IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V  « < 7 8 9  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
InSight mission
mcaplinger
post Dec 30 2015, 07:24 PM
Post #121


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1599
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (katodomo @ Dec 30 2015, 11:04 AM) *
...to track the arm's movement - two b/w cameras.

Actually (and despite my earlier skepticism), the cameras were upgraded to Bayer color.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Dec 30 2015, 08:02 PM
Post #122


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1599
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (gpurcell @ Dec 30 2015, 10:40 AM) *
So what happens to the readied Atlas V that they were going to launch with in this sort of case?

ULA takes it back and uses it for something else. There's almost certainly a cancellation cost in the launch contract.

Usually the mission-specific fairing sticker isn't put on until encapsulation, but if it's on already they can peel it off pretty easily smile.gif


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PaulM
post Jan 1 2016, 10:39 AM
Post #123


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 187
Joined: 15-August 07
From: Shrewsbury, Shropshire
Member No.: 3233



QUOTE (James Sorenson @ Dec 30 2015, 10:54 AM) *
I can tell you this with certainty, that's not going to happen. Instrument selection happens early in the design and the lander is pretty much now complete. Because of the launch slip and subsequent storage, Insight may hit its cost cap of $675 million. If that happens NASA will have to decide whether to cancel the mission or continue with it. At this point in the game, any new instruments isn't on the table, but perhaps possible descoping some things is?

I made this comment because I read that to fund the 10% or so increase in Insight mission cost then another discovery mission would need to be sacrificed. My argument is that if another discovery mission did not fly then it would be possible to fund a few more instruments such as LIDAR on Insight's deck.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nprev
post Jan 1 2016, 12:33 PM
Post #124


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 7982
Joined: 8-December 05
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 602



One primary reason that's not possible is that new instruments require not only testing of said instruments but also integration and testing with (and of) the entire spacecraft. New equipment introduces new interdependencies, some of which can be unexpected, difficult to detect, and detrimental. Obviously this increases not only mission risk but also cost--significantly.

Also, it's generally not an easy proposition to shuffle money between programs. It's been done, but it's not done lightly, and I suspect that InSight would only ask for something like that to save the mission from outright cancellation--definitely not to add new instrumentation.


--------------------
A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Jan 1 2016, 05:48 PM
Post #125


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1599
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (nprev @ Jan 1 2016, 04:33 AM) *
One primary reason that's not possible is that new instruments require not only testing of said instruments but also integration and testing with (and of) the entire spacecraft.

More fundamentally, there are typically not spare data and power connectors on spacecraft like this. Even adding mounting holes to bolt on new stuff is non-trivial; assuming there was enough unused area at all, the spacecraft would have to be at least partially disassembled to do so.

The combination of Insight being a cost-capped PI mission and the problem instrument not being funded by NASA makes this a complex and AFAIK unprecedented situation. We'll just have to wait and see how it develops.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JRehling
post Jan 3 2016, 05:06 AM
Post #126


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1987
Joined: 20-April 05
Member No.: 321



This is vaguely reminiscent of the problems that Dawn had during its development cycle:

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=1645

However, InSight has a problem with what is unambiguously its main instrument. You can't downscope that instrument away, or you'd be eliminating the purpose of the mission.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Jan 3 2016, 07:42 PM
Post #127


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1599
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (JRehling @ Jan 2 2016, 09:06 PM) *
This is vaguely reminiscent of the problems that Dawn had during its development cycle...

Thanks for pointing that out, John, I had forgotten that tale of woe. What's missing from Dawn is the international aspect; although much of Dawn's payload was provided by foreign partners, as far as I know most of the developmental problems were with the spacecraft.

I wish there was better information about what actually happened with Dawn and how it was resolved; the best I've been able to find is http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1112 but that falls well short of an official report/policy statement.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vjkane
post Jan 4 2016, 01:27 PM
Post #128


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 481
Joined: 22-April 05
Member No.: 351



QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Jan 3 2016, 11:42 AM) *
I wish there was better information about what actually happened with Dawn and how it was resolved; the best I've been able to find is http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1112 but that falls well short of an official report/policy statement.

Check out this SpaceFlight Now article: http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0603/03dawn/

At least some of the issues like the xenon tank seem to represent crap happens -- the team did the testing but problems were found late in the process in other tanks of the same design.

I hope that there are quiet review boards done for issues like these so that the experience gained can be passed to other teams. For example, why didn't the thrusters and harpoon function on Philae and what can future comet lander missions learn?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
B Bernatchez
post Mar 9 2016, 05:17 PM
Post #129


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 31-December 10
From: Earth
Member No.: 5589



Apparently, the project has been given a path forward towards the next launch opportunity: http://spaceref.com/mars/nasa-targets-may-...ht-mission.html

To those knowledgeable about such things, How likely is it that CNES actually gets the instrument working according to specifications?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Mar 9 2016, 05:25 PM
Post #130


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1590
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43 35' 53" N 1 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



QUOTE (B Bernatchez @ Mar 9 2016, 06:17 PM) *
How likely is it that CNES actually gets the instrument working according to specifications?


the defective vacuum vessel is no longer the responsibility of CNES, apparently
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=5746

QUOTE
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, will redesign, build and conduct qualifications of the new vacuum enclosure for the Seismic Experiment for Interior Structure (SEIS), the component that failed in December.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Mar 10 2016, 01:09 AM
Post #131


Martian Cartographer
****

Group: Members
Posts: 7256
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



I wonder if the landing ellipse will change now... as happened with Schiaparelli for its 2 month delay.

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
monitorlizard
post Mar 11 2016, 10:22 AM
Post #132


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 228
Joined: 8-May 05
Member No.: 381



The MEPAG meeting at the beginning of March had an InSight update that gave some information on the history of the seismometer problems, as well as several photos of problem areas. The Mepag presentations are at http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meetings.cfm?expand=m29. The newest meeting is #31, scroll down to the presentation titled "InSight Mission". Slides 11 through 15 are about the seismic instrument. Lots of other interesting talks also listed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lilmac
post Sep 6 2016, 09:52 PM
Post #133


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 27-January 12
Member No.: 6325



InSight cleared for May 2018 launch. Godspeed.


http://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-appro...insight-mission
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Explorer1
post Mar 29 2017, 07:21 AM
Post #134


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1438
Joined: 13-February 10
From: Ontario
Member No.: 5221



Good seismometer news, passed vacuum testing. https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/03/28/insig...ses-major-test/

Leak free!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PhilipTerryGraha...
post Mar 29 2017, 11:49 PM
Post #135


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 12-December 16
From: Sydney, Australia
Member No.: 8089



Ayy! This is good news indeed! biggrin.gif


--------------------
Reddit aficionado. Creator and sole moderator of r/junomission, r/osirisrex, r/lucymission, r/psychemission, and r/hirise
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 7 8 9
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th September 2017 - 11:03 AM
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.