MSL in the Media Options

[Drkskywxlt]

Thought it would be interesting to get a sense of how MSL is being covered in the popular media, particularly since the board's residents cover so many different cities and countries!

CNN covered the landing live, which I was pleased to see. NBC has also had some semi-regular coverage on the evening news for the last few days. The NBC Today Show this morning mentioned the rear hazcam anomaly and how the crazies on the internet are abuzz over it (also mentioned the likely true cause/s of the "blob").

[Tesheiner]

Landing was the top news on the main spanish newspapers on their web version, remaining on that position through the whole day over any other kind of news. Articles were (and still are) very professional which is something I'm quite pleased.

[SFJCody]

The 2005 image of a Martian sunset taken by Spirit is doing the rounds on facebook and twitter as a Martian sunrise imaged by Curiosity.

[Drkskywxlt]

CSPAN has also been carrying JPL's daily press conferences live, which is a nice surprise (even if nobody really watches CSPAN!).

[stevesliva]

The NBC Today Show this morning mentioned the rear hazcam anomaly and how the crazies on the internet are abuzz over it (also mentioned the likely true cause/s of the "blob").

Well, thank goodness for the moderation here, because I was unaware, but I'm unsurprised. Easy to forget that the attention brings a tidal wave of... imaginative people.

[dvandorn]

I just caught a special entitled "Mega Mars Rover" on the National Geographic channel. It was a workmanlike piece in terms of the documentary style, focusing on the design and fabrication stages of the MSL project, following through launch and with coverage of the actual landing prepared at the very last minute and slotted in to its assigned places in the script.

It featured some very good interviews with people like Adam Steltzner and Rob Manning, following issues like the main parachute testing crises and the failure of the dry-lube concept. It was also well-crafted for such a documentary, beginning with scenes from the actual landing (controllers reporting key EDL milestones, celebrating after landing is confirmed, etc.) and then going back to the beginning of the project to illustrate how all those people jumping up and down and hugging in the control room got to that special moment in their lives, and the epic struggles they all went through in the process.

The only thing I didn't so much care for was what seemd to be a lot of screen and voiceover time from Gentry Lee. I understand the guy was involved in the MSL program during its design phase, and I do respect him as an engineer. There is just something about the guy that makes me uncomfortable -- sort of like I would never want to have a casual conversation with him, 'cause I'd be afraid that any intelligent observations I might make would end up in his next conversation with someone else, rebranded as his own ideas. That could just be my own take, though, YMMV. It's not like I've ever actually met the man.

The high point of the piece, for me, was a series of incredibly high-quality CGI graphics of EDL which landed Curiosity inside a very good simulation of Gale Crater, though along the rim of the Victoria-sized crater in the eastern side of the landing ellipse. This was a higher quality CGI graphics version of MSL's EDL than I have ever seen before; they obviously spent a lot of time and money on getting the details correct.

In addition to the standard EDL and skycrane images, they prepared these same high-quality animations of various alternate scenarios of the landing sequence, using different landing techniques or illustrating perils of the skycrane technique, including:

- dropping MSL in airbags and watching it splatter into thousands of pieces upon impact;

- landing MSL on a legged landing stage onto a moderate slope, such that the top-heavy lander configuration flipped over a few times;

- landing MSL on the skycrane, having the bridle cut fail, and as the descent stage flies away little Curiosity gets dragged along with it, pieces breaking off as it slips over the rim of a crater and out of sight, except for bits and pieces flying up and then the big puff of cloud as the descent stage augurs in, apparently right on top of the rover.

Of course, they also had multi-angle views of a nominal EDL and skycrane maneuver, including an animation of heat shield separation above Gale that was scarily near-identical to the MARDI view. The only thing that wasn't realistic about the animation of the landing itself (besides being a good deal east of the actual landing point) was the lack of much dust being kicked up by the descent stage motors. Then again, no one was expecting the kind of surface disturbance we actually did see.

On the whole, a very well done piece for an "instant documentary" on a breaking news event.

-the other Doug

[RoverDriver]

...
The only thing I didn't so much care for was what seemd to be a lot of screen and voiceover time from Gentry Lee. I understand the guy was involved in the MSL program during its design phase, and I do respect him as an engineer. There is just something about the guy that makes me uncomfortable -- sort of like I would never want to have a casual conversation with him, 'cause I'd be afraid that any intelligent observations I might make would end up in his next conversation with someone else, rebranded as his own ideas. That could just be my own take, though, YMMV. It's not like I've ever actually met the man.
...

I haven't seen the documentary you are talking about but among the various reviewers of my work Gentry Lee was one of them. I was definitely uncomfortable in front of him simply because he can spot problems and issues very well. If there is a flaw in your work he will very likely find it and he will point it out without sugar coating it. I find this a great quality although it can be quite intimidating when you are under his scrutiny. I never heard him selling some one else ideas as his own nor I ever heard someone complaining about it.

Paolo

[dvandorn]

Ah, the voice of someone who actually knows the man. I'll never argue with superior information to my own.

Thinking about it, my own reactions to Mr. Lee probably come from him having the arrogance to think he could write sequels to A.C. Clarke's "Rendezvous with Rama" and putting out what struck me as not excellent sf in the Clarke style but inferior pot-boilers reminiscent of Jacqueline Susanne's work, just not as well written. As an old Clarke fan, I suppose I would regard with mistrust anyone who would try and take up Sir Arthur's mantle, and the attempts I have made to read Mr. Lee's works have always bogged down in disgust. (Again, while I've done film criticism professionally, I'm not a literary critic, so I'll say once more that YMMV. There's no accounting for some peoples' tastes -- including my own.)

I did find one short sequence in "Mega Mars Rover" involving Mr. Lee quite interesting. It was what looked like a design review meeting of some stripe, with John Grotzinger chairing the meeting and Gentry Lee pushing hard on some point or another (the only part of the discussion shown was Lee insisting that the design specs are one thing but what they're discussing now is something else again), and Grotzinger saying he's extremely unhappy and pointing at Lee as he said it. The editing of the discussion made it impossible to tell whether Grotzinger was upset at Lee for pursuing with great energy something that Grotzinger didn't want to pursue, or if Lee was pointing out some problem in planning that no one else had perceived up to this point.

-the other Doug

[nprev]

Gentry Lee, BTW, is the Chief Engineer for the JPL Solar System Exploration Directorate, so I would fully expect him to be a quite active participant in such meetings as critical design reviews & risk analysis for all such projects; that's the core of his job.

These activities are encouraged--in fact, expected--to be gloves off in order to ensure that as many potential flaws in design or latent systemic problems are revealed as possible. They can get ugly; I've heard them referred to as "murder boards". But it's absolutely necessary for mission assurance, for obvious reasons.

In any case, we're not here to perform personal (and definitely not literary) criticism...

[djellison]

Having now seen Mars Landing 2012:The New Search for Life ( from Discovery ) And Martian Mega Rover ( from NatGeo ) - I am appalled at Discovery, and Mark Davis just did exactly what I expected for Nat Geo.

I could sit here and type 50 things wrong with the animation in the Mark Davis documentary - but it doesn't matter..the story they told, and how they told it were real, accurate and fascinating.

Discovery were treating it all like a reality show - and got the story itself wrong, and told it in a patronizing, superficial way.

So - full marks for NatGeo. Discovery...yeah - not so much.


Also - Gentry was not in it a lot - not at all. And what others have said about him is right. He is sharp, quick, and finds holes, errors and gaps in engineering very very very quickly. He is, in short, brilliant.

[dvandorn]

I could sit here and type 50 things wrong with the animation in the Mark Davis documentary - but it doesn't matter..the story they told, and how they told it were real, accurate and fascinating.

Yeah -- for example, the approach shots had the sun on completely the wrong side of Mars. But you're absolutely right, the animations felt extraordinary accurate overall. I was highly impressed.

-the other Doug

[djellison]

Just a few examples....
There were only two FHAZ's
The descent stage prop tanks had gold insulation, not silver.
There were only 4 EMB's not 6
There was no RTG thermal cover
Glass window over the MastCAMs (when there isn't one)
No glass cover over the ChemCam (when there is one)
Cruise stage was just enlarged MER with 4 solar arrays segments, not 6.
Parachute colors pattern is 3/4's missing
Powered Descent Vehicle dances left and right. It's actually a rock steady divert maneuver.
Descent stage flyaway is to the right (it could only fly away foreword or backward)
Descent stage flyaway is straight towards the science goals ( intentionally - it would go which ever way, fwd/bwd, was most away from science)
Entry animations had it being about 6am local time, not 2pm.


BUT - like I said - that doesn't matter. They painted an accurate picture and told a real story. Discovery just told the story they wanted to, regardless of how much that did or didn't have to do with the actual mission.

D

[dvandorn]

Discovery just told the story they wanted to, regardless of how much that did or didn't have to do with the actual mission.

By the Discovery piece, I'm assuming you mean the special that ran on Science the evening of 8/6 and was re-run several times during the week?

Yeah -- that piece didn't appear to be structured in any useful way. It reminded me of a local TV station's news truck going out to JPL and grabbing interviews with whoever wanders by for their views on the landing. There was nothing there you didn't get by watching the landing coverage and the post-landing presser. And the smiling hosts reminded me of the educational programming they run on NASA TV aimed at eight-year-olds with a second grade reading level. Useful for grade schools, maybe, but well under par for their normal space programming.

-the other Doug

[lyford]

Discovery just told the story they wanted to, regardless of how much that did or didn't have to do with the actual mission.

I have come to expect very little from "The Bigfoot Channel."

[Drkskywxlt]

MSL made the NBC Nightly news again last night as they showed clips of the President's congratulatory call to JPL.