|
Satori
|
|
« on: 09/20/2011 05:34 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
« on: 09/20/2011 05:34 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phillip Clark
|
|
« Reply #1 on: 09/20/2011 05:52 PM » |
|
No mention of the rover in the article.
|
|
|
|
savuporo
|
|
« Reply #2 on: 09/20/2011 10:14 PM » |
|
The date has been oscillating between late 2012 and early 2013 in recent reports, by the way, even from the same sources, not sure whats more accurate.
|
|
|
|
Phillip Clark
|
|
« Reply #3 on: 09/21/2011 07:39 AM » |
|
The date has been oscillating between late 2012 and early 2013 in recent reports, by the way, even from the same sources, not sure whats more accurate.
"Between 2011 and 2014"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
spacex
|
|
« Reply #5 on: 01/07/2012 04:40 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
Satori
|
|
« Reply #6 on: 03/05/2012 10:26 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
Satori
|
|
« Reply #7 on: 03/14/2012 12:33 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
Phillip Clark
|
|
« Reply #8 on: 03/14/2012 03:09 PM » |
|
I wonder whether the Chinese will have any "repeat capacity" in the Chang'e programme.
For example, should Chang'e 3 not survive a lunar landing, would everything rest on Chang'e 4 or would a Chang'e 3 replacement be flown, so that China (hopefully) has two successful rover missions before the pair of sample-return missions?
As the Chang'e flights become more demanding it is reasonable to expect that failures will appear in the programme.
|
|
|
|
savuporo
|
|
« Reply #9 on: 03/14/2012 04:12 PM » |
|
I don't have a reference, but i remember reading somewhere that Chang'e-2 was essentially built as a spare for Chang'e-1 and once the first once flew successfully, received it's pre-planned upgrades.
If they learned anything from their success there, and from the early days of exploration technology developments, back when series numbers for probes in double digits were not uncommon, one would hope that they are building spare(s).
|
|
|
|
Phillip Clark
|
|
« Reply #10 on: 03/14/2012 04:35 PM » |
|
I don't have a reference, but i remember reading somewhere that Chang'e-2 was essentially built as a spare for Chang'e-1 and once the first once flew successfully, received it's pre-planned upgrades.
If they learned anything from their success there, and from the early days of exploration technology developments, back when series numbers for probes in double digits were not uncommon, one would hope that they are building spare(s).
I remember this being said about Chang'e 2 soon after Chang'e 1 reached the Moon. Don't forget all of the failures that the Russians had before the Luna 9 landing? And Lunas 15, 18 and 23 crash-landed. The Americans were lucky with the Surveyor 1 soft-landing, as Surveyors 2 and 4 showed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moe Grills
|
|
« Reply #12 on: 03/14/2012 08:02 PM » |
|
I wonder whether the Chinese will have any "repeat capacity" in the Chang'e programme.
Why wouldn't they? There's over a billion Chinese, you could safely assume that someone working for their space program would independently think of the same thing you posted. In other words? You could bet your bank account, Phil, that that contingency is already in the works over there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phillip Clark
|
|
« Reply #14 on: 03/18/2012 12:56 PM » |
|
Mission to bring back lunar soil By Xin Dingding (China Daily)
At: http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012-03/16/content_14845488.htm
What is new to me in this article is that the Chinese will not be doing a direct return to Earth from the lunar surface - as the Soviet Union did with its sample-return missions - but they plan to launch back into selenocentric orbit, perform a docking and then come back to Earth. The unmanned rendezvous in selenocentric orbit will be a major space "first" if the Chinese pull it off: I wonder why they have chosen this approach. Maybe they are thinking of proving some technologies for a Mars sample-return mission during the 2020s using the heavy-lift launch vehicle or multiple CZ-5 launches?
|
|
|
|
