-
#20
by
plutogno
on 15 Mar, 2013 06:42
-
What's the point of the EDM "landing demonstrator"? They cannot use it for the rover anyway, right?
in Europe we have tried landing on Mars once and failed, so there is a point in demonstrating the capability of landing anything on the planet
-
#21
by
spectre9
on 15 Mar, 2013 08:05
-
Aeroshell
Parachutes
Descent propulsion
Propellant tanks
Guidance and Navigation
How much does ExoMars weigh?
How big will the capsule need to be?
-
#22
by
Dalhousie
on 15 Mar, 2013 08:49
-
What's the point of the EDM "landing demonstrator"? They cannot use it for the rover anyway, right?
in Europe we have tried landing on Mars once and failed, so there is a point in demonstrating the capability of landing anything on the planet
But the original point was to test techology for the main lander. Given the history this was reasonable. This way they won't be able to do that.
-
#23
by
asmi
on 15 Mar, 2013 09:36
-
Heard some interesting rumors about this marriage. Apparently the Europeans are less than happy with the work they've seen by the Russians. I won't go into any more detail than that, except to say that some people are apparently very worried about the level of expertise in the Russian space program.
And yet the Russians somehow have managed to achieve (and still are) things in space that Europeans can only dream about... I think whoever said that should check the facts first. One needs to achieve something worthwhile before he/she gets a moral right to critisize.
-
#24
by
anik
on 15 Mar, 2013 09:46
-
-
#25
by
Blackstar
on 15 Mar, 2013 10:36
-
Heard some interesting rumors about this marriage. Apparently the Europeans are less than happy with the work they've seen by the Russians. I won't go into any more detail than that, except to say that some people are apparently very worried about the level of expertise in the Russian space program.
Really, after several decades of cooperation on planetary missions they are suddenly saying this now? I would doubt the rumours.
That's okay. Feel free. I don't have a stake in it one way or another. I heard this from somebody who was equally steamed at how unreliable the Americans are. But keep in mind that in this case they are talking about a degree of cooperation that is unprecedented.
-
#26
by
Blackstar
on 15 Mar, 2013 10:40
-
And yet the Russians somehow have managed to achieve (and still are) things in space that Europeans can only dream about... I think whoever said that should check the facts first. One needs to achieve something worthwhile before he/she gets a moral right to critisize.
Er... this isn't about macho posturing or waving a flag. And I'd note that Europe's planetary science program has been a lot more active and successful in the past two decades than the Russian one.
What I heard was that there was a big meeting over technical issues and the Europeans discovered at least one really startling error in the Russians' work, the kind of thing that makes them really nervous that they're working with a team that doesn't just have quality control problems, but may have more fundamental problems than that. Take that for what it's worth.
-
#27
by
Archibald
on 15 Mar, 2013 10:48
-
there was a big meeting over technical issues and the Europeans discovered at least one really startling error in the Russians' work
An obvious question then is: can the European help the Russians correcting those mistakes ? and improving their program as a whole ?
-
#28
by
Oli
on 15 Mar, 2013 10:52
-
But the original point was to test techology for the main lander. Given the history this was reasonable. This way they won't be able to do that.
NASA would have been responsible for the rover lander, which is reasonable, given the expertise NASA has. However the last time russia landed on mars was 40 years ago, so for me it just seems to be political decision (too expensive, so lets outsource what we have outsourced before). With a team already working on EDM this seems like a nonsensical and unnecessarily risky decision to me.
Anyway, I'm sure the russians can do it
-
#29
by
Blackstar
on 15 Mar, 2013 11:01
-
An obvious question then is: can the European help the Russians correcting those mistakes ? and improving their program as a whole ?
They shouldn't have to. The goal is a cooperative program that lands a rover on Mars. The goal isn't to help the Russians improve their planetary program.
But maybe it was just a glitch and everything will be fine.
-
#30
by
GClark
on 15 Mar, 2013 11:27
-
-
#31
by
baldusi
on 15 Mar, 2013 19:02
-
But the original point was to test techology for the main lander. Given the history this was reasonable. This way they won't be able to do that.
NASA would have been responsible for the rover lander, which is reasonable, given the expertise NASA has. However the last time russia landed on mars was 40 years ago, so for me it just seems to be political decision (too expensive, so lets outsource what we have outsourced before). With a team already working on EDM this seems like a nonsensical and unnecessarily risky decision to me.
Anyway, I'm sure the russians can do it
I've gotten the impression that the Russian lander was one of the conditions for this cooperation. After all, those Protons are not cheap and why would they let ESA test EDL but not let them try to get one EDL success themselves?
BTW. I think that if the Europeans are going to land on an EDL of the Russians they are going to check every test and calculation at all the meetings. I think they might spend a fair bit extra on system engineering support.
-
#32
by
asmi
on 16 Mar, 2013 02:49
-
According to
the order, one Proton-M has been ordered for 1 509 826 000 RUR, which is about 49.2 million US dollars.
-
#33
by
Dalhousie
on 16 Mar, 2013 05:07
-
And yet the Russians somehow have managed to achieve (and still are) things in space that Europeans can only dream about... I think whoever said that should check the facts first. One needs to achieve something worthwhile before he/she gets a moral right to critisize.
Er... this isn't about macho posturing or waving a flag. And I'd note that Europe's planetary science program has been a lot more active and successful in the past two decades than the Russian one.
What I heard was that there was a big meeting over technical issues and the Europeans discovered at least one really startling error in the Russians' work, the kind of thing that makes them really nervous that they're working with a team that doesn't just have quality control problems, but may have more fundamental problems than that. Take that for what it's worth.
What sort of problem? Is the source cedible?
-
#34
by
bolun
on 08 Apr, 2013 14:10
-
Shaking ExoMars 8 April 2013
The structural model of the Entry, Descent and Landing Demonstrator Module, or EDM, of ESA’s 2016 ExoMars mission has been subjected to a series of intense shaker tests to simulate the rigours of launching into space.
EDM will be launched to Mars together with the Trace Gas Orbiter and will test key landing technologies in preparation for the 2018 ExoMars rover mission and subsequent missions to Mars.
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Shaking_ExoMarsImage credit: ESA & A. Le Floc’h
-
#35
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 08 Apr, 2013 14:16
-
I am still shaking my head at the missed opportunity to milk just a little bit more science with the ExoMars 2016 lander - you'd think they will go with something like a Beagle 2 instrument set and designed for something like a month on Mars, just like
Mars Pathfinder did. Now ESA is stuck with a 4-day Mars weather station with the EDL techniques finding no other place to go (the ExoMars rover will land on some TBD Russian EDL hardware).....
Also apparently the candidate landing site for the 2016 lander is right next to Opportunity (well actually only a few dozen km away) on Meridiani Planum, but I can't find the source right now...
-
#36
by
bolun
on 12 Apr, 2013 19:41
-
-
#37
by
bolun
on 21 May, 2013 20:37
-
-
#38
by
bolun
on 24 May, 2013 19:26
-
-
#39
by
spectre9
on 24 May, 2013 23:43
-
Why do they have to drop the parachute on Earth?
Don't they have a wind tunnel big enough in Europe?
I'm just comparing it to the MSL parachute testing.
