Author Topic: LIVE: MSL Curiosity Rover ENTRY, DESCENT, LANDING - Aug 5-6, 2012  (Read 275446 times)

Online Chandonn

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1240
  • "Pudding!!! UNLIMITED Rice Pudding!!!"
  • Lexington, Ky
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 17
Isn't it pas time to close this thread?  We're al;ready onto Sol1 and there really aren't any more "updates" for this thread.


EDIT: Just pointing out that this thread is quickly devolving into "Lets human-rate Skycrane by stealing from the JWST budget" instead of MSL updates...
« Last Edit: 08/07/2012 03:32 pm by Chandonn »

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Well, when they release the hires video of MSL landing, it should noted here and not the SOL-1 thread, though it should be posted to the video thread...
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
You responded with the classic (around here) snark of "How much more would you have been willing to pay..."

You do get that snark is not helpful in the discussion.

It was an honest question which you didn't even attempt to answer but also snarkily pointed at JWST. It's very easy to sit here and contemplate such feature creep. Everything costs money. Armchair engineering is the easiest.

Quote from: UGordon
We can't don't even make hardware get to LEO and be reusable and you're suggesting we start thinking about not throwing away spent hardware because it's just... well, a waste of good, spent hardware?

You can argue semantics if you want. Trying to levy a reusability requirement on a Mars lander at this point, when each additional kilogram of mass delivered there costs millions is ludicrous, IMO.

Think about what you were asking for:
Still, I would have rather seen it land upright, in a controlled and predictable fashion.

Prior to this, guided entry on Mars was undemonstrated. The parachute as the biggest supersonic parachute ever and it couldn't have been tested at the specified Mach number on Earth. The skycrane maneuver was undemonstrated. Among all that, you'd also love to have the descent stage do a nice flyaway and a soft landing? Who pays for that capability and for what purpose on this particular EDL?

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
You responded with the classic (around here) snark of "How much more would you have been willing to pay..."

You do get that snark is not helpful in the discussion.

It was an honest question which you didn't even attempt to answer but also snarkily pointed at JWST. ...

I'll take your word that it was an honest question.  But I did interpret it as snark, and responded in kind.

Quote from: UGordon
We can't don't even make hardware get to LEO and be reusable [modified by JF]...

You can argue semantics if you want. Trying to levy a reusability requirement on a Mars lander at this point, ...

It should be clear that I'm not levying a new requirement on the vehicle, I'm talking about the larger issue of re-usability, in general, while using this vehicle as a convenient case in point, because of its topicality.  My larger point holds.  At least Mr. Musk agrees with my thinking about re-usabilty.

Quote from: UGordon
Think about what you were asking for:
Still, I would have rather seen it land upright, in a controlled and predictable fashion.

Prior to this, guided entry on Mars was undemonstrated. ... Among all that, you'd also love to have the descent stage do a nice flyaway and a soft landing? Who pays for that capability and for what purpose on this particular EDL?

Yeah, it would have been a "nice to have".  But I didn't invent that budgetarily expensive and mission creepy phrase.  Even so, the purpose would have been pretty clear: Demonstrate a controlled landing.  Clearly a useful demonstration that will have to be made in due course.

Excuse me for a minute tho.  I gotta adjust my armchair.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Chris Bergin

Isn't it pas time to close this thread?  We're al;ready onto Sol1 and there really aren't any more "updates" for this thread.

Yep. Especially now we've got Buzz Killington forgetting its a LIVE UPDATE THREAD posting ;)

It's been emotional! ;D

New live thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29633.0
« Last Edit: 08/07/2012 03:33 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0