3 ms·

It is indeed odd to me, that the only and all three missions distinct by funding all failed in exactly the same way, at exactly the same point, where those fund

It is indeed odd to me, that the only and all three missions distinct by funding all failed in exactly the same way, at exactly the same point, where those funded from a different source only did 1 in 25 times in that way. Perhaps the randomly-drummed up engineers argument could have some merit for overall mission failure, though it doesn't adequately explain failure on only the same, final mode. Were the same engineers involved? If so, it seems beyond the pale they didn't learn anything? To be clear, it's not that these landers hit the moon and expired, they all stopped transmitting on the final leg. It's a weird failure and even weirder that it wasn't experienced more frequently in govt funded missions. I've no plausible theory why, that's why it's interesting. All reasonable explanations have to be a bit out there, other than the de facto "bad luck", which doesn't wash with me. I'm not interested in investigating (beyond doing sums on wikipedia numbers). But I am interested in it being investigated by someone more qualified.

krisoft 3y ago
> I've no plausible theory why, that's why it's interesting. These are groups on a shoestring budget trying to do something very hard for the first time. They fail at the hardest part of the task. How about that as an explanation? > All reasonable explanations have to be a bit out there, Have you tried hard things before? Failure is the default outcome. > they all stopped transmitting on the final leg That tends to happen when you hit a rock the size of the Moon. As these did. I think you are making a mystery out of this where there is none.
- detrites 3y ago
  They didn't lose contact on impact, but minutes prior. The hardest part is the landing, not necessarily specifically the communicating with the lander on the way down - which in some sense is trivial depending how it's done. Indeed, it's an assumption they didn't land and instead impacted, until confirmed visually - as the landing is typically an automated process at that point. Continually breezing past the points I've made does nothing to convince me this isn't odd or interesting. I've no horse in the race and will continue to be intrigued until someone can give better explanations, rather than "it's hard dude".
  - krisoft 3y ago
    > Continually breezing past the points I've made does nothing to convince me this isn't odd or interesting. I’m sorry that it feels like that to you. I’m doing my best to adress your points to the best of my abilities. If you feel I am breezing by your point that just means I haven’t understood you yet. > They didn't lose contact on impact, but minutes prior. I see what you are saying, but that is not true. The Hakuto-R Mission 1 reports they have telemetry about the craft free falling. They talk about an altitude measurement system possibly miscalculating. They also talk about the thruster running out of fuel. [1] The Beresheet had an Innertial Measurement Unit fail, then they had communication issues, and they regained communication, but by that time it was too late to save the lander. They also had telemetry up until the impact if I read it right. [2] Which one is the third you are refering to? 1: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/japans-ispace-prepares-worlds-first-commercial-lunar-landing-2023-04-25/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/japans-ispace-prepa... 2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beresheet https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beresheet
    - detrites 3y ago
      Great - this is some decent information. Thank you! So, I've formed my opinions on both of these based on initial reports which all said similar things - contact was lost with the lander during the descent. If that's reliably revised now I'd have to reconsider. Though it still strikes me as odd all initial reports were identical across the board. Why is that? The third one is of course the subject of this article though we have come some way, so it's well understandable were it to become lost in the background. Anyway, I appreciate your good natured engagement.
      - krisoft 3y ago
        > Though it still strikes me as odd all initial reports were identical across the board. Why is that? If you are asking why the initial report was about loss of signal then it is simple: Crashing a lander leads to signal loss. The media wants to report on the situation and demands an imediate answer. “We lost the signal.” is a simple statement of fact the engineers can make without any further analysis. So they make that statement and the media reports it. You were earlier saying that the initial reports all said the signal was lost minutes earlier than the landing? I don’t recall seeing anything about the timing. > The third one is of course the subject of this article No. The subject of the article is the first one in my list, the Hakuto-R Mission 1. Then there is the second on my list the Beresheet. And then it sounded like you were refering to a third comercial lander? > Anyway, I appreciate your good natured engagement. Thank you. I try my best. And thank you for yours too.

krisoft 3y ago

> I've no plausible theory why, that's why it's interesting. These are groups on a shoestring budget trying to do something very hard for the first time. They fail at the hardest part of the task. How about that as an explanation? > All reasonable explanations have to be a bit out there, Have you tried hard things before? Failure is the default outcome. > they all stopped transmitting on the final leg That tends to happen when you hit a rock the size of the Moon. As these did. I think you are making a mystery out of this where there is none.

detrites 3y ago
They didn't lose contact on impact, but minutes prior. The hardest part is the landing, not necessarily specifically the communicating with the lander on the way down - which in some sense is trivial depending how it's done. Indeed, it's an assumption they didn't land and instead impacted, until confirmed visually - as the landing is typically an automated process at that point. Continually breezing past the points I've made does nothing to convince me this isn't odd or interesting. I've no horse in the race and will continue to be intrigued until someone can give better explanations, rather than "it's hard dude".
- krisoft 3y ago
  > Continually breezing past the points I've made does nothing to convince me this isn't odd or interesting. I’m sorry that it feels like that to you. I’m doing my best to adress your points to the best of my abilities. If you feel I am breezing by your point that just means I haven’t understood you yet. > They didn't lose contact on impact, but minutes prior. I see what you are saying, but that is not true. The Hakuto-R Mission 1 reports they have telemetry about the craft free falling. They talk about an altitude measurement system possibly miscalculating. They also talk about the thruster running out of fuel. [1] The Beresheet had an Innertial Measurement Unit fail, then they had communication issues, and they regained communication, but by that time it was too late to save the lander. They also had telemetry up until the impact if I read it right. [2] Which one is the third you are refering to? 1: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/japans-ispace-prepares-worlds-first-commercial-lunar-landing-2023-04-25/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/japans-ispace-prepa... 2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beresheet https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beresheet
  - detrites 3y ago
    Great - this is some decent information. Thank you! So, I've formed my opinions on both of these based on initial reports which all said similar things - contact was lost with the lander during the descent. If that's reliably revised now I'd have to reconsider. Though it still strikes me as odd all initial reports were identical across the board. Why is that? The third one is of course the subject of this article though we have come some way, so it's well understandable were it to become lost in the background. Anyway, I appreciate your good natured engagement.
    - krisoft 3y ago
      > Though it still strikes me as odd all initial reports were identical across the board. Why is that? If you are asking why the initial report was about loss of signal then it is simple: Crashing a lander leads to signal loss. The media wants to report on the situation and demands an imediate answer. “We lost the signal.” is a simple statement of fact the engineers can make without any further analysis. So they make that statement and the media reports it. You were earlier saying that the initial reports all said the signal was lost minutes earlier than the landing? I don’t recall seeing anything about the timing. > The third one is of course the subject of this article No. The subject of the article is the first one in my list, the Hakuto-R Mission 1. Then there is the second on my list the Beresheet. And then it sounded like you were refering to a third comercial lander? > Anyway, I appreciate your good natured engagement. Thank you. I try my best. And thank you for yours too.