Slashdot Mirror
Air Bag Blocks Spirit's Path
cosog writes "bad news everyone: 'Two sections of the air bags used to cushion Spirit during the landing phase are obstructing the vehicle's path.'. Fortunately scientists have a solution for it: 'We'll lift up the left petal of the lander, retract the airbag, then let the petal back down[...]'. This means that: 'The earliest the six-wheeled Spirit rover will get rolling is Jan. 14, about three days later than originally planned, NASA said'."
...the robots with the flamethrowers always make it though the maze faster.
But 'no', they said. 'Flamethrowers weigh too much', they said. That's what happens when you replace all the visionaries with bean counters.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
That it isn't really just some Martians up there messing with it to give us grief?
The article says that if all the lift and tuck maneuvers fail, the rover could just turn and roll of in another direction. I know we have some JPL dudes hanging out here, so the question is, why waste 3 days? Why not just roll off the alternate ramp and start exploring? I guess I just don't understand why the front ramp is so special.
Suddenly, the hairy finger of a familiar monkey tapped me on the shoulder. It was time.--G. T.
Info here fourth paragraph
Your comment history doesn't seem too trollish, so here goes. I'll be getting modded offtopic with the rest of the thread, but what's new.
This "thrown free" bullshit cracks me up every time.
A previous poster has already addressed the reality of landing. Now, before we even get there: what about the construction of your car makes you think that you'll be "thrown free" if broadsided by a train? Let's look at a passenger-side impact, since you'd be dead in either case if hit from the driver's side. In fact, even if hit from the passenger side, your chances are slim.
At impact, the train will continue towards you, through your car. Your car will gain velocity in the direction of the train. If you're "thrown" anywhere, you'll be thrown towards the front of the train as it plows through and accelerates your car, and that's only because you remained at rest since you weren't attached to the car.
Your new relative velocity to the car/train system means that your unrestrained torso will be thrown over the center console (assuming you're not in a truck), allowing your head to meet the passenger side of your car as it's crushed inwards by the impact. Game over.
With the seatbelt on, you remain (relatively) planted in your seat. You might injure your neck, as your head doesn't have lateral restraints, but the entire right side of the car is available to absorb the energy of the collision without your body being present. If you're in a car with side curtain airbags, so much the better. You will then slowly come to a halt as the train stops.
The "being plowed along" part is not really the variable affected by seat belt use. You will be plowed along whether you're wearing a seat belt or not; there is no way the impact of the train would "throw you free" in a side collision. If your car disintegrates and is mowed over by the train during the ensuing slowdown, you'll die either way. Seat belt use will, however, affect what happens to your body during impact.
I would challenge any advocate of the "thrown free" argument to explain a single situation in which a body could be "thrown free" from a car in a way that would result in less injury than remaining restrained in the vehicle, even ignoring the hazard from landings.
Rear-end collision? You gain relative velocity towards your seat, no problem.
Side collision? Detailed as above - you gain relative velocity towards whatever hits you, not some magical boost away from it and out the (open? do you ride everywhere with your windows open for safety?) window to "safety."
Front collision? Hey, you might indeed be "thrown free", but there's going to be unpleasant encounters first: steering wheel vs. torso, and head vs. windshield. Airbags and or seatbelts prevent or lesson the impact of both of these encounters. People smarter than you designed and throughly tested these systems.
Those rare collisions in which the car flips are the only kind that might result in you being thrown free, and even in these cases the odds of you being better off outside the vehicle are slim (as in the case below of the half-in/half-out person).
If you're riding without your airbag and seatbelt because you know the risks and accept them because your prefer to be comfortable, fine. But don't go around telling people that they're better off. If you're riding w/o a seatbelt or airbag you're much more likely to get in a garden-variety head-on collision and shatter your skull on the windshield than you are to be flipped and safely thrown free.
Every system is working as designed, so there won't be much to worry about. I believe they could likely solve that problem. And they still have days to test the rover before they could roll it off anyway, so even if lifting the panel doesn't work, maybe by the time they tested the system and agreed on where to go, the airbag would have deflated enough on its own in the low pressure of the Martian atmosphere. Drive off another ramp, if it comes to that. The rover has six wheels and was designed to worked even if the landing site didn't turn out to be as flat as it is.
It seems that despite those gorgeous panaromic pictures they have got, the boffins haven't decided on where to go. Perhaps this little inconvenince will give them a few extra days to come to a hopefully good decision.
You wouldn't be thrown "free to safety". You'd much more likely be thrown to your death. Being thrown from a vehicle by a collision is usually fatal.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
It's sometimes necessary to be completely unharnessed so that you can be 'thrown free' from the wreck.
Thanks! I always wondered if I'd be safer outside my 3-point safety harness, airbag, passenger protection frame and crumple zones.
There I was thinking that decelerating with the car was a good idea. Rather than not decelerating. Like in the bad old days when people were often literally decapitated when their skull went through the windshield and their neck presented a soft target for the razor-sharp glass.
Is this what happens when costs become the driving factor?
It's retards like you who keep insurance premiums high because you think you're invincible.
Either you're using the wrong tense of "to know," or you're really gullible.
Yes, thanks for the little reminder. My mistake, I'm sure you understand.
Air Bag Blocks Spirit's Path. Hah.
We should rename Spirit to Dolly. Or maybe Pamela.
Obviously, that is pretty much the only way being thrown out of the car would ever help you in my opinion, and the chances of it happening do not outweigh the chances of wearing a seatbelt saving your life.
stuff
I thought the article was going to be about some wacked out church claiming to have scientific proof that you don't get to go to heaven if you die in an airbag-equipped car.
Crummy mars robot spoiling my fun.
Triv
My grandfather drove off a bridge, and was able to escape because he wasn't belted.
However, I'm not a proponent of the "thrown free" method either. The fact remains that, although belts and airbags can cause a worse issue in some conditions, in many many more conditions they diminish your injury. Your wife should visit an ER sometime, or talk to an insurance adjuster.
--
$tar -xvf
CARS DON'T EXPLODE!
If you've ever seen a car on fire (which happens all the time), it is obviously a very dangerous situation, but it ain't no bomb. People get this idea from movies, to the point where they never reflect upon the plausibility of the whole thing.
The only way I can think of for a car to explode is for the fuel tank to be completely demolished during a crash in such a way that none of the fuel ignites. Then, the fuel Whoooshes out into the air and achieves a good fuel/air mixture, and at just the right moment, something ignites the whole deal. The correct fuel/air mixture is the (very) hard thing to come by.
Fact is, the scenario I just presented doesn't happen much. Even those exploding trucks from about 15 years ago pretty much turned into flamethrowers, not bombs. If anyone has any references (e.g. news stories) about a single car exploding, I'll happily eat my words.
Yes, I'm still a junky. Are you still a bitch?
I think it may be "because" of those images. I've seen a bit or two of the press conferences and it always looks like the scientists are frothing at the mouth with eagerness to explore one feature or another. Or perhaps one feature and another and another and another .....
Deciding where to go first can't be easy.
To misquote Dick Solomon, Alien Physics Teacher :
Trains don't kill people, physics kills people.
It's tied to the landing pad. Supposedly 'explosive knives' are gonna cut the cables. But you and I know that it usually takes 3 or 4 'Estes solar ignitors' to get anything to light. It's gonna be a dud.
Eat at Joe's.
Not to mention the fact that "thrown free" only equals "safety" in a very small fraction of cases. I've got decades of experience in tripping and falling, and it can hurt when I land from standing hieght. I've got no desire to become a 60 mph projectile and then encounter immoble objects (asphalt, trees, other vehicles, etc.) Airbag and seatbelt, please...
It only takes 3 or 4 ignitors if you don't set them up correctly...
Not to mention the windows you have to go through to get out and possibly the dashboard and other things your limbs can hit on the way out. I didn't think people actually believed in things like this. It's idiotic. I'm shocked.
Der Tod ist der einzige Weg hier raus!
I for one am betting all money on either
a) knive cuts cable that somehow found it's way into the area.
b)knives cut last remaining microbe that somehow found its way up onto the platform.... oooops.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Yes, but let all the mouth-breathers out there continue to ride sans seatbelt, and think how nicer it will be for the rest of us! Clear out the gene pool I say.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I just watched the live JPL NASA webcast and they said that the wheel technique did not work, today they will lower the wheel back down and try to retract the bag by revolving the retraction motor 6 more times. If it does not work, they still have plenty of other possible routes; they are just trying to make sure nothing is compromised so early in the mission.
hopefully our little rover will bloom soon and not wilt
MonkeysKickAss
http://heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5 478,8244347%255E1702,00.html
Haida Manga
Doesn't Mars experience dust storms?
What about those giant tornado-like "dust devils" which travel hundreds of miles, leaving wide trails visible from orbit?
Everyone assumes it's safer to proceed slowly. But if NASA contemplates the airbag issue long enough, perhaps some incoming dust dunes may bury the rover before it ever gets down from the pad.
were you involved in the planning stages of the Beagle mission? :p
That guy had a propane tank in his car, and it's safe to say his propane tank wasn't wearing a seat belt!
The real irony is that she's a nurse. Makes you feel confident in our medical system, doesn't it?
stuff
Thank goodness I'm not the only one!
Mod parent up! I can now stop reading this thread.
-zack
...but if this is panels on the rover we're talking about, why not mount a sponge on the side of the lander that it can rub the panels against? And if it's the lander, why not equip the rover with a sponge? You could go and bash it against a rock every so often to clean it out. And since there's atmosphere, why not use some advanced technology like (ghasp) fans to blow the dang dust off every so often?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Maybe we got a Beagle under the bag? Which would explain why we have not removed the bag, as to not piss of the english :)
That there are still people that think seat belts are unsafe is about as stupid as folks that think there is a theory of "Creation".
Seat belts became widespread in cars after they were installed into test planes and caused less Chuck Yeager types to die.
It's simple science. "My brother's neighbor's friends cat died because..." - annectodal evidence. Survey 1000 crashes with and without and compare the results.
The only bearing 30 minute lag time would have
is your finger twitching movements would take 30
minutes to be executed.
No..... Humor from blatent retardedness does
NOT appear funny to me.
You can see here that natural processes most likely have occured in a similar manner Mars as they do on Earth. The rover is going to check out these rocks tomorrow or the next day if all goes well. It is exciting to see discovery and the scientific process in action. Who knows maybe water is very common there and thats what eroded this hole into this rock. In any case, sooner or later we are going to turn up water on mars, find life, and reaffirm how precious life on earth in its abundance indeed is.
what makes anyone think that being thrown from a vehicle they would in any way be thrown to safety?, most likely you would be thrown into oncoming traffic, or into the path of the train that just hit your car, etc, etc.... and furthermore, after being thrown from a vehicle, you most likely would becmoe airborne in a head forward fashion, which if my 7th grade science teacher was right, would send you flying head first into some obstacle, ... or are you all related to freaking bat man>?
The next time you are out for a walk, grab your wife and hurl her face down on the road as hard and fast as you can, then ask her if "thrown clear" is still a philosophy she wants to indulge in.
I would challenge any advocate of the "thrown free" argument to explain a single situation in which a body could be "thrown free" from a car in a way that would result in less injury than remaining restrained in the vehicle, even ignoring the hazard from landings.
While I agree that in most cases a seatbelt will save your life.I did know some people who hit a rock and ended up upside down in a creek. They died due to their seatbelts holding them upside down with their heads in the water.
Whether they would of survived being thrown out is hard to say.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Give it time.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
The chances of being thrown out of the window of a vehicle during an accident without injury are so slim they are effectively non-existent. Being thrown out through the front or rear windscreen almost always leads to significant injury, often facial. To be popped out of an open side window like a pea from a peashooter, without touching the sides (so to speak) is very unlikely.
The only way you have any noticable chance of being thrown clear uninjured during an accident is if you are in an open-cockpit vehicle like a beach buggy or regular convertible. Even in this case, you are still more likely to be injured than if you remained belted into your seat. Being ejected to land face-first on the pavement at 50 miles per hour is usually not advisable.
The only two instances I can think of in which it might be more dangerous to be belted in, is if
- you are driving an open-cockpit vehicle without a roll-bar and the vehicle rolls onto it's back
- the vehicle catches on fire and the seatbelt buckle fails, trapping you
In the first case, driving an open-cockpit vehicle with no roll bar is an act of stupidity and illegal in most places. In the second case, we live in the real world (not hollywood). Despite witnessing a number of vehicular accidents, I've never seen one erupt in flames either on the road or on the track.Racing drivers "have accidents for a living", or almost so. I can't think of too many of them who refust to wear belts.
If thrown free was so much better, then I wouldn't need to wear a helmet when riding my motorcycle.
1.
Not entirely true. Can't do the physics but from personal observation a car with low levels of fuel, which means the petrol tank is vapor filled after a puncture, can, very occasionally explode. I've seen it twice in non LPG accidents personally. 18 years as an Ambulance Paramedic in NSW, Australia to set up the credentials.
Perhaps it would be better stated as CARS DON'T USUALLY EXPLODE.
2.
Again from 18 years as a Paramedic the initial movement is backwards but as the car decelerates your initial velocity returns which , untethered, ends you with your chest on the wheel and your head on something hard. View crash dummie footage and you'll see just this. Likewise for the other scenarios.
Again with train wrecks people in Australia have survived a train wreck both buckled up and unbuckled, buckled more prevalent as it is a legal requirement to wear seatbelts. However I have seen people thrown out of a relatively intact car as gravity and open windows tend to make things work unexpectedly.
This evidence is eyewitness reports only. I personally have seen all this and more.
Wolj
Wolja Future Tombstone: Shit happened then I died
I just want to know where the hell he gets this from the airbags on the lander. I know there's a superficial link there, but... what the hell?
SRSLY.
From experience attending crash scenes I have never seen this. The crash, assuming it happened, must have been in an open car without rollbars but then generally if it was that old it wouldn't have seat belts.
From extensive studies in Australia the facts are clear. Seatbelts save many more lives than being unrestrained.
Just a few google responces to "seatbelts safety australia"
Death-defying designs for car safety
Seatbelts & Restraints the facts
Wolja Future Tombstone: Shit happened then I died
I believe ObviousGuy is to blame for the tangent. Also, your sig has some insight on your question.