djellison
Sep 16 2007, 06:04 PM
Catch up Phil
- they did a toe-dip in and out again - and since then, have now gone fully back in.
Aussie
Sep 17 2007, 05:51 AM
I am not sure that I really have my mind around this toe dip concept. They put all six wheels down the slope, then they backed up to ensure that they could get out. Why? If there was undue slippage or (unlikely but possible as Brian L implied) the backout resulted in a purgatory event, then what was the payoff for this evolution. Better to have deferred the risk until after exploration within the crater had been completed and then experiment with egress. But then again I guess that I am too conservative ever to be a rover driver.
djellison
Sep 17 2007, 07:20 AM
Driving out they used the visidom technique to make sure they were not slipping too much - and if you read the updates you'll see that the rover identified a slip of 40% and stopped driving.
Better to know you can get out before getting in much deeper.
Doug
fredk
Sep 17 2007, 03:34 PM
The toedip policiy makes sense as far as traction on the (hopefully) rocky interior slope goes. If that traction is anomalously bad, you probably want to rethink going in deep, and may want to get out and try somewhere else. But if the raised drift at the edge of the rim could not be driven back across without severe slippage, but the rocky slope was OK, then clearly once you're "in" you may as well go all the way in for the white layer. As it turned out there was some slippage backing out on the drift, but hopefully that won't effect the eventual egress.
mhoward
Sep 17 2007, 04:34 PM
It's all dust under the bridge now - we're in. Plus, egress worked and wasted little time. Hooray for our side!
climber
Sep 17 2007, 05:32 PM
I guess you've also noted how "agressive" the toe dip has been as compared to Endurance. We're talking of meters, no longer of centimeters.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.