51–60 of 150 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea good point. Apparently the blade tip speed on Ingenuity is Mach 0.6-0.7!
Interesting note about this: the speed of sound on Mars is only ~70% of that on Earth, due to less atmospheric density. Might change your Mach numbers!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If I remembered correctly they used a space hardened Power cpu If you're remembering correctly, then I'm misremembering in that this has essentially a Snapdragon chip and not a rad hardened CPU at all
Maybe I am misremembering the interview. Maybe the person said that they used to use a hardened IBM power chip?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingenuity_(helicopter)#Avionic...
We will use more helicopters instead of rovers for new missions ? Or larger crafts would be much harder or riskier to use ? Or maybe have a helicopter that can move the rover with the equipment to different locations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a problem of scaling this up to say a 20kg payload? I’m not an aeronautical engineer, so I guess what I’m asking is if there is some problem scaling up flying machines in an extremely thin atmosphere?
I don't know the answer to your question, but for context here are the weights of Mars rovers: Sojourner (1997): 11 kg Spirit & Opportunity (2004): 185 kg Curiosity (2011): 899 kg Perseverance (2020): 1,025 kg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think you’re supposed to hold your breathe when lifting…
Just like your not supposed to puff your cheeks when playing an instrument, but that never stopped Dizzy Gillespie. More of a suggestion than a rule
We will use more helicopters instead of rovers for new missions ? Or larger crafts would be much harder or riskier to use ? Or maybe have a helicopter that can move the rover with the equipment to different locations.
Didn't this use mostly off the shelf parts? If so, I wonder how this will impact costs on future missions. If they can do more with consumer hardware, they can save budget to apply toward more science.
The original Elon Musk biography describes how a legacy aerospace engineer joined spacex and was tasked with a part: > He got a quote back for $120,000. “Elon laughed,” Davis said. “He said, 'That part is no more complicated than a garage door opener. Your budget is five thousand dollars. Go make it work.’”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a thin atmosphere, lifting a heavier payload needs bigger rotors or increased RPM, which increases power demands and structural stress. The challenge is to keep the vehicle light enough to fly while also making it sturdy enough to carry the payload and survive environments.
Why can’t “more rotors” be another solution?