IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Would Phoenix be able to blip its rockets to move around a bit?, ...and not just pulling itself along with the arm...
climber
post May 22 2008, 01:13 PM
Post #31


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2791
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



QUOTE (Oersted @ May 22 2008, 02:29 PM) *
If we had two trenching operations within meters of each other and they turned out to be different, that would tell us so much more than one single trenching operation, the validity of which we can't say a lot about, because there is just this one operation.

I guess the arm have "left" and "right" ability and not just "strait forward" axis.
If I'm right, we could have a second trench (1 m?) from the first during extended mission, don't we?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ugordan
post May 22 2008, 01:19 PM
Post #32


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3631
Joined: 1-October 05
From: Croatia
Member No.: 523



QUOTE (climber @ May 22 2008, 03:13 PM) *
... during extended mission ...?

Whoa, people. Phoenix isn't even safely down yet and you're already talking about extended missions.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post May 22 2008, 02:40 PM
Post #33


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14058
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Oersted @ May 22 2008, 01:29 PM) *
Phoenix is legacy hardware, and it is certainly much better to have the present Phoenix than none at all. But how much does that argument advance things?


It advanced them from not having any mission, to having a mission that will do a LOT of science. It wouldn't do '10x' the science, as you claim, if it could move, because within 5 months or so, it's going to be dead. It's going to take most of it's life to fully understand and investigate what we land on. If it could move, it wouldn't have time to do the same to a second site and the data tells us that a second site would be the same as the first. Maybe we'll get a polygon edge within the work volume - that would be a nice bonus. But for what Phoenix is being sent to do, it's purpose, it's prime goal... mobility is not in any way justified, required or 'missing'. By Sol 90 after the full characterization of the landing site, the sun will begin to set. From that point on, it's going to be camping out on ever decreasing power, on an atmospheric and surface monitoring program. Phoenix isn't going to last 1500 Sols. This is a short lived tightly focused mission for which mobility is not required.

Would it be nice to have a rover. YES. Would there be a benefit to Phoenix to be mobile? No - because it wouldn't even be on Mars - it would be on PPT's getting turned down at the scout selection phase. A lack of mobility made Phoenix possible. Lamenting that fact is moot.


Indeed, refering back to your quote ' how much does that argument advance things?' - debating mobility for Phoenix advances nothing whatsoever. There isn't a debate to be had. It's not mobile. Argument finished. I struggle to see what your point is beyond that.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
centsworth_II
post May 22 2008, 03:11 PM
Post #34


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2140
Joined: 28-December 04
From: Florida, USA
Member No.: 132



QUOTE (Oersted @ May 22 2008, 08:29 AM) *
Phoenix is legacy hardware, and it is certainly much better to have the present Phoenix than none at all. But how much does that argument advance things?

You would be much better off advocating for improvements to future missions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st June 2018 - 02:39 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.