4 ms·
It's not just the center of gravity. I think people really underestimate how hard landing on the Moon is, because counter-intuitively, the lack of an atmosphere
by somenameforme 2y ago
It's not just the center of gravity. I think people really underestimate how hard landing on the Moon is, because counter-intuitively, the lack of an atmosphere makes things harder, not easier. Landing on Mars (or even Venus (!!) - which is the first other planet we ever landed on) is easy mode by comparison.
With the lack of atmosphere is that there is no 'natural' attitude/orientation correction. If you're tilted 5 degrees then you'll stay that way. With an atmosphere drag and aerodynamic forces can be used to ensure a proper orientation.
'Just make sure you come down straight' isn't so easy because when you enter the Moon's 'orbit' (not necessary, speaking colloquially) you're traveling extremely fast. And so to land you need to zero out your horizontal and vertical velocities. You do this by literally turning around the opposite direction and thrusting. And then you need to simultaneously also ensure your vertical velocity stays near zero as you approach the surface.
And then finally you need to come down with your vertical velocity at near zero, your horizontal velocity at zero, and perfectly orientated. This is really friggin hard. If you have even a hair of velocity you're going to bounce, skid, and otherwise do nasty things - which is why so many landers end up on their side, if not upside down. And then there's the Moon's surface itself. Come in on an even slightly unlevel terrain and again you're in for a wild ride.
- lou1306 2y agoA bit of Kerbal Space Program really makes you appreciate what an ordeal a satellite landing is. And that is a much simplified setting with e.g., no control lag (even on unmanned crafts), a much closer satellite, etc. Even just designing a craft that will not topple once landed is punishing.
- sfblah 2y agoSo are you saying that landing the lunar lander in 1969 was substantially harder than SpaceX landing its boosters back on Earth?
- weebull 2y agoIn 1969 they used a pilot, and a very good one too. Surveyor 1 in 1966 is a much better comparison.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dreamcompiler 2y agoYes. SpaceX absolutely depends on the v^2 automatic deceleration effect the atmosphere provides. They also depend on GPS which is not available on the moon. SpaceX also takes advantage of 50 years of improvement in orientation sensors, INS, image analysis, thrust vectoring servos, and thrust control. As another post points out, the Apollo landings had real pilots who could look out the window. It's a testament to their skills that they all made it home.
- sfblah 2y agoThanks for the context. Agreed it's amazing what people can do it such an unforgiving environment.