51–60 of 135 posts
The XKCD already updated the live comic about this subject [1]. All panels are available at its sister wiki [2] In my opinion it is a beautiful work of art, pushing the limits of what the media allow the artist to do (the media in this case being comic strips in the webcomic format. [1] https://xkcd.com/1446/ [2] https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1446:_Landing/All...
The XKCD already updated the live comic about this subject [1]. All panels are available at its sister wiki [2] In my opinion it is a beautiful work of art, pushing the limits of what the media allow the artist to do (the media in this case being comic strips in the webcomic format. [1] https://xkcd.com/1446/ [2] https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1446:_Landing/All...
Looks like there's an error on that page, and it's only showing a static image.
The second link, that's the one that has all the panels.
The hi-res image shows how just how unlucky a landing spot this was. http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2016/09/OSIRIS_narro...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philae_(spacecraft)#/media/Fil...
Now to the hard part: Bringing our boy back home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IIRC, the designers had little idea what kind of surface the comet would have. Could be ice, could be rocks, could be dust. What kind of landing gear + fixation gear would have been better?
INANE (I Am Not A NASA Engineer), but perhaps 4 or better yet more legs arranged in a tetrahedron or analogous polyhedron would better ensure the lander did not get stuck inside a crevasse; an inner rotating body could then bring the lander into a working position. The more the legs, the higher the chance the lander could 'roll' to a lower ground when initially bouncing off the surface, but the optimal number of legs…
The hi-res image shows how just how unlucky a landing spot this was. http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2016/09/OSIRIS_narro...
I'm surprised at how rugged the surface looks in these high-res images. Especially compared to the imagined flat landing areas we were used to seeing in the run up to the landing [1]. Just shows how difficult a task it was to land and keep the craft the right way up. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philae_(spacecraft)#/media/Fil...
The XKCD already updated the live comic about this subject [1]. All panels are available at its sister wiki [2] In my opinion it is a beautiful work of art, pushing the limits of what the media allow the artist to do (the media in this case being comic strips in the webcomic format. [1] https://xkcd.com/1446/ [2] https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1446:_Landing/All...
Thank you! To those who didn't click on the second link, you really should. It is like a journal of the lander, except in webcomic format.
"At 2.7 km, the resolution of the OSIRIS narrow-angle camera is about 5 cm/pixel, sufficient to reveal characteristic features of Philae’s 1 m-sized body and its legs, as seen in these definitive pictures." I looked at the pictures and the human eye can barely see the lander. Considering that the chances of losing these landers is not that low, I don't understand why they don't make them visually more distinctive. An…
My entirely uneducated guess is that a layer of paint would impede the cooling of electronics that depend on the housing to dissipate heat.Paint would also absorb more solar heat than plain metal.
I suspect there's a lot of re-thinking of how to land on a comet going on as well.
#/media/File:Rosetta%27s_Philae_on_Comet_67P_Churyumov-Gerasimenko.jpg){kind=link}