Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 517 posts

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#301

Post by m4rtink »

nitrogen wrote: post #97
raphaelj wrote: post #47

NASA's ability of succeeding at landing things successfully on the first try on foreign bodies since 1969 is mind-blowing. Meanwhile, SpaceX takes half a dozen tries before managing to do the same on a fully known environment on Earth.

NASA's ability of succeeding at landing things successfully on the first try on foreign bodies since 1969 is mind-blowing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter > The spacecraft encountered Mars on a trajectory that brought it too close to the planet, and it was either destroyed in the atmosphere or escaped the planet's vicinity and entered an orbit around the sun. An investigation attributed the failure…

Mars Observer is mad that you forgot to mention it! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Observer

Actually it is not mad - becase it exploded into millions of pieces due to the leaky fuel system...

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#302

Post by [deleted] »

mu_killnine wrote: post #31

The Nasa person they have helping narrate what's going on is so genuinely happy the landing went well. It made me kinda tear up. It's infectious just how excited all these people are about this project. Also, I was a bit worried he was going to pass out. 10/10, would watch again (and probably will with my kids)

[deleted]

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#304

Post by aaron695 »

I don't get why they had to bring the children into this asking questions constantly. Do we really want to reinforce this is just for children?

SpaceX doesn't do this. They are always top quality. Adults doing professional things in space, that to me is more inspiring to children and young adults.

Can't they have an adult stream and one dumbed down for the children if they really think these things should be dumbed down.

It was better than ESA I guess

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#305

Post by m4rtink »

mempko wrote: post #219
jaegerpicker wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX has a very different set of risk tolerances and approaches. Nasa is a government funded entity and the tolerance for failure (rightly or wrongly) is very low according to every thing I've read. SpaceX being private has a much larger cushion for failure. Elon will keep funding it far longer than congress would Nasa is my guess. If SpaceX loses some rockets that's the cost of business, of course once those missi…

You have it exactly backwards. Risk tolerance is higher for the government. Fox example, SpaceX would never just send a rocket to mars just to do science which would bring it zero profits. It won't take risk funding something where the science may or may not bear any fruit. Also, SpaceX IS mostly funded by NASA anyway as a government contractor. SpaceX exists because the government wanted to create a private space ma…

Main reason for Red Dragon not happening was NASA requesting parachute landing into the ocean instead of the previously planned propulsive landing on land for Dragon 2.

This would mean that SpaceX would need to develop and fund Dragon 2 propulsive landing on their own, with only real mission fully requiring it being Red Dragon.

In the end it was much easier to just drop the whole thing, especially with the much more perspective Starship on the horizon.

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#306

Post by jbd28 »

Daho0n wrote: post #250
Ftuuky wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not american but still enjoyed the landing very much. They sent a freaking nuclear-powered jeep to the surface of another planet, they can gloat all they want.

I'm not saying anything bad about the landing. It was a great feat. I just find the chanting often done in US videos disgusting.

Too bad for you to just be happy for these government employees then. USA! USA!

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#307

Post by Melkman »

mulmen wrote: post #269
spaetzleesser wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should make km the default unit and not miles....

Ever been on an airplane? Altitude was almost certainly measured in kilofeet. As noted in other comments, NASA (like the rest of the United States [1]) does use the metric system. But it doesn’t matter. Nothing about the metric system makes it uniquely suitable to landing on Mars. Or space travel in general. What matters is a consistent standard. Internally NASA could use Armstrongs. Where 1 is the weight or height o…

Consistency is not the only value of a system of units. Convenience is also of importance. And that is where the metric system shines. Having all measures of a unit in multiples 10 combines perfectly with our decimal calculations. Having as few as possible magical numbers to convert and combine between units makes making mistakes harder. How many calories in kinetic energy has a pound going 10 miles per hour ? I know a kilo going 10 meters per second has 50 joules of kinetic energy without looking up anything and doing the calculation in my head.

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#308

Post by frabbit »

koheripbal wrote: post #165
tectonic wrote: post #14

You can also watch an EDL visualization in your browser: https://eyes.nasa.gov/apps/mars2020/#/home And read about how it will use Terrain Relative Navigation to find a safe landing spot: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/a-neil-armstrong-for-mars-land... Perseverance is phenomenally complex, its Sample Caching System alone contains 3,000+ parts and two robotic arms. So exited for all the sciencing this nuclear-powered,…

Any idea when they will start experimentation? I want to find microbial life!

What is it about that that excites you so much?

Is it the idea that life could originate elsewhere and that there might really be aliens?

Or is it the idea that Mars could support some sort of colony?

Or the hope of completely novel microbiology?

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#309

Post by mulmen »

dieortin wrote: post #296
mulmen wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever been on an airplane? Altitude was almost certainly measured in kilofeet. As noted in other comments, NASA (like the rest of the United States [1]) does use the metric system. But it doesn’t matter. Nothing about the metric system makes it uniquely suitable to landing on Mars. Or space travel in general. What matters is a consistent standard. Internally NASA could use Armstrongs. Where 1 is the weight or height o…

It does matter. See the errors caused in the past by using the imperial system. The metric system has a number of advantages.

The errors were not caused by the imperial system. The errors were caused by using the imperial system and the metric system. Specifically in expecting one system and getting the other.

Re: Perseverance Rover lands on Mars [video]

#310

Post by mulmen »

Melkman wrote: post #307
mulmen wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever been on an airplane? Altitude was almost certainly measured in kilofeet. As noted in other comments, NASA (like the rest of the United States [1]) does use the metric system. But it doesn’t matter. Nothing about the metric system makes it uniquely suitable to landing on Mars. Or space travel in general. What matters is a consistent standard. Internally NASA could use Armstrongs. Where 1 is the weight or height o…

Consistency is not the only value of a system of units. Convenience is also of importance. And that is where the metric system shines. Having all measures of a unit in multiples 10 combines perfectly with our decimal calculations. Having as few as possible magical numbers to convert and combine between units makes making mistakes harder. How many calories in kinetic energy has a pound going 10 miles per hour ? I know…

If working with simple units of ten is beneficial then every mission should redefine units in terms of expected velocities and vehicle size so they are optimized for the actual calculations at hand.

That's not realistic, obviously, so we just pick one. The units in the system are arbitrary, really.

In reality regardless of the system you choose every calculation is going to end up with fractions of something. You aren't just going to do it in your head.

Post reply on HN