There is an arrowish shaped pebble to the bottom left of this image that looks as though it has been dislodged from a spot below. I wonder if that is due to the rockets or whether the rover bounced a little or just my misinterpretation?http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/00003/mcam/0003ML0000125000E1_DXXX.jpg
Quote from: clongton on 08/12/2012 04:08 pmCommon expression. How about "based on past experience with American rovers, in all likelihood"?That is hardly a big enough statistical sample to draw confident claims from. Of course it's everyone's expectation that MSL will live more than 1 Mars year, but engineering should IMHO be done by setting requirements, not expectations. Otherwise what's stopping you from escalating costs for example when you realize one component could significantly outlive another and you wish to "improve" that other component as well?
Common expression. How about "based on past experience with American rovers, in all likelihood"?
But I am hoping future design teams will think longer term than the DRM. For example, did this team plan for an extended mission? If so, what are the defining parameters? If not, why not? That's not a criticism - just a question.
I'm having trouble telling the true color of the sky. When I look at the far rim images I posted on my phone, the sky and rim are a butterscotch. But on my laptop, it's a bluish white, not yellow at all.What do your screens show?
But I would think that given the cost of designing a rover and actually sending to the Martian surface, that we would want to maximize the capability and longevity as much as we can for the express purpose of extending the DRM as much as possible, within financial constraints.
Extended missions are not really planned until the basic mission is complete.
I don't even know what Sol we're on now. Seems like she's just been sitting there forever.
They had to cut significant capabilities from the primary mission because of "financial constraints" (AKA being more than a billion over budget).
2-Mars surface missions are in some ways different than other missions because, as a senior non-Mars scientist once explained to me, "it's so damned hard getting down to the surface that as long as the spacecraft is operating, you keep it running."It could be a decade or more before we get another spacecraft to the surface of Mars, and so you can expect NASA to try and keep MSL running for as long as possible.
That was exactly my point for bringing up extended missions. I understand about the funding constraints, I really do, but Blackstar's statement is why I believe that lander and rover designers need to think beyond the DRM for their spacecraft and very deliberately do whatever they can when designing for the DRM to be able to make their spacecraft last as long as humanly possible.