• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Curiosity on it's way to Mars.

steve s

Philosopher
steve s
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
5,865
The Mars rover Curiosity was successfully launched today and is on it's way to mars. It will be the largest rover ever put on Mars and has a nuclear battery which is expected to last 14 years, so it won't be dependent on the sun for power. Expected landing is August 5, 2012.

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/mission/timeline/launch/



Steve S
 
Is it just me or the simulations they show for the landing look like rips straight out of a Thunderbird episode?
 
Here's an animation of the landing and mission. I couldn't help but think of R2-D2 on Tatooine.




ETA:And here's Curiosity's stunt double being put through its paces at JPL.



Steve S
 
Last edited:
Lol

Will be watching this mission in earnest. Hope that they can pull off the landing, looks like all kinds of things could go wrong with such a complex setup.
 
nvidiot said:
... looks like all kinds of things could go wrong with such a complex setup.
Click to expand...

They used this same landing method for the Polar Lander which ended in a crash. They think the radar system picked up the heat shield as it fell away and misled the computer into thinking it was lower than it really was. The rockets fired too early and ran out of fuel while it was still too high.

They fixed the problem for the Phoenix lander mission.

Steve S
 
I dont think anything beats Opportunity and Spirit for landings. We are going to put these probes in this golf ball thing, and do a chip shot to Mars.....and it worked!!!!
 
steve s said:
They used this same landing method for the Polar Lander which ended in a crash. They think the radar system picked up the heat shield as it fell away and misled the computer into thinking it was lower than it really was. The rockets fired too early and ran out of fuel while it was still too high.

They fixed the problem for the Phoenix lander mission.

Steve S
Click to expand...

Still seems like a really complex set up. I really hope they pull it off.
 
steve s said:
It will be the largest rover ever put on Mars and has a nuclear battery which is expected to last 14 years, so it won't be dependent on the sun for power.
Click to expand...

I wondered about that, why the switch from solar to nuke? Because we finally got the battery down in size or because we finally got the lander up in size?
 
Robrob said:
I wondered about that, why the switch from solar to nuke? Because we finally got the battery down in size or because we finally got the lander up in size?
Click to expand...
The larger rover would need more power. The scientific package is significantly larger and more complex, including more robotics. Mechanically the system is larger requiring more drive power and heating. Spirit and Opportunity both had to shut down for the Martian winter because their power collection was too low to permit continuous operation, it was more by luck than good judgement that they lasted as long as they did (though on a number of occasions the judgement saved both rovers). Dust on the solar panels was also a significant hazard for both of the older rovers. Using a sufficiently powerful RTG solves all of those problems, the heating can be maintained over the winter months and it is unaffected by dust.

The big problem will be the landing. The method has been used unsuccessfully once (though tested a number of times on an earth environment). It will be terrific if it works because it will deliver the most capable vehicle that has ever been producedbut will also develop a technology that could deliver substantially larger payloads to the martian surface.
 
steve s said:
Here's an animation of the landing and mission. I couldn't help but think of R2-D2 on Tatooine.




ETA:And here's Curiosity's stunt double being put through its paces at JPL.



Steve S
Click to expand...

Stunningly complicated!
If they pull it off, I'll be expecting a better coffee maker shortly after.
 
nvidiot said:
Lol

Will be watching this mission in earnest. Hope that they can pull off the landing, looks like all kinds of things could go wrong with such a complex setup.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm thinking. I can't get too excited until it's up and running.
 
Loss Leader said:
August 5? I don't have that kind of time!
Click to expand...

This is OT, but when I was a teenager I went with my great-grandmother to the bank. She was in her early 90's at the time. The line wasn't moving fast enough to suit her, and finally she piped up and yelled to the teller "Hurry it up, up there. Some of us don't have too much time."

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
 
steve s said:
They used this same landing method for the Polar Lander which ended in a crash. They think the radar system picked up the heat shield as it fell away and misled the computer into thinking it was lower than it really was. The rockets fired too early and ran out of fuel while it was still too high.

They fixed the problem for the Phoenix lander mission.
Click to expand...

Actually, according to the investigation report MPL most likely crashed due to the touchdown sensor falsely interpreting the vibrations from landing leg deployment as a signal that the lander had touched down. The lander then shut off its landing engines while still about 40 meters above the ground. The fix for the Phoenix lander was a minor change to the software, to ignore the landing sensors until the lander was about to touch down.

The Curiosity rover's landing system is similar in that it uses a powered touchdown by rockets, but different in that the landing rockets are a separate module. The rocket pack actually stops some distance above the surface and hovers. The rover descends on tethers, and when it touches down the tethers detach and the rocket pack flies away and crashes. It's the first time a combination of descent rockets and tethers have ever been used to land like this. Hopefully everything will actually work.
 
ellindsey said:
Actually, according to the investigation report MPL most likely crashed due to the touchdown sensor falsely interpreting the vibrations from landing leg deployment as a signal that the lander had touched down. The lander then shut off its landing engines while still about 40 meters above the ground. The fix for the Phoenix lander was a minor change to the software, to ignore the landing sensors until the lander was about to touch down.
Click to expand...

I was going by what some guy said on a show about the Phoenix mission which was on the Science Channel. Apparently he didn't read the report, or was interviewed before it came out.

Steve S
 
Bit by "faster, better, cheaper" - among other things, an integrated test which would have caught the problem didn't happen due to budget constraints.

I was part of the engineering support for the generator design, so I was a little extra happy to see the cruise stage containing Curiousity on its way. I'll be even happier after the cruise stage lowers the rover gently to the ground, releases it, and flies up and away* to let her do her thing.


* They did program it to fly away and not just up, right...?
 
SezMe said:
Is there a simple answer to the question: Why six legs instead of four?
Click to expand...

Because the 6-wheel rocker-bogie suspension works well. Roll one wheel over a rock and the body tilts half as much as the next best suspension.
 
Half as much tilt lets it roll over rocks twice as large on a slope without tipping over. Rather important when there's no one around to set it back upright...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom