MSL should have a digging arm

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

centsworth_II

Guest
<font color="yellow">"The landing for MSL appears far too complicated & I am not sure that it will land successfully."</font><br /><br />It seems to me that the desent rocket portion is like the Viking and<br />lunar landers, and the tether portion is just like the Pathfinder and MER.<br />Apparently, putting the decent rockets above the lander makes<br />for greater stability. So... in theory, this takes the best parts of the <br />Viking and MER systems and puts them together to make an even better<br />system. So, what's to worry?<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
"would be far happier if both Mars Phoenix Lander & MSL were using airbags, although MSL is maybe too heavy!!! "<br /><br />Air bags have been used only 3 times. (beagle does count). Powered landing have worked more that 10 (maybe 20) times (lncluding lunar landings). Airbags wouldn't work for Phoenix since the lander and airbags would interfere with access to the dirt for the arm
 
3

3488

Guest
Hi.<br /><br />I am just very concerned. Like everyone here, I soooo<br />much want both Mars Phoenix Lander &<br /> Mars Science Laboratory to succeed.<br /><br />True, the Viking landers & the pre Apollo Surveyors (not to mention Apollo themselves) <br />used powered descent.<br /><br />Beagle 2, is a strange one. No one really knows what happened. <br />One theory was that the martian atmosphere, was warmer & therefore less dense<br />than normal (both Spirit & Opportunity met less resistance<br />than expected) & as a result, Beagle 2 smacked into Isidis Planitia too fast.<br /><br />However, MRO has scanned the landing site & a large area within the landing ellipse<br />with the HiRISE & found nothing.<br /><br />It has been suggested that Beagle 2 missed Mars altogether <br />(the seperation from Mars Express was slightly flawed) & ended up in Heliocentric orbit.<br /><br />Perhaps if & when MRO can scan the enitre landing ellipse in Isidis Planitia, we will know for sure <br />(Beagle 2 could have landed very long).<br /><br />Regarding airbags, the three used by NASA to Mars (Mars Pathfinder, MER A Spirit & <br />MER B Opportunity)have worked.<br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>odds are the MSL rover will use nuclear RTG power instead of solar power panels.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>dont get too excited. i think its already decided that MSL will have MMRTG onboard, producing somewhere in the neighborhood of .. 110 watts or so at the beginning of the mission.<br />Thats roughly the same as MER's have available at peak <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Suppose we have MSL use <font color="yellow"><i>both</i></font>/i> RTG and solar power. Given the space available for solar panels, it could probably collect a lot of power. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
None can be spared. Also, there isn't as much acreage as you think.
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
<dont get too excited. i think its already decided that MSL will have MMRTG onboard, producing somewhere in the neighborhood of .. 110 watts or so at the beginning of the mission. Thats roughly the same as MER's have available at peak ><br /><br />Don't be so skeptical. This image gives an idea of the relative power of the MSL vs the MER...<br /><br />http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/gallery/spacecraft/images/wheels_side.jpg<br /><br />There are only 14 kgs of batteries to power the MER, the MSL batteries in comparison should be enormous. The solar power for the MER to recharge it's batteries peaks at 140 watts for only 4 hours per day at best. The MMRTG of the MSL will provide continuous power as high as 123 watts for 24.5 hours per day. Nor will the MSL have to waste battery power at night to keep from getting too cold, unlike the MER which sometimes must supplement it's radioactive heater units with electrical heating.<br /><br />If the wheels on the MER eat 100 watts of electric power to operate, I'm guessing the MSL takes at least 300 watts. So the MSL is a powerhouse.
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
<...it appears to be laike the RAT & microscopic imager as on the MERs, rather than as a trenching arm as on Viking 1 & Viking 2. The arm that MSL will have will be much less energy intensive, as it will not ' dig & lift' soil as the Viking landers did.><br /><br />Spinning just one of the MSL wheels should provide some impressive trenching capability, maybe even as good as a digging arm.<br />
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
MSL only operates for less than a 1/3 of a sol. <br /><br />2 batteries at 8 amp hrs at EOL<br /><br /><br />
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
That is what the MERs do as did Sojourner. However, you can't go very deep that way. If you want to go more than a couple centimeters, you need to dig for real. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
Are you saying it won't be able to operate at night or when it is not on the side of Mars facing Earth? I would expect it would only need lights to operate at night time (so the cameras can see). Better levels of automation should help with the rest. Some things could be very autonomous. Those could include digging (until you hit something that won't budge anyway), positioning sensor arms, and taking pictures. Finally, given that MSL is much larger than the MERs, it should be able to drive farther and faster on its own. If nothing else, a rock that would force a MER to go around might be ignored by MSL. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
<However, you can't go very deep [by wheel trenching]. If you want to go more than a couple centimeters, you need to dig for real. ><br /><br />A couple centimeters? The MER wheels are 10 inches in diameter, the MSL wheels look to be 20 inches in diameter. Trenching down to half the diameter of the wheel shouldn't be a problem. That's a heck of a lot more than one inch deep!<br /><br />The MER has trenched as deep as four inches...<br /><br />http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/2004/62.cfm<br /><br />...so the MSL should be able to go at least as deep as 8 inches.<br /><br />If you want to go very much deeper than 8 inches with the limited power available on Mars, you would be better off with a drill than a digging arm. The Mars Phoenix Lander digging arm will go no deeper than 20 inches...<br /><br />http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/future/phoenix.html <br /><br /><br />Trenching should provide plenty of digging capability for the MSL.
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
"re you saying it won't be able to operate at night or when it is not on the side of Mars facing Earth? I would expect it would only need lights to operate at night time (so the cameras can see)."<br />1. It not going to work at night. Doesn't make sense if it is only going to work less than 1/3 of a sol<br />2. Lights need power. The reason for only working a partial day is for battery recharging<br />3. Science instruments will be processing at night
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>1. It not going to work at night. Doesn't make sense if it is only going to work less than 1/3 of a sol<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Your logic there is circular. Why are you assuming it would work only 1/3 of a Sol? The reasons you listed below that? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
My logic is not circular.<br /><br />I am not assuming, it IS only going to work 1/3 of a sol.
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
Because I know it is only going to work 1/3 of a sol. There is no "if" only an "is" <br /><br />You figure it out. Simple answer
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
I just came from the jpl open house and I asked about trenching. Turns out the MER is even better at trenching than I thought, having trenched as deep as 1.5 wheel diameters. <br /><br />If the MSL can do as well then that would equal a trenching depth of 30 inches, or 1.5 times deeper than what the digging arm of the Mars Phoenix Lander is supposed to do. So the the MSL doesn't need a Phoenix Lander style digging arm.
 
3

3488

Guest
It is worth remebering that the MERs have both been effective at trenching, by locking five wheels,<br />& driving only one. <br /><br />The Vking Landers & Mars Phoenix Lander are static landers, hence the need <br />for trenching arms.<br /><br />MSL only needs to do like wise. Also MSL is heavier, & more powerful, hence <br />potentially deeper trenches. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
 
N

no_way

Guest
btw, does anyone know if MSL will employ RAD750 cpu ( as does MRO ) or is it powered by the upcoming BAE next gen product ? ( MERs and Phoenix use RAD6000, which is previous gen and significantly slower )
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
Not sure if it matters much, but since the Martian atmosphere blocks at least a little radiation, a ground probe might not need as much radiation shielding -- once there. En route, radiation would still be a hazard. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
What did you do? Travel into the future and watch it work for its entire lifespan? If so, please make sure the JPL engineers know about any problems you saw it run into. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
  • Locked
If Korolev had lived long enough, would the N1 have been a success?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Our Solar System
JonClarke
J
W
  • Locked
Where to comment on the Mythbuster's Lunar Landing hoax episode
Replies
0
Views
820
Our Solar System
willpittenger
W
J
  • Locked
What if Mars Surveyor 2001 had not been cancelled?
Replies
2
Views
822
Our Solar System
JonClarke
J
W
  • Locked
Thickness of skins on lunar landers and pressurized rovers
Replies
4
Views
1K
Our Solar System
vulture4
V
W
  • Locked
Will MPL2 or MSL be able to steer away from boulders?
Replies
2
Views
624
Our Solar System
Cygnus_2112
C

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom