Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a great NASA animation of the entry of Curiosity into the Martian Atmosphere...this goes along with NightBazaar's great thread>>>>>
We will have NO communication with the probe until about an hour after touchdown.
Let's hope for success....many of our names are embedded on a disc on the rover for posterity and future archaeological efforts.
It's expected to touchdown on Sunday evening, August 5. That's only 3 short weeks off from today.
I've never quite figured why the process (albeit complicated) of entering the atmosphere to touchdown is being called SEVEN MINUTES OF TERROR! I can see it being Seven Minutes of Anxiety or Uncertainty, but Terror??? That seems a little extreme. I'm looking forward to seeing the Command Center team running around screaming with pale, frightened expressions in a stste utter shock. Perhaps the reason for "terror" is that if for some reason it all goes terribly wrong and crash lands, it could be the prospect of terror at lining up for unemployment and filling out application forms for entry level positions at McDonald's or Wal-Mart. I'll have a big bowl of buttered popcorn ready for showtime.
What's going to make the landing a nail-biter is that although it's been tested on Earth such a landing on Mars itself is untested. It has to be a flawless landing, or it's going to mean big trouble. There are no inflatable airbags to cushion the landing. It better go right. My name and that of Mrs. NightBazaar are aboard that rover and we're fully expecting a deluxe scenic tour of the area.
It's expected to touchdown on Sunday evening, August 5. That's only 3 short weeks off from today.
I've never quite figured why the process (albeit complicated) of entering the atmosphere to touchdown is being called SEVEN MINUTES OF TERROR! I can see it being Seven Minutes of Anxiety or Uncertainty, but Terror??? That seems a little extreme. I'm looking forward to seeing the Command Center team running around screaming with pale, frightened expressions in a stste utter shock. Perhaps the reason for "terror" is that if for some reason it all goes terribly wrong and crash lands, it could be the prospect of terror at lining up for unemployment and filling out application forms for entry level positions at McDonald's or Wal-Mart. I'll have a big bowl of buttered popcorn ready for showtime.
What's going to make the landing a nail-biter is that although it's been tested on Earth such a landing on Mars itself is untested. It has to be a flawless landing, or it's going to mean big trouble. There are no inflatable airbags to cushion the landing. It better go right. My name and that of Mrs. NightBazaar are aboard that rover and we're fully expecting a deluxe scenic tour of the area.
I think it's "TERROR" because half of all the probes sent to Mars have failed for one reason or another and the Skycrane is essentially an untested technology that could doom the mission.
But mostly it gets everyone's attention and builds the drama.....like TV advertising a new show.
It's cool we have our names "immortalized"
on board the Rover.
I think it's "TERROR" because half of all the probes sent to Mars have failed for one reason or another and the Skycrane is essentially an untested technology that could doom the mission.
But mostly it gets everyone's attention and builds the drama.....like TV advertising a new show.
It's cool we have our names "immortalized"
on board the Rover.
Agreed, both are valid reasons to be nervous. Adding to the list of concerns is that the distance is such that by the time it lands, it still takes time for the transmission to reach the Earth. So there's that period of time that we'll have no idea whether it's a success or failure. And, yes, it's pretty much of a catchy attention-grabber.
There are potential difficulties which could spell failure. These fall into two categories: human error, and natural obstacles. An unforeseen problem in the design, constructon, or on-board programming. It could land on a good-sized rock or rocks causing the rover to tip over on its side making it impossible to right itself back on its wheels again. If a problem is due to human error that could cause a public reaction which could slow down the prospects of future missions. If a problem is related to a natural unforeseen conditions, it's more forgivable. It's a very hard target just to get to Mars, not to mention land in a specific location.
From the images I've seen of the target area, it looks like the landing site is fairly smooth. I'd guess surface rocks may be generally small, similar in size to the rocks in the areas of the other rovers. That should be no big deal for the MSL rover. However, looks can be deceiving. I haven't seen any images that give a fairly inspection of the terrain of the landing area. There must be some images that show a bit more detail than the images most commonly seen. NASA - Revised Landing Target for Mars Rover Curiosity NASA - Image Gallery
The main reason for the skycrane landing system has to do with the size and weight of the MSL. The airbag system used by previous rovers (which are much smaller than the MSL) would burst on impact. We'll know if the landing is a success or not by the signal received. If the landing is successful as expected, the signal will be strong. If the rover ends up on its side or upside down, the signal will be much weaker because of the position of the communication disk.
Engineers that have worked on the landing system are confident that the landing will be a be a success and may pave the way for landing systems for future landings of other large equipment, especially for delivering habitats, etc., for any future manned missions. What a win or loss on Mars will mean - Cosmic Log
There are now three orbiters (Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, Odyssey Orbiter and Mars Express) around Mars that are in position to watch the MSL and relay data as it enters the atmosphere and heads for the surface. Exactly how much detail they will show and for how long is hard to say. It may just show up as a speck for a brief time or it might just be a view of the landing area. We'll have to wait and see. NASA Mars Odyssey Repositioned to Relay Mars Science Laboratory Landing Data | Mars Today - Your Daily Source of Mars News
What's going to be interesting is that the MSL is designed to climb Mt. Sharp (Aeolis Mons). Mt. Sharp towers about 3 miles above the floor of Gale Crater. The path to be followed isn't too steep, and woill give a good look at the rock layers to try to determine if there was enough water, and for how long, on Mars that might show how suitable (or not) Mars may have been for the potential of life to form, not necessarily that there is life on Mars or that life ever did form in its past. On the other hand, you never know. MSL wasn't designed to search for life. It was designed to search for evidence of conditions that could have been suitable for life. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Sharp_(Mars) APOD: 2011 July 29 - Gale Crater
What would be really cool is if the MSL could happen to catch any rock slides or water flow from the crater walls. I don't know how likely that is though at Gale Crater.
Agreed, both are valid reasons to be nervous. Adding to the list of concerns is that the distance is such that by the time it lands, it still takes time for the transmission to reach the Earth. So there's that period of time that we'll have no idea whether it's a success or failure. And, yes, it's pretty much of a catchy attention-grabber.
There are potential difficulties which could spell failure. These fall into two categories: human error, and natural obstacles. An unforeseen problem in the design, constructon, or on-board programming. It could land on a good-sized rock or rocks causing the rover to tip over on its side making it impossible to right itself back on its wheels again. If a problem is due to human error that could cause a public reaction which could slow down the prospects of future missions. If a problem is related to a natural unforeseen conditions, it's more forgivable. It's a very hard target just to get to Mars, not to mention land in a specific location.
From the images I've seen of the target area, it looks like the landing site is fairly smooth. I'd guess surface rocks may be generally small, similar in size to the rocks in the areas of the other rovers. That should be no big deal for the MSL rover. However, looks can be deceiving. I haven't seen any images that give a fairly inspection of the terrain of the landing area. There must be some images that show a bit more detail than the images most commonly seen. NASA - Revised Landing Target for Mars Rover Curiosity NASA - Image Gallery
The main reason for the skycrane landing system has to do with the size and weight of the MSL. The airbag system used by previous rovers (which are much smaller than the MSL) would burst on impact. We'll know if the landing is a success or not by the signal received. If the landing is successful as expected, the signal will be strong. If the rover ends up on its side or upside down, the signal will be much weaker because of the position of the communication disk.
Engineers that have worked on the landing system are confident that the landing will be a be a success and may pave the way for landing systems for future landings of other large equipment, especially for delivering habitats, etc., for any future manned missions. What a win or loss on Mars will mean - Cosmic Log
There are now three orbiters (Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, Odyssey Orbiter and Mars Express) around Mars that are in position to watch the MSL and relay data as it enters the atmosphere and heads for the surface. Exactly how much detail they will show and for how long is hard to say. It may just show up as a speck for a brief time or it might just be a view of the landing area. We'll have to wait and see. NASA Mars Odyssey Repositioned to Relay Mars Science Laboratory Landing Data | Mars Today - Your Daily Source of Mars News
What's going to be interesting is that the MSL is designed to climb Mt. Sharp (Aeolis Mons). Mt. Sharp towers about 3 miles above the floor of Gale Crater. The path to be followed isn't too steep, and woill give a good look at the rock layers to try to determine if there was enough water, and for how long, on Mars that might show how suitable (or not) Mars may have been for the potential of life to form, not necessarily that there is life on Mars or that life ever did form in its past. On the other hand, you never know. MSL wasn't designed to search for life. It was designed to search for evidence of conditions that could have been suitable for life. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Sharp_(Mars) APOD: 2011 July 29 - Gale Crater
What would be really cool is if the MSL could happen to catch any rock slides or water flow from the crater walls. I don't know how likely that is though at Gale Crater.
What makes this probe different from all the other Mars probes is its size and power source. Curiosity weighs in at 2,000 pounds, or about the size of a small car. It also has no solar panels. This is the first nuclear powered probe.
What makes this probe different from all the other Mars probes is its size and power source. Curiosity weighs in at 2,000 pounds, or about the size of a small car. It also has no solar panels. This is the first nuclear powered probe.
Yep, it's a hefty one. Transmission from the MSL is expected by Monday. If there's no signal, that could be a very grim sign. We'll know by then if the landing was a success or not. If the landing is a failure, it could lead to a serious direction for any surface missions to Mars in the near future. The idea is that if we can't safely land on the planet, how can we expect to send people there in the future? It's a good point. There have been more failures than successes. I'm optimistic that it'll be a flawless landing, but we still won't know for sure until that first transmission arrives. We should also receive a simple first image from the rover. Hang on to your hat!
Yep, it's a hefty one. Transmission from the MSL is expected by Monday. If there's no signal, that could be a very grim sign. We'll know by then if the landing was a success or not. If the landing is a failure, it could lead to a serious direction for any surface missions to Mars in the near future. The idea is that if we can't safely land on the planet, how can we expect to send people there in the future? It's a good point. There have been more failures than successes. I'm optimistic that it'll be a flawless landing, but we still won't know for sure until that first transmission arrives. We should also receive a simple first image from the rover. Hang on to your hat!
We encountered the same difficulties with the moon during the 1960s. Between 1958 and 1964 our first 15 attempts with the Pioneer and Ranger programs all failed to complete their lunar missions. With the last 4 Ranger probes impacting the moon at high velocity. Eventually we figured it out. Between 1969 and 1972 there has been six manned missions to the moon, so our failures were more than twice our success rate.
We can easily design a landing craft that will survive a Mars landing. We have already demonstrated that several times. However, the methods used would not be suitable for a manned mission. For example, the "bouncing ball" approach they have already used. It would certainly be an exciting ride for any of the astronauts.
The good news is that with such a low atmospheric density the entry vehicle will not get nearly as hot as it does coming through Earth's atmosphere, nor should it be as bumpy. The bad news is that the low atmospheric density will require more thrust, but that should be balanced out some by the .375 G on Mars.
It also might be prudent to make any future Mars habitat module mobile, just in case it lands in a less than desirable location.
I am somewhat surprised that Curiosity was designed to function for only one Martian year (686.98 Earth solar days). Considering that it is nuclear powered, I would have expected a longer life. It must be a very small reactor.
I am somewhat surprised that Curiosity was designed to function for only one Martian year (686.98 Earth solar days). Considering that it is nuclear powered, I would have expected a longer life. It must be a very small reactor.
I think that's been described as the "warranty", so to speak. Spirit and Opportunity were expected to last 90 Martian days. Although Spirit gave up the ghost and was declared dead in May, 2011, Opportunity still seems to be going on strong. The rovers were launched in June and July 2003. That's far longer, 9 years, than was expected. Hopefully, Curiosity will have a similar endurance that will keep it active for many years to come. Time will tell.
JPL seems to think the optimized power levels for Curiosity appears to be a minimum lifetime of 14 years. That said, there are certainly other things that could shorten that goal. It could be that even though it would still have power, it may grow too weak for continued mobility.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agreed, both are valid reasons to be nervous. Adding to the list of concerns is that the distance is such that by the time it lands, it still takes time for the transmission to reach the Earth. So there's that period of time that we'll have no idea whether it's a success or failure. And, yes, it's pretty much of a catchy attention-grabber.
How The Rover Will Phone Home
