Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
Perseverance Rover Mars Landing 2-18-21
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="L8APEX" data-source="post: 16580410" data-attributes="member: 51947"><p>The successfulness of the MSL sky crane (rocket powered drone/ final stage of the decent system) that lowered Curiosity successfully, before cutting the suspension cables to fly off and crash I think left them a bit more <em>ballsy </em>when it comes to the landings.</p><p>They went from the smaller simple rovers that basically landed in encased in airbags like Spirit and Opportunity in the '00s that were very overbuilt and lasted 20x the original mission to very complex descent systems paired with continually larger payloads as the rovers themselves have become the size of cars and much more complex, not to mention mistakes will happen. We had a Mars climate satellite come in to shallow/hot on its insertion burn, and burn up in Mars atmosphere in the late 90's because Lockheed made it's software guidance to use imperial units and NASA was using metric in their software.</p><p>The Brits successfully landed a spacecraft a few years back (Beagle 2), but it failed to unfold all of it's "pedals" leaving it unable to communicate, dead on the surface.</p><p>Any KSP players can relate when it comes to Duna missions on the mistakes side. Failure is always an option.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="L8APEX, post: 16580410, member: 51947"] The successfulness of the MSL sky crane (rocket powered drone/ final stage of the decent system) that lowered Curiosity successfully, before cutting the suspension cables to fly off and crash I think left them a bit more [i]ballsy [/i]when it comes to the landings. They went from the smaller simple rovers that basically landed in encased in airbags like Spirit and Opportunity in the '00s that were very overbuilt and lasted 20x the original mission to very complex descent systems paired with continually larger payloads as the rovers themselves have become the size of cars and much more complex, not to mention mistakes will happen. We had a Mars climate satellite come in to shallow/hot on its insertion burn, and burn up in Mars atmosphere in the late 90's because Lockheed made it's software guidance to use imperial units and NASA was using metric in their software. The Brits successfully landed a spacecraft a few years back (Beagle 2), but it failed to unfold all of it's "pedals" leaving it unable to communicate, dead on the surface. Any KSP players can relate when it comes to Duna missions on the mistakes side. Failure is always an option. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
Perseverance Rover Mars Landing 2-18-21
Top