Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Unmanned Spaceflight.com _ MSL _ The size of MSL

Posted by: Stu Apr 5 2009, 12:44 AM

Cute YouTube vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7kBTZAGhbs


Posted by: BrianL Apr 5 2009, 02:07 PM

But also an excellent example of why people should be required to pass a test and obtain their photographer's license before being allowed to own and operate a camera. I think I need a Gravol. biggrin.gif

Posted by: lyford Apr 5 2009, 05:43 PM

I think the camera operator was training to film Cloverfield. rolleyes.gif

But its great to see all three from different perspectives. Maybe I need tohttp://www.macworld.com/article/138480/2009/01/imovie_09_image_stabilization.html

(It's amazing how often this forum will spark contemplation an upgrade purchase as the result of just one image, video or program. I'm looking at you, mhoward. )


Edited for clarity.

Posted by: stevesliva Apr 5 2009, 07:38 PM

QUOTE (Stu @ Apr 4 2009, 08:44 PM) *
Cute YouTube vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7kBTZAGhbs


The Briton in you should approve of the choice of Holst for the soundtrack. And I find the appropriateness of Holst's subtitle to be a bit amusing. MSL, bringer of war.

Posted by: mhoward Apr 5 2009, 07:52 PM

MSL, Bringer of War? Well, it does have a friggin' laser beam attached to it, of course.

Lyford: totally not my fault. I can't be held responsible if the team rocks by releasing so much data ;-)

Posted by: nprev Apr 15 2009, 03:31 AM

From the JPL homepage today. Big rig, big chute:


http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA11981.jpg

Posted by: ElkGroveDan Apr 15 2009, 04:51 AM

Great the only color they gave it was the color of Mars. How is HIRISE going to be able to see that during EDL? They should have made it neon green with a giant happy face painted on it. THEN it would be easy to spot.

Posted by: nprev Apr 15 2009, 05:16 AM

...Yeah! blink.gif Great idea, Dan!

Why DON'T they make Mars chutes in contrasting colors? There's some opportunistic science to be had (like rate of dust deposition) aside from the coolness factor. It must have something to do with cost, performance or even mass considerations, I'd guess, though the only thing I can think of is added manufacturing expense.

Posted by: MahFL Apr 15 2009, 02:23 PM

I think the chute is erm mostly white ?

Posted by: nprev Apr 16 2009, 12:13 AM

Yeah, but there's a lot of light-colored dusty terrain; not much contrast there. Dan is right: neon green or blinding blue or something else that would really contrast with the vast majority of the Martian landscape is the ticket.

Posted by: Stu Apr 16 2009, 05:29 AM

Careful... these "neon glowing parachutes" are just a hop, skip and a jump away from putting adverts on the parachutes... how much would MacDonalds pay to have its "M" on MSL's parachute, to be imaged on Mars' surface by HiRISE after landing, as the first off-planet advert...

Hmmm... not sure if that would be a good thing or a bad thing...

Discuss! smile.gif

Posted by: djellison Apr 16 2009, 08:13 AM

White works smile.gif

Posted by: AndyG Apr 16 2009, 10:56 AM

Stu,

2.3G$

...is McDonald's annual profits and MSL's likely cost. laugh.gif

Andy

Posted by: cbcnasa Apr 16 2009, 02:53 PM

Wasn't NASA considering putting advertising somewhere? I recall something being mentioned about that. pancam.gif

Posted by: Astro0 Apr 16 2009, 10:50 PM

You may be thinking about Beagle 2. I don't know if it was being seriously considered.

BBC News Online story 27 Nov 1998 "Getting the message across - on Mars": The BBC 9o'clock news last night reported the advertising potential of Beagle 2, with Science Correspondent James Wilkinson suggesting the airbags which cushion the lander as it hits the surface could carry company logos.

Posted by: SteveM Apr 26 2009, 09:18 PM

QUOTE (nprev @ Apr 15 2009, 12:16 AM) *
...Yeah! blink.gif Great idea, Dan!

Why DON'T they make Mars chutes in contrasting colors? There's some opportunistic science to be had (like rate of dust deposition) aside from the coolness factor. It must have something to do with cost, performance or even mass considerations, I'd guess, though the only thing I can think of is added manufacturing expense.

I imagine that (besides tradition) the cost of qualifying a relatively untested neon-green fabric for the critical entry mission may also have something to do with it.

Steve M

Posted by: mcaplinger Apr 26 2009, 11:51 PM

QUOTE (SteveM @ Apr 26 2009, 01:18 PM) *
I imagine that (besides tradition) the cost of qualifying a relatively untested neon-green fabric for the critical entry mission may also have something to do with it.

Not the fabric so much (it's just normal nylon and polyester AFAIK) but the dye process. Dyeing nylon requires heat, and I suspect qualifying the process without a critical engineering reason to do so wasn't high on anyone's priority list.

Posted by: alan Jun 11 2009, 10:25 PM

Some more picture of the test of the worlds largest parachute.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4320989.html


Posted by: mars_armer Jun 15 2009, 05:00 PM

Video of the http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=28343 at the end of this article:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/06/15/1963818.aspx

Like everything on MSL, it's big!

Posted by: vikingmars Jun 15 2009, 09:05 PM

huh.gif Yes : it's THAT big !!!! Pic taken today at the Paris Air Show at the CNES exhibit. Enjoy ! smile.gif


Posted by: SteveM Jun 17 2009, 02:35 PM

Does anyone have any idea what that "tin can" with the brown and black spiral markings is atop the RTGs? I haven't seen it in http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/images/PIA09201_br.jpg.

Steve M

Posted by: djellison Jun 17 2009, 02:39 PM

It's not ontop of the RTG - it's mounted on one of the trusses that stands up at the back of the rover deck. It's the UHF antenna for relay to MODY/MEX/MRO

Posted by: MahFL Jun 17 2009, 05:40 PM

I noticed that too, thought it was a mistake or something.

Posted by: ilbasso Jun 17 2009, 06:56 PM

Reminds me of the Mike Myers "All Things Scottish" shop skit from Saturday Night Live: "They come in three sizes: wee, not so wee, and friggin' HUGE!"


Posted by: Steve G Jun 19 2009, 06:28 AM

Will Curiosity carry batteries as well as the RTGs? I know that it will have a constant power supply, but will batteries be required to give it an extra boost of power for driving ops, etc?

Posted by: Stu Jun 27 2009, 06:50 AM

Guess it's too late to put one of these on MSL..?

http://www.geek.com/articles/gadgets/panasonic-unveils-bizarre-looking-3d-concept-camcorder-20090421/

Shame... wink.gif

Posted by: djellison Jun 27 2009, 08:14 AM

Well - before the descoping of Mastcam's zoom..... it DID

Posted by: nprev Jul 11 2009, 03:40 AM

Here's the miniscule, almost infinitesimal http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/msl-20090710.html.

Posted by: mhoward Jul 11 2009, 03:43 AM

Where? I don't see it. laugh.gif

Posted by: nprev Jul 11 2009, 03:54 AM

tongue.gif

Actually, you might say that in future MRO pics if it doesn't discolor much during reentry & lands upside down.

(We already talked about parachute colors, so I'll let this one slide! rolleyes.gif )

Posted by: djellison Jul 13 2009, 10:47 PM

Delay related posts moved to MSL reasons for delay thread.

Posted by: peter59 Jul 27 2009, 08:00 AM

Large Heat Shield for Mars Science Laboratory
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/msl-20090710.html
Heat shield with a diameter of 4.5 meters is really big.

Posted by: MahFL Jul 27 2009, 12:53 PM

I read somewhere there was concern over the heatshield and infact a new one might have to be built. Does anyone know if that was the case ?
Logically proberbly not if the heatshield is now ready.
mars.gif

Posted by: hendric Jul 28 2009, 04:10 AM

That's no heatshield, it's a small moon!

Posted by: climber Aug 5 2009, 09:16 PM

A "spaceflightnow.com", Craig Covault's article here: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0908/05msl/
Including quite some nice and new pictures.

Posted by: Stu Jun 11 2010, 06:21 AM

MSL activity in JPL clean room yesterday during the "Summer of Innovation" event...


Posted by: brellis Sep 6 2011, 12:00 PM

I was - uhm Curious tongue.gif about the size and weight of MSL as compared to the Viking Landers. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Science_Laboratory, MSL is 10 feet long (3.0m) and weighs about a ton (900kg).

According to the http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/masterCatalog.do?sc=1975-075C, Viking's lander feet formed a 7.25 ft (2.21m) triangle when viewed from above, and weighed 1261lbs (572kg).

Posted by: Stu Dec 18 2011, 07:43 PM

Very cute new "family portrait" here...

http://www.lacanadaonline.com/news/tn-pas-1217-la-canada-jpl-mars-yard-reunion-rovers,0,7369198.story

Posted by: James Sorenson Dec 19 2011, 09:13 PM

That is an excellent photo! Does anyone know where the full resolution pics are? I'd like to make that rover family portrait my desktop background. smile.gif

Posted by: pospa Jan 22 2012, 06:29 PM

QUOTE (James Sorenson @ Dec 19 2011, 10:13 PM) *
...Does anyone know where the full resolution pics are? I'd like to make that rover family portrait my desktop background. smile.gif
James (and all others), maybe you'll like these new hi-res pictures from Mars Yard:
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA15279
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA15280
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA15278
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA15277

Posted by: brellis Jan 22 2012, 07:13 PM

Great pics -- 15279 with the two basketball players gives you a good sense of how big MSL is! rolleyes.gif

Posted by: pospa May 13 2012, 01:55 PM

MSL team testing rover mobility across sand dunes in the Mojave Desert with weight simulator Scarecrow.
... with MER simulator as well. For comparison maybe, or training for Cape Tribulation? smile.gif



more pictures http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1205/10rovertest/

Posted by: djellison May 13 2012, 05:21 PM

We know exactly how the MER chassis copes with real Mars. It's being used as calibration - a reality check - to help us figure out exactly how well the MSL chassis will handle Mars as well.

Posted by: pospa May 14 2012, 11:21 AM

QUOTE (djellison @ May 13 2012, 07:21 PM) *
It's being used as calibration - a reality check - to help us figure out exactly how well the MSL chassis will handle Mars as well.

OK, thanks for clarification.
... and the result is? ... how well the MSL chassis will handle Mars?

Posted by: Marz Aug 5 2012, 11:29 PM

Just watching all the "pre-game" shows and learned that the backshell has 75kg of tungsten ballast embedded on the forward edge to help control its attitude in atmosphere entry. I wonder if large follow-up missions of landers could be designed so that the robot stowage configuration achieves this purpose. Seems a shame to deliver an extra 75kg to mars that is dumb ballast.

5.7 hours and counting!

Posted by: MahFL Aug 5 2012, 11:40 PM

QUOTE (Marz @ Aug 6 2012, 12:29 AM) *
Seems a shame to deliver an extra 75kg to mars that is dumb ballast.

5.7 hours and counting!


The problem then is you'd have to safely land all the embedded rover/landers, have comms setup for them, and teams to run the submissions, all costing many many $$$. The throw away mass is what it is, it's a needed design feature.

Posted by: mchan Aug 6 2012, 12:32 AM

Ballast is typically very dense material due to the mass and volume constraints. In some cases on aircraft, depleted uranium is used. Designing a payload into ballast is just not practical from either budget or schedule.

Posted by: Explorer1 Aug 6 2012, 12:33 AM

Any reason it was tungsten specifically? Wouldn't lead work just as well (and be a bit cheaper)?

Posted by: MahFL Aug 6 2012, 12:36 AM

QUOTE (Explorer1 @ Aug 6 2012, 12:33 AM) *
Any reason it was tungsten specifically? Wouldn't lead work just as well (and be a bit cheaper)?


To comply with the Planetary Protection Protocol they used fairly nonreactive tungsten. Lead is deadly poisonous.


Posted by: mcaplinger Aug 6 2012, 12:55 AM

QUOTE (Explorer1 @ Aug 5 2012, 05:33 PM) *
Any reason it was tungsten specifically? Wouldn't lead work just as well (and be a bit cheaper)?

Lead is too soft. Tungsten (or possibly a copper-tungsten alloy which is easier to machine) is much harder. Also, tungsten is denser, allowing volume savings.

http://www.e-tungsten.com/top_10_tungsten_reasons.html

I'm unaware of any planetary protection restrictions against lead or generally toxic materials. Consider the toxicity of Pu238...

Posted by: MahFL Aug 6 2012, 01:06 AM

The Pu238 is in protective ceramic cakes. It's highly unlikely to ever to pollute Mars. It also has a half life and will eventually decay into a less harmless compound.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)