Quake3World

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:05 am**

looks cool, dunno about the presentation style... hope it lands

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:51 am**

Saw this on Michio Kaku's site before.
Impressive how they figured out the landing, but they didn't say what it's going to do when it gets there, which makes it a bit meh in the end

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:38 am**

it's due to land in 5 days. there will be some kind of nasa coverage when the time comes.
more info here:

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/mission/rover/

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:46 am**

So what's the difference between this Mars Rover and the previous Mars Rover, that landed and sent back info? Just a different area of the planet?

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:53 am**

better equipment all around... more detailed analysis on soil samples, etc. Just read the info on that site you lazy bum.

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:59 am**

I did read what you linked to. The page you linked to does not include any info about the previous Mars Rover for comparison

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 2:59 pm**

You know, you could probably ask Google the same question and it would probably give you the answer.

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:26 pm**

Well, for starters, it's about the size of a small car. Hence the need for such a sophisticated landing sequence. You can't just parachute down or bounce on a landing bag like the other two. The MSL will contain a much more advanced manipulator arm and drill to dig deeper into the soil and break open rocks, and a full range of spectrometer instruments to determine the composition of samples. Also note the lack of solar panels - it's packing plutonium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Science_Laboratory

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:28 pm**

that reminds me i have the hot wheels mars stuff somewhere

http://www.amazon.com/Hot-Wheels-Sojour ... B000EKED6I

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:10 pm**

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 5:39 pm**

fKd wrote:looks cool, dunno about the presentation style... hope it lands

i hope so it. looks completely awesome in every way

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:01 pm**

obsidian wrote:Also note the lack of solar panels - it's packing plutonium.

Isn't that going to be a massive environmental hazard if it crashes on Earth? Wasn't that the reason for there being no nuclear-powered spacecraft? I read on the Wiki that it's non-fissile; it's still radioactive, though (that's how it works); isn't that still dangerous?

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:42 pm**

Scourge wrote:You know, you could probably ask Google the same question and it would probably give you the answer.

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:50 pm**

Damn, I didn't know the rover was so close to landing.

The video was a bit on the dramatic side, but a good reminder nonetheless. That power supply looks like it'll last for 14 years before power output drops significantly. I wonder how long the rover will last (assuming it survives the landing)?

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:01 pm**

i was gonna mention it a day before it happened just so you morons might actually remember to check it out.

And yeah, having a set amount of energy is kind of disappointing since the previous rover was able to surpass all expectations ... kept going much longer than expected, and a big part of that wouldn't be possible without solar panels' "renewable" energy source.

Granted, this one is much bigger, it would probably need to haul around a massive amount of solar panel surface area, so it was probably not the best solution.

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:10 pm**

Nah, a wind turbine would do the trick.

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:12 pm**

Did you just --

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:09 pm**

Transient wrote:Nah, a wind turbine would do the trick.

yes it would, were it not for the fact that surface atmospheric pressure on Mars is a fraction of what it is on Earth, thereby rendering turbines useless

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:19 pm**

I hope it lands too. The rover is powered by a small nuclear engine ffs AWESOME.

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:14 pm**

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:34 pm**

seremtan wrote:
Transient wrote:Nah, a wind turbine would do the trick.
yes it would, were it not for the fact that surface atmospheric pressure on Mars is a fraction of what it is on Earth, thereby rendering turbines useless

And here I thought that the only hurdle was the giant turbine sticking off the top of the rover.

Edit: I should scroll down all the way before replying. LOL Tsakali.

Posted: **Wed Aug 01, 2012 12:18 pm**

And yet most people in the world are wondering if their favorite soap opera is on that night.

Posted: **Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:17 am**

Nice, this looks pretty wicked. I hope this bad boy lands safe and sound. I recall reading about the launch but I kinda forgot about it. The landing process seems quite complex to be fully automated but assuming they've thought it through properly we may have some nice feeds coming from Mars soon.

Posted: **Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:49 am**

no comment from geoff. he must be in denial.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:22 am**

there is a pretty badass interactive solar system engine here with all kinds of info. shows where the rover is at right now, the speed / distance from mars etc.

http://eyes.nasa.gov/launch2.html?docum ... sl/edl.xml

Quake3World

mars landing

mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing

Re: mars landing