Author Topic: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander  (Read 253824 times)

Offline novo2044

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • USA
  • Liked: 389
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #500 on: 02/23/2024 09:58 pm »
Did we get any answers as to whether there will be photos coming down, and if yes, when?
They want to get pictures, not sure about when, largely due to communication issues.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #501 on: 02/23/2024 10:01 pm »
About 10 per R/W/B teams plus "Team Four."

Team Four pulled in subject matter experts, working outside the control room. Called vendors e.g. MDA for range finders.

R/W/B teams and Team Four worked nearly around the clock. Collapsed into single team for final descent. 48 hour and 40 hour days.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline thomasafb

  • Shuttle Hugger
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #502 on: 02/23/2024 10:04 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).
Visited Shuttles (so far):
OV-104, OV-105

Offline mikegi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #503 on: 02/23/2024 10:04 pm »
Did having to use the NDL instead of the intended sensors prevent the lander from nulling out the horizontal velocity on landing (and, thus, cause the craft to tip over)?

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1185
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #504 on: 02/23/2024 10:05 pm »
It's commendable they decided to be transparent and told us the real reason about the LiDAR failure. 

Offline AS_501

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 576
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 412
  • Likes Given: 329
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #505 on: 02/23/2024 10:05 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.
Launches attended:  Apollo 11, ASTP (@KSC, not Baikonur!), STS-41G, STS-125, EFT-1, Starlink G4-24, Artemis 1
Notable Spacecraft Observed:  Echo 1, Skylab/S-II, Salyuts 6&7, Mir Core/Complete, HST, ISS Zarya/Present, Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis, Dragon Demo-2, Starlink G4-14 (8 hrs. post-launch), Tiangong

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #506 on: 02/23/2024 10:06 pm »
Klotz for AvWeek: was it just serendipity that elliptical orbit caused check of lidar? When in nominal sequence would it have been activatated.

"Fortuitous" because we would not have arbitrarily activated the laser range finders prior to descent. Assumed they worked based on terrestrial testing. Low perilune caused activation... "a bit of luck for us."

Normally would have turned on about an hour before landing. Would have been 5 minutes before landing before detecting the issue.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline ShinodaChan

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #507 on: 02/23/2024 10:07 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.

Depends on if you're a glass half-empty or glass half-full type of person. Half-empty, 'Partial failure'. Half-full, 'Partial success'. Either works in this scenario.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #508 on: 02/23/2024 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. (Not on this mission)
« Last Edit: 02/23/2024 10:22 pm by sdsds »
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #509 on: 02/23/2024 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.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline Phil Stooke

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1358
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1426
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #510 on: 02/23/2024 10:12 pm »
The PRIME drill is on the second mission, not this one.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #511 on: 02/23/2024 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.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Sualdam

  • Member
  • Posts: 40
  • UK
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #512 on: 02/23/2024 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.
You can have all the degrees in the world, and all the experience in the world, but that doesn't automatically grant you the gift of common sense.

Offline NGCHunter

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Liked: 187
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #513 on: 02/23/2024 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.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #514 on: 02/23/2024 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.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1811
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #515 on: 02/23/2024 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.

Offline thomasafb

  • Shuttle Hugger
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #516 on: 02/23/2024 10:19 pm »

They said they were getting telemetry from EagleCam. At no point did they say it had been ejected.

okay, valid point. i must have associated the term telemetry for a successful sep.
Visited Shuttles (so far):
OV-104, OV-105

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #517 on: 02/23/2024 10:20 pm »
Adam with Science News: any idea how long lander might stay operational?

Approximately nine days til sunset. Eventually deep cold will mean electronics not expected to survive. O/c will see at lunar dawn if electronics made it through.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline ShinodaChan

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #518 on: 02/23/2024 10:21 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.

The general public isn't as relevant to IM's future as NASA and IM's shareholders / partners are. Even then, a fair chunk of people will always be interested in a lunar landing until (as with reusable boosters) it becomes a novelty. Granted that's a rather small percentage of the population, but the interest will still be there for IM-2 and beyond.

Online VSECOTSPE

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1488
  • Liked: 4701
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: IM-1 Odysseus lunar lander
« Reply #519 on: 02/23/2024 10:23 pm »
Crain: "It sounds easy in retrospect." Two navigation pods on vehicle had optimal angles. NDL angle optimized to test sensor. Quickly implemented attitude/location transformations. "This is the kind of thing that would have taken a month" in normal sw development. Basically did it in an hour and a half.

Some Apollo 13-ish jujitsu there that’s worth applauding.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1