141–150 of 210 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess would be that the rotor struck the ground during landing.
If I'm interpreting the picture correctly, it does look like there is a gouge on the ground in the pic showing the shadow
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They mentioned during the media briefing that the terrain they were flying in were featureless, which is extremely challenging for it to determine where it's at, and thus it's possible that it misidentified some aspect of the terrain and caused this. Unfortunately because communication was lost when it landed, the flight data was lost, so we will never know for sure what happened.
It doesn't save flight data until it receives confirmation of download?
And by "disk" I mean non-volatile flash memory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't save flight data until it receives confirmation of download?
During flight, high-rate flight data is written to volatile RAM, and 1HZ data is telemetered to Perseverance. The high-rate data is not written to disk until landing, because writing to disk is slow and CPU-intensive. There was a brownout during or just before landing, and sadly that meant the high-rate telemetry data was lost because it was never written to disk. And by "disk" I mean non-volatile flash memory.
Thanks for the info.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
During flight, high-rate flight data is written to volatile RAM, and 1HZ data is telemetered to Perseverance. The high-rate data is not written to disk until landing, because writing to disk is slow and CPU-intensive. There was a brownout during or just before landing, and sadly that meant the high-rate telemetry data was lost because it was never written to disk. And by "disk" I mean non-volatile flash memory.
Okay, so we do have a subset of the flight data. Thanks for the info.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 1993, to Richard Garriott, for just $68,000: https://www.space.com/8073-privately-owned-soviet-moon-rover...
But technically Russia might not have owned title to it in the first place. Sounds almost like an NFT before NFTs existed: -- Space lawyer, Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz (University of Mississippi) said: without reading the papers or knowing how they were processed and by whom, she can't speak to the validity of the ownership of a space object purchased at auction. "However, a contention that buying a space object that la…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They chucked a lot of stuff--anything intended for surface use went out the airlock. The cost per pound to bring something back from the moon was higher than the cost per pound of basically anything they brought.
Depends. If the primary point was to put a man on the moon, the cost of bringing things back is basically free. If on the other hand the primary mission was bringing back as many rocks as possible, then yes, the return would be very expensive.
No, because they'd still have to pay to bring all the extra fuel to get the junk back up off the moon and back to Earth. And before that spend the cost of that extra fuel getting it up there. When every pound is like thousands of dollars it really adds up.
Was the singular focus on the Wright Brothers' contributions to flight and ingenuity a fair one? I had thought there was some shift in the Wright Brothers' attribution to flight in general. It seemed like better recognition of the contributions by Samuel Langley and Glenn Curtiss' to flight technology were along with acknowledgement of the WB's own efforts to boost their legacy might have checked a decision to keep p…
It was not about the contribution but about the moment. The Wright brothers achieved the first powered flight on earth and Ingenuity achieved the first powered flight on another planet. I think people are well aware that it's neither the Wright brothers nor ingenuity as a singular entity that did what ultimately concluded in that achievement but rather the scientific effort of humanity as a whole.
If it was the scientific effort of humanity as a whole, then it seems like the director would have simply compared it to the profound effort toward manned flight.
After all, we have Langley Air Force Base and NASA’s own Langley Research Center.
They should auction it off. For pickup only, of course. I'd like to own the first helicopter on Mars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mars has weather, unlike the moon. Will the samples really still be there a decade or two from now?
Mars' famous dust storms aren't so good at causing damage, because the air's really, really thin, so they can't pick up heavy particles even with high wind speeds. A serious problem if you need to keep grit out of fine machinery or electronics, not so much if you're worried about erosion (I mean, yeah, eventually it'd be a problem, but it's slow-motion compared to the erosion of something exposed to sand storms on Ea…
Well at least intentionally faked. It turns out Martian regolith/soil is also much more moist than expected so getting water will be relatively easy, but at the time of the book this wasn't known!