4 ms·
The money quote: so many remember the ship because it made sense, as a follow-up of the real LEM. I was thinking about it yesterday, waiting for news about the
by narag 3y ago
The money quote: so many remember the ship because it made sense, as a follow-up of the real LEM.
I was thinking about it yesterday, waiting for news about the IM probe. Why do they make the landers tall? Wouldn't it be better something like this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_program
Tangential: the background music of the video is really nice.
- doctor_eval 3y agoI think it's because the engines are really heavy, so the centre of gravity is very low, despite their height. It's deceptive!
- narag 3y agoStill, the japanese mission had that problem. If the surface is guaranteed to be flat, low centre of gravity could be enough, but knowing there could be rocks or other kind of irregularities, I'd consider a fail safe shape.
- doctor_eval 3y agoI think the Japanese mission was much more complicated than that. It was supposed to fall on its side; but as I understand it, it fell on the wrong side. Whatever they build also has to fit in the launch cowling. Surveyor was tiny.
- narag 3y agoIt was supposed to fall on its side; but as I understand it, it fell on the wrong side. My point stands (unlike the probe, heh). If it call roll, a different shape could have helped. Whatever they build also has to fit in the launch cowling. Folding telescopic arms? I understand that this stuff is expensive and weight is limited, but the worst result is a failed landing.