IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Discovery 2012
punkboi
post Aug 20 2012, 07:15 PM
Post #31


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 533
Joined: 25-October 05
From: California
Member No.: 535



If InSIGHT's selection is true, then I'm glad that JPL's EDL team will have a reason to eat peanuts again in 2016...though I REALLY wanted to see a spacecraft float in an extraterrestrial lake. Oh well. smile.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Aug 20 2012, 07:22 PM
Post #32


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1363
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43 35' 53" N 1 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



QUOTE (punkboi @ Aug 20 2012, 09:15 PM) *
I REALLY wanted to see a spacecraft float in an extraterrestrial lake. Oh well. smile.gif


ditto. CHopper was cool too!


--------------------
I'm one of the most durable and fervent advocates of space exploration, but my take is that we could do it robotically at far less cost and far greater quantity and quality of results.

James Van Allen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gpurcell
post Aug 20 2012, 08:04 PM
Post #33


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 215
Joined: 21-December 04
Member No.: 127



I think it is pretty tough to argue with this selection. It's an instrument package that we've needed to send for a long time and it's got a well-defined risk profile.

Additional Thoughts:
I think this is a really important mission. Between it and Curiosity, we'll really be at an inflection point in Mars exploration strategy by 2018/20 or so, with prety good data confirming one of four big picture views of the planet:

1) Wet Mars and live internal heat/movement;
2) Wet Mars and no current internal heat/movement;
3) Dry Mars and live internal heat/movement; and
4) Dry Mars and no current internal heat/movement.

The relative value of a major effort like MSR compared to other solar system exploration priorities really depends on which of these four broad stroke pictures ends up being closest to the truth.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
claurel
post Aug 20 2012, 08:47 PM
Post #34


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 28-September 05
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 514



I have no reason to doubt that NASA made the right choice based on considerations of risk and scientific value. But I'd really been hoping that we'd get a glimpse of Titan's seas; I can't help feeling massively disappointed, even though InSight is an exciting mission. The long travel times and stubbornly slow orbital motions sure make it rough to be a fan of exploration of the Outer planets. And calculating my age at the time of the next opportunity for a TiME-like mission was the wrong approach to softening this blow...

--Chris
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Aug 20 2012, 09:04 PM
Post #35


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1363
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43 35' 53" N 1 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



just wondering what science objectives can be accomplished by a single-spacecraft network. I understand that some data is better than no data at all, but still...
BTW with a bit of luck (and taxpayer money) there mayl be three new spacecraft on the surface of Mars in 2016:
InSIGHT, the short-lived ExoMars EDL demonstrator and possibly also a similar Chinese craft (see http://www.stfc.ac.uk/RALSpace/resources/P...MarsProbes.pdf).
And of course Curiosity (and why not Opportunity) will still be operational


--------------------
I'm one of the most durable and fervent advocates of space exploration, but my take is that we could do it robotically at far less cost and far greater quantity and quality of results.

James Van Allen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Drkskywxlt
post Aug 20 2012, 09:25 PM
Post #36


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 287
Joined: 29-August 06
From: Columbia, MD
Member No.: 1083



Hmm...sounds like confidence in cost estimates was a key factor in Insight's selection. Insight came in a bit below the cap.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gpurcell
post Aug 20 2012, 09:34 PM
Post #37


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 215
Joined: 21-December 04
Member No.: 127



QUOTE (Drkskywxlt @ Aug 20 2012, 04:25 PM) *
Hmm...sounds like confidence in cost estimates was a key factor in Insight's selection. Insight came in a bit below the cap.


Yep. No more DAWNs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nprev
post Aug 20 2012, 09:38 PM
Post #38


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 7097
Joined: 8-December 05
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 602



<MOD MODE>


Very much appreciate the civility in this discussion so far, but just want to make sure that everyone keeps the Rules and Guidelines firmly in mind as it progresses. Thanks!


</MOD>


--------------------
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
Explorer1
post Aug 20 2012, 11:48 PM
Post #39


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 934
Joined: 13-February 10
From: British Columbia
Member No.: 5221



My only wish is for color cameras; from the looks of this video they'll be essentially navcam/hazcam types, great for engineering but still black/white.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSTYvwodKO0...player_embedded


Any idea for the landing site or when it will be selected? I'm assuming near a volcanic region...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vjkane
post Aug 20 2012, 11:59 PM
Post #40


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 439
Joined: 22-April 05
Member No.: 351



QUOTE (Paolo @ Aug 20 2012, 02:04 PM) *
just wondering what science objectives can be accomplished by a single-spacecraft network.

There's some information in this presentation from 2009. A presentation to the Decadal Survey Mars panel showed considerable work in trying to get the most from a single station. Unfortunately, the Decadal Survey link is gone, but I can send a copy to anyone who emails me. I wrote summaries of the tactics at my blog here and here.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Aug 21 2012, 12:41 AM
Post #41


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1292
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (Explorer1 @ Aug 20 2012, 04:48 PM) *
My only wish is for color cameras...

MSSS could provide a range of color cameras for very low mass. http://www.msss.com/space-cameras/ More information on request.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Explorer1
post Aug 21 2012, 12:49 AM
Post #42


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 934
Joined: 13-February 10
From: British Columbia
Member No.: 5221



That's assuming it's not too late to make a minor payload adjustment, is it? The payoff will certainly be worth it, even for a Phoenix-style landing site.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Aug 21 2012, 12:56 AM
Post #43


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13815
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



There's a pair of nearly finished MastCam's - one could find a lovely home on that arm. I really hope they can find the $ to do it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Aug 21 2012, 01:01 AM
Post #44


Bloggette par Excellence
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4474
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



What kind of $ would it cost?


--------------------
My blog - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vjkane
post Aug 21 2012, 01:08 AM
Post #45


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 439
Joined: 22-April 05
Member No.: 351



A MastCam is more affordable than my dream, flying Sojourner's twin rover which is somewhere in JPL storage. The original proposal for the never flown 2001 lander would have flown this rover on a Phoenix/Insight-class lander. Oh, well, Curiosity will likely still be roving in 2016 and who knows, Opportunity might still be plugging along.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st October 2014 - 11:27 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.