3 ms·

I have been waiting for this for quite a while. Very excited about the potential for new discoveries. Having said that, it still looks like the craziest Rube G

I have been waiting for this for quite a while. Very excited about the potential for new discoveries. Having said that, it still looks like the craziest Rube Goldberg set of hacked together systems I've ever seen for landing on a planet. Here's hoping it all comes off without a hitch. I have a feeling it'll become an object lesson in engineering whether it works or not.

bane 14y ago
"it still looks like the craziest Rube Goldberg set of hacked together systems I've ever seen for landing on a planet" It almost makes slamming into the planet and bouncing around in a giant airbag look like a perfectly reasonable and drama-free landing approach.
dugmartin 14y ago
It reminds me of the results of my highschool art class project 25 years ago. We were given a sheet of construction paper, a few straws, some glue and a couple of rubber bands. The challenge was to build something that would keep a light bulb from breaking when dropped from the top of a ten foot ladder. I spent a week of class periods building what looked like a replica of the Lunar Module with fins - the legs were springs to absorb the impact. It worked great when I tested it but failed on the testing day because the teacher was holding it upside down when he dropped it. My friend, who goofed off the whole week drawing comics in class spent 5 minutes wrapping his bulb in straws, then crumpled up the paper, uncrumpled it and then wrapped that around the straws. A couple of loops of tape and he made a landing "vehicle" that worked every time.
avar 14y ago
The team directly addressed that crazy landing system v.s. the alternatives in a press conference just a few days ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwXe_X4UKoM#t=30m16s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwXe_X4UKoM#t=30m16s
ChuckMcM 14y ago
One of the things that came out of discussion with NASA scientists was a deliberate 'science of disaster' sort of thinking. There are a number of sensors in the landing shell, in curiosity, and in the sky crane, that start transmitting as soon as they can. Further the goal of having the Mars Odyssey in position was so that as much data could be collected as possible. Basically you have to ask the question "What science can I do at this stage?" so that during every possible outcome you extract the most data you can. I find that a fascinating way to structure your thinking about a project.
- mturmon 14y ago
  I thought the main driver for collecting telemetry and having Mars Odyssey (an orbiter) in sight to relay data is due to the earlier loss of Mars Polar Lander (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Polar_Lander#Communications_loss http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Polar_Lander#Communication...). The review board analyzing the loss of MPL could not narrow down the cause for certain, although they did identify a most likely cause. It was resolved in the future to have as much data collected as possible so that an unexplained loss could not occur again. One key ingredient in this is line of sight to a relay orbiter. But this is not a science driver, it is an engineering driver.
  - ChuckMcM 14y ago
    "But this is not a science driver, it is an engineering driver." Fair point.
    - mturmon 14y ago
      I am not meaning to be too picky. It's a big distinction from some perspectives at least. ;-)

bane 14y ago

"it still looks like the craziest Rube Goldberg set of hacked together systems I've ever seen for landing on a planet" It almost makes slamming into the planet and bouncing around in a giant airbag look like a perfectly reasonable and drama-free landing approach.

dugmartin 14y ago

It reminds me of the results of my highschool art class project 25 years ago. We were given a sheet of construction paper, a few straws, some glue and a couple of rubber bands. The challenge was to build something that would keep a light bulb from breaking when dropped from the top of a ten foot ladder. I spent a week of class periods building what looked like a replica of the Lunar Module with fins - the legs were springs to absorb the impact. It worked great when I tested it but failed on the testing day because the teacher was holding it upside down when he dropped it. My friend, who goofed off the whole week drawing comics in class spent 5 minutes wrapping his bulb in straws, then crumpled up the paper, uncrumpled it and then wrapped that around the straws. A couple of loops of tape and he made a landing "vehicle" that worked every time.

avar 14y ago

The team directly addressed that crazy landing system v.s. the alternatives in a press conference just a few days ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwXe_X4UKoM#t=30m16s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwXe_X4UKoM#t=30m16s

ChuckMcM 14y ago

One of the things that came out of discussion with NASA scientists was a deliberate 'science of disaster' sort of thinking. There are a number of sensors in the landing shell, in curiosity, and in the sky crane, that start transmitting as soon as they can. Further the goal of having the Mars Odyssey in position was so that as much data could be collected as possible. Basically you have to ask the question "What science can I do at this stage?" so that during every possible outcome you extract the most data you can. I find that a fascinating way to structure your thinking about a project.

mturmon 14y ago
I thought the main driver for collecting telemetry and having Mars Odyssey (an orbiter) in sight to relay data is due to the earlier loss of Mars Polar Lander (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Polar_Lander#Communications_loss http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Polar_Lander#Communication...). The review board analyzing the loss of MPL could not narrow down the cause for certain, although they did identify a most likely cause. It was resolved in the future to have as much data collected as possible so that an unexplained loss could not occur again. One key ingredient in this is line of sight to a relay orbiter. But this is not a science driver, it is an engineering driver.
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  "But this is not a science driver, it is an engineering driver." Fair point.
  - mturmon 14y ago
    I am not meaning to be too picky. It's a big distinction from some perspectives at least. ;-)