4 ms·
The trajectory of this missions is really cool [0], basically it will use both the earth _and_ the moon to slingshot itself and then approach the moon in a sort
by riffraff 3y ago
The trajectory of this missions is really cool [0], basically it will use both the earth _and_ the moon to slingshot itself and then approach the moon in a sort of tangential path.
As I understand it this means the mission will take quite a bit more time than "usual" but save a lot of power.
[0] I'm on mobile, but this looks like a decent representation https://twitter.com/TitaniumSV5/status/1695724234339954779?t=mbejmKuCVH5VX3tZbgL7YQ&s=19 https://twitter.com/TitaniumSV5/status/1695724234339954779?t...
- delphico 3y agoISRO missions to Moon and Mars leveraged Sling-shotting (saves on Fuel and weight of the same to be carried). The Russian probe took a more direct approach landing to the moon.
- zertrin 3y agoOne could say it was somewhat too direct :)
- midoridensha 3y agoIt was a highly successful special lunar operation.
- goku12 3y agoOf all the recent failures of moon landers, Luna 25 is the most intriguing one. It failed simply because the retro-burn continued too long. It was a simple timed operation, unlike all the complex logic that goes into landing. Makes me wonder about the state of the Russian space programme.
- bigDinosaur 3y agoThe most recent former head of the agency has apparently expressed skepticism about the US moon landings in 1969 and also has a degree in economics. Allegedly the program has been hollowed out by corruption. Perhaps someone more qualified to comment could shed some light on this?
- dotnet00 3y agoIf you mean Dmitry Rogozin, then yeah, he was a total dick (a part of which he has allegedly lost recently in Ukraine) who peddled all sorts of lies and oversaw the decline of Russian space capabilities. I wouldn't be surprised if he expressed doubt over the Moon landings considering that he was also the one to push the absurd claim that the hole that had been drilled into a Soyuz was sabotage done by a space-crazed American female astronaut.
- nkoren 3y agoThis wouldn't be the first time that they've lost a major mission due to a similarly simple root cause: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyus_(spacecraft) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyus_(spacecraft)
- verzali 3y agoThe Russian space program is a real mess and a shadow of what it once was.
- sashank_1509 3y ago[flagged]
- bouvin 3y agoHeaven forbid that all conversations should not be about the USA.
- lnenad 3y agoHe just mad Russia landed on Venus 50 years ago and the USA didn't.
- matkoniecz 3y ago> The constant ISRO fanboyism is annoying Maybe. But why you complain in response to comment without any of it? Also, why being excited about lunar mission is supposed to be a problem? People can be excited about things smaller than some large achievement. And human landings were not so useful anyway.
- chimp_brain 3y agoI don't think space fanboyism hurt anyone, if at all someone feels proud let them be as long as it's in good spirits. Comparison of SpaceX to ISRO or even other organisation seems a bit unfair, SpaceX have access to ecosystem of sensors, components that are restricted by US. Develop something as simple as reaction wheel takes decades. While I don't appreciate fanboyism in general, I also believe there is a world beyond writing a few lines of codes...
- f6v 3y agoAny kind of nationalism is annoying when it comes to science.
- farhanhubble 3y ago[flagged]
- goku12 3y agoISRO missions leveraged Hohmann transfers to gradually raise the orbit. It does save on fuel using the Oberth effect. It also has somewhat less uncertainty. However, they were not gravitational slingshots. Have a look at the tweet linked by the other commenter - the probe approaches moon twice. The first approach causes a rather drastic change in velocity and trajectory. It's unlikely that such a change comes from the probe's thrusters alone. I assume that the second approach and capture is somewhat mild (tangential as the other commenter put it). In comparison, the Chandrayaan and Mars orbiter missions approached their target only once. And the insertion was also somewhat drastic, with a long retro-burn.
- numpad0 3y agoLanding mechanism is cool too. The lander has deformable metallic sponge balls on the legs, hits the soil at its "heel" and tip forward[1]. Official reasons given is it allows reduction of structural margins, physical interferences and tipover risks on inclined surfaces, which seem to make sense. Maybe it's just me that it looks a bit like someone had to have a spacecraft that lands like the Space Shuttle with engines pointing back. 1: https://www.isas.jaxa.jp/feature/forefront/files/201912_1.jpg https://www.isas.jaxa.jp/feature/forefront/files/201912_1.jp...
- berniedurfee 3y agoThat’s pretty much my standard landing method in Kerbal. Descend vertically to keep from having to worry about balancing a bunch of thrusters. Then, tip over, hopefully in the right orientation and gently enough to not blow up.
- emadehsan 3y agoSlingshot analogy animation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-3#/media/File:Animation_of_Chandrayaan-3_around_Earth.gif https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-3#/media/File:An...
- riffraff 3y agoyeah but notice the JAXA one is different, since it approaches the moon twice. It starts sort of the same way, but then it uses the moon's own attraction to project itself much further out and then come back approaching the moon in a different way.
- goku12 3y agoGravity assist or gravitational slingshot [1] is a specific type of maneuver that's different from the Hohmann transfer that Chandrayaan-3 is seen taking in your video. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist
- Aachen 3y agohttps://nitter.net/TitaniumSV5/status/1695724234339954779?t=mbejmKuCVH5VX3tZbgL7YQ&s=19 https://nitter.net/TitaniumSV5/status/1695724234339954779?t=...