But the Internet Archive has a good copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20190329140048/https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/29/nasa-proves-its-space-helicopter-can-fly-on-mars/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190329140048/https://www.engad...
- 52-6F-62 8y ago
  I've been using the Duck Duck Go Firefox extension. It seems to help a fair bit.
- abc-xyz 8y ago
  If you use Android then I strongly recommend Firefox, you can easily install ublock origin and other addons, and they even have an option to disable cookies altogether.. it's really a joy to use.
brlewis 8y ago
> They also had to use a gravity offload system in the form of a motorized lanyard that tugged at the helicopter as it hovered above the ground This sounds like something that could make the helicopter more stable. Could a physicist please explain why it's still a good test?
- NeutronStar 8y ago
  Think in terms of force, it has enough force to raise itself on Mars.
- dnadler 8y ago
  They were probably just testing the thrust it puts out in that atmosphere by measuring the force applied to the tether. They could also test the stability by trying to maintain a constant force on the tether (by not simply pulling as hard as possible), but I imagine they have different ways to test stability.
- NetBeck 8y ago
  The concept is to have the object as the input and having ARGOS follow and adapt to make the object behave as if it were on another planet. If a person were testing for Mars, ARGOS would make a 100 pound barbell feel like only 38 pounds. Change the environment to Jupiter and the 100 pound barbell would feel like 240 pounds. It is designed to simulate conditions, not support what is already on Earth. As for the helicopter, ARGOS had to adapt its weight relative to Earth by pulling it up enough to simulate lighter conditions on Mars.
- dTal 8y ago
  I expect they probably anchored the tether to the center of gravity.
- jvanderbot 8y ago
  If this were the only test, that would be a bad test. They're probably verifying that the flight hardware has characteristics consistent with all the previous test cases before blasting it to Mars. (I work near this project, but not on it directly).
ptha 8y ago
While the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) only logged a total of one minute of flight time at an altitude of 2 inches above the ground, the scientists were able to get the data they need to be able to say that it will work on Mars. "The next time we fly, we fly on Mars," project manager MiMi Aung said. I realise it's just a concept test for future missions, but this doesn't seem like a particularly rigorous test. I assume they are they under a lot of time pressure.
- jvanderbot 8y ago
  They (endgaget) were treating that test as the first and last proof. In reality, that project has been full-speed-ahead with flight tests for a while. The difference is more like that this is the first untethered, full-flight-system, full-environment test. The data from which is compared to the huge batch previous tests with partial systems, w/ and w/o gravity offloads, etc etc. Logging a lot of flight time with the actual hardware is a really bad idea, sort of like "testing in production."
  - dontbenebby 8y ago
    >Logging a lot of flight time with the actual hardware is a really bad idea, sort of like "testing in production." That's a fascinating fact. A lot of work must have gone into a testing environment that can do so much of the work via simulation.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >Logging a lot of flight time with the actual hardware is a really bad idea, sort of like "testing in production." We test in staging environments set to mimic production 100% (or as close as possible) all the time. After an initial period where they're under development, un-maned aerial vehicles should obviously be tested a hell of a lot in actual end environment, with their whole actual hardware, too.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- 8y ago
crispyambulance 8y ago
It's really cool. I am amazed they're able to fly a helicopter in what is effectively almost a vacuum to us. But what about power? How long can a 4lb drone fly? a few minutes? Presumably there's a way to recharge this thing, but that would require a base-station with solar or nuclear power source. I am not understanding how this drone would be effective in a mission!
- gpm 8y ago
  Something I don't think people appreciate is how slowly things move on mars in general. Curiosity, a huge success, has moved a total of 20.38 kilometers as of two days ago. That's after 2359 martian days. It's hard for me to imagine a drone not being effective! https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/mission/whereistherovernow/?ImageID=9942 https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/mission/whereistherovernow/?ImageI...
  - mikepurvis 8y ago
    To be fair, though, a lot of that is by choice. What advantage is there in moving quickly and taking on all of the associated risks when there's lots to see and do while moving slowly and spending extended periods of time parked at specifically interesting sites?
    - massivecali 8y ago
      By having alternate crafts that can move quickly, we might be able to better guesstimate if it's worth the time of the slow rover to change course and investigate a blip on the map. Alternatively, fast craft could fly around and drop beacons on areas of interest to be investigated at a later time. Beacons that could be sensor probes returning data of interest.
- gpm 8y ago
  Tons of technical details on the helicopter here [0] For power in particular, charged by solar panels (the things above the rotor), worst case end-of-life flight time is estimated at 90s, depending on season it might take more than 1 day to reach full charge. Edit: And the two numbers for range I can find in that document suggest 300m flight range, and "outbound sorties" of length 100m (suggesting always flying back to the rover?). [0] https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Publications/files/Balaram_AIAA2018_0023.pdf https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Publications/files/Balaram_A...
teslaberry 8y ago
one bad gust of wind, putting a helicopter on a planet with little atmosphere is stupid. it will be prone to problems. build things robustly , that is the lesson of our landers and missions to mars, 1 lander missions account for most of the lander science. despite many landers sent, because it lasted longer, it was robust. helicopeters ARE NOT robust. and even less so on mars. for mars, just build and ultra light jumping machine, it's 1/3 the gravity for hells' sake , just make something that jumps or has really long legs, and takes huge strides, like an ultralight giant daddy long legs, with a camera 20 meters up , perched high for identifying useful targets for inspection. toroise NOT the hare on mars.

79 points by oedmarap 8y ago

pintxo 8y ago

Side note: anyone tried to change his privacy settings on engadget.com? There seems to be a lot of bad ux at play.

sdoering 8y ago
Yes. They just do not enable you to do that. And do totally not comply with GDPR requirements this way. But non the less hope to come out unscathed because of their "opt in" popup. Well. As I have a strong hosts file as well as respective browser addons I do not care - their trackers do not see me.
black_puppydog 8y ago
I've just stopped bothering. The intersection between "sites that use dark patterns to get around gdpr" and "sites with content I really need to get, and from them" is empty (in my sample)
- noneeeed 8y ago
  Likewise. I'm much more likely to just go "meh" and close the tab if I hit some shitty cookie dialogue that makes me manually untick 37 options before continuing. There are plenty of good sites out there who have either less or no tracking bollocks, I don't need to use the shitty ones.
StavrosK 8y ago
Whenever I see the Oath pop up, I just close the site.
- jfk13 8y ago
  Same here. It's way beyond unacceptable; it's atrocious. I hope someone has the time and energy to pursue a GDPR complaint against them, as at least some Oath sites are clearly targeted at EU-based users.
mirimir 8y ago
Yeah. > Before you continue... > Engadget is now part of the Oath family. We (Oath) and our partners need your consent to access your device, set cookies, and use your data, including your location, to understand your interests, provide relevant ads and measure their effectiveness. Oath will also provide relevant ads to you on our partners' products. Learn More > Select 'OK' to allow Oath and our partners to use your data, or 'Manage options' to review our partners and your choices. Tip: Sign In to save these choices and avoid repeating this across devices. You can always update your preferences in the Privacy Centre. Not going to do that! And from the Google cache link: > 404. That’s an error. > The requested URL /search?q=cache:lT5Qm1nXpPcJ:https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/29/nasa-proves-its-space-helicopter-can-fly-on-mars/+&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/29/nasa-proves-its-space-he... was not found on this server. That’s all we know. But the Internet Archive has a good copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20190329140048/https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/29/nasa-proves-its-space-helicopter-can-fly-on-mars/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190329140048/https://www.engad...
52-6F-62 8y ago
I've been using the Duck Duck Go Firefox extension. It seems to help a fair bit.
abc-xyz 8y ago
If you use Android then I strongly recommend Firefox, you can easily install ublock origin and other addons, and they even have an option to disable cookies altogether.. it's really a joy to use.

brlewis 8y ago

> They also had to use a gravity offload system in the form of a motorized lanyard that tugged at the helicopter as it hovered above the ground This sounds like something that could make the helicopter more stable. Could a physicist please explain why it's still a good test?

NeutronStar 8y ago
Think in terms of force, it has enough force to raise itself on Mars.
dnadler 8y ago
They were probably just testing the thrust it puts out in that atmosphere by measuring the force applied to the tether. They could also test the stability by trying to maintain a constant force on the tether (by not simply pulling as hard as possible), but I imagine they have different ways to test stability.
NetBeck 8y ago
The concept is to have the object as the input and having ARGOS follow and adapt to make the object behave as if it were on another planet. If a person were testing for Mars, ARGOS would make a 100 pound barbell feel like only 38 pounds. Change the environment to Jupiter and the 100 pound barbell would feel like 240 pounds. It is designed to simulate conditions, not support what is already on Earth. As for the helicopter, ARGOS had to adapt its weight relative to Earth by pulling it up enough to simulate lighter conditions on Mars.
dTal 8y ago
I expect they probably anchored the tether to the center of gravity.
jvanderbot 8y ago
If this were the only test, that would be a bad test. They're probably verifying that the flight hardware has characteristics consistent with all the previous test cases before blasting it to Mars. (I work near this project, but not on it directly).

ptha 8y ago

While the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) only logged a total of one minute of flight time at an altitude of 2 inches above the ground, the scientists were able to get the data they need to be able to say that it will work on Mars. "The next time we fly, we fly on Mars," project manager MiMi Aung said. I realise it's just a concept test for future missions, but this doesn't seem like a particularly rigorous test. I assume they are they under a lot of time pressure.

jvanderbot 8y ago
They (endgaget) were treating that test as the first and last proof. In reality, that project has been full-speed-ahead with flight tests for a while. The difference is more like that this is the first untethered, full-flight-system, full-environment test. The data from which is compared to the huge batch previous tests with partial systems, w/ and w/o gravity offloads, etc etc. Logging a lot of flight time with the actual hardware is a really bad idea, sort of like "testing in production."
- dontbenebby 8y ago
  >Logging a lot of flight time with the actual hardware is a really bad idea, sort of like "testing in production." That's a fascinating fact. A lot of work must have gone into a testing environment that can do so much of the work via simulation.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >Logging a lot of flight time with the actual hardware is a really bad idea, sort of like "testing in production." We test in staging environments set to mimic production 100% (or as close as possible) all the time. After an initial period where they're under development, un-maned aerial vehicles should obviously be tested a hell of a lot in actual end environment, with their whole actual hardware, too.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
8y ago

crispyambulance 8y ago

It's really cool. I am amazed they're able to fly a helicopter in what is effectively almost a vacuum to us. But what about power? How long can a 4lb drone fly? a few minutes? Presumably there's a way to recharge this thing, but that would require a base-station with solar or nuclear power source. I am not understanding how this drone would be effective in a mission!

gpm 8y ago
Something I don't think people appreciate is how slowly things move on mars in general. Curiosity, a huge success, has moved a total of 20.38 kilometers as of two days ago. That's after 2359 martian days. It's hard for me to imagine a drone not being effective! https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/mission/whereistherovernow/?ImageID=9942 https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/mission/whereistherovernow/?ImageI...
- mikepurvis 8y ago
  To be fair, though, a lot of that is by choice. What advantage is there in moving quickly and taking on all of the associated risks when there's lots to see and do while moving slowly and spending extended periods of time parked at specifically interesting sites?
  - massivecali 8y ago
    By having alternate crafts that can move quickly, we might be able to better guesstimate if it's worth the time of the slow rover to change course and investigate a blip on the map. Alternatively, fast craft could fly around and drop beacons on areas of interest to be investigated at a later time. Beacons that could be sensor probes returning data of interest.
gpm 8y ago
Tons of technical details on the helicopter here [0] For power in particular, charged by solar panels (the things above the rotor), worst case end-of-life flight time is estimated at 90s, depending on season it might take more than 1 day to reach full charge. Edit: And the two numbers for range I can find in that document suggest 300m flight range, and "outbound sorties" of length 100m (suggesting always flying back to the rover?). [0] https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Publications/files/Balaram_AIAA2018_0023.pdf https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Publications/files/Balaram_A...

teslaberry 8y ago

one bad gust of wind, putting a helicopter on a planet with little atmosphere is stupid. it will be prone to problems. build things robustly , that is the lesson of our landers and missions to mars, 1 lander missions account for most of the lander science. despite many landers sent, because it lasted longer, it was robust. helicopeters ARE NOT robust. and even less so on mars. for mars, just build and ultra light jumping machine, it's 1/3 the gravity for hells' sake , just make something that jumps or has really long legs, and takes huge strides, like an ultralight giant daddy long legs, with a camera 20 meters up , perched high for identifying useful targets for inspection. toroise NOT the hare on mars.