Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
1
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by Zed_Noir on Today at 10:17 pm »
As far as I am concerned. This is mostly a failed first Lunar landing attempt by Intuitive Machines. Will not matter in the long run, if their next (and fiscally doable final) attempt is more successful.

Unlike some posters here. Think the lack of photos and videos during the landing attempt is really bad PR. The days of media people reading out a press release about what happen is long gone. General public interest in a mission requires high quality video presentations of the phases of the mission and the actual event itself to be sustainable, IMO.

Considering how Astrobotic looks right now, IM is considerably better off. At least IM's lander actually made it.

Doesn't matter. The general public will likely not return to watch follow up coverage after the really mediocre landing attempt coverage.
2
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by sdsds on Today at 10:17 pm »
Marsha Smith, SP Online: communications problems, how much are they due to south polar location; lessons learned?

Phenomenon of interest at south pole: frequency multi-path condition/interference.

We're going to figure out an antenna location map that gives us an antenna pointed towards Earth while in transit.
Some dishes have had config issues and weaker power band. Power xmit levels were too low at times to keep carrier lock.
3
I have a number of NASA related items from the 1960s that were bought from NASA surplus in the 1970s. I have identified some of the items using the JPL archives, but some of the items I am having a hard time identifying. This is an illuminated switch that was part of a console, but I am not sure what it was used for. It has buttons for EL Kv, AZ Kv, Signal Monitor, and Servo Response. Most of what I have identified are from early satellites and rockets, but I am told there are parts from the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle and Lunar Landing Training Vehicle. This could also be from some rocket testing or aircraft as well. I assume EL and AZ are Elevation and Azimuth, but I'm not sure what the Kv stands for either. Anyone with any incite?
4
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by NGCHunter on Today at 10:15 pm »
The Astronomy Live video calculates orbital parameters for IM-1 that are very different from what Horizons shows, but I'm currently assuming those discrepancies are due to the small number of data points used, as the Bochum Observatory range data continues to match Horizons closely.
Yes, to be clear, my data is approximate due to the relatively few data points and the quick and dirty way I do the astrometry (sorry!). My objective was to determine the approximate orbit at least well enough to be able to get a simulated version of IM-1 to the moon in Orbiter Spaceflight Simulator using just my own observations (which I was able to do, though in a different southern crater - https://twitter.com/astroferg/status/1760520784039051595 ). I had planned for additional observations with my own personal telescope, but unfortunately it suffered a malfunction and will not power up.
5
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by Sualdam on Today at 10:15 pm »
So how do we classify this mission compared to others in recent years.  How about:
-  SLIM and Odysseus:  Partial success.
-  Chang'e 3-5, Chandrayaan 3:  Full success
-  Peregrine-1, Luna 25, Beresheet, Chandrayaan 2, Hakuto-R:  Failures

I'm trying to put these in perspective for my museum visitors.

For me, it comes down to:

Success - landed intact exactly as it was supposed to, all payloads working as intended, all data transmitted as intended.

Partial success - landed intact and transmitting, but payloads compromised, and/or data transmission compromised (immediately, or as mission progresses).

Failure - crashed, no data retrieved from surface.

Of course, you could look at it in other ways. But since it takes so much to actually get there and get a touchdown, touching down without crashing cannot be classed as a complete failure.
6
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by whitelancer64 on Today at 10:14 pm »
so, yesterday it was a full success with the lander being upright and EagleCam had supposedly worked. Now it turns out it fell over, EagleCam did not work and oh yes, they screwed up during launch processing (and only came clean after being asked).

They said they were getting telemetry from EagleCam. At no point did they say it had been ejected.
7
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by Phil Stooke on Today at 10:12 pm »
The PRIME drill is on the second mission, not this one.
8
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by sdsds on Today at 10:12 pm »
WR Smith for SFN: given operability of NDL, will it be used on future systems, and particularly HLS.

For CLPS we don't prescribe what tech to use.

Same for HLS partners. Now that this has been shown to operationally work, will be "of great interest"

Already licensed tech to a small company for commercialization. Order of mag more accurate, half the power, half the mass of traditional, 1/3 the volume.
9
Space Science Coverage / Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Last post by sdsds on Today at 10:09 pm »
CNN Q re Eaglecam and any payloads from which haven't gotten data.

Eaglecam will be commanded, clear sd card and ejected. Not fired during landing due to nav system initialization would put a flag up for Eaglecam not to fire. Didn't have time to fix it after reboot.

Think we can meet all the commercial payload needs. Believe already have image of art cube.

For NASA science payloads, Kearn says still checking to see if measurements can't be made with some experiments.

No mention of PRIME-1/TRIDENT drill.
10
Advanced Concepts / Re: Realistic, near-term, rotating Space Station
« Last post by MickQ on Today at 10:08 pm »
Back in reply #4425 I proposed an adaptation/ modification to a rotating docking system put forward by lamontagne in the previous few posts.  Any thoughts on that ??
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1