Slashdot Mirror


Opportunity Rover Encounters Its Own Heat Shield

blamanj writes "Mars Rover Opportunity, a few meters shy of the 2km mark on its odometer, has come across the remains of the heat shield from its landing. This map traces the path of the rover for the past 11 months. It's been averaging about 6 meters/sol. Spirit, which had to stop to dislodge a rock, is still climbing the "Columbia Hills". It's tough going, and Spirit experiences slippage of up to 80% as it climbs the hills."

269 comments

  1. Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the JPL by SYFer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Since I assume that they would not know the precise location of the shield, it must have been quite a moment when the thing first slewed into view. It's a bitch getting that Mountain Dew out of the keyboard, isn't it?

    --
    "...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
  2. Unfortunately by mg2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The crushed-body of an evidently indigenous species was found sprawled in the impact zone of the heat shield....

    1. Re:Unfortunately by michaeldot · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, it had probably been working on one of those canal boats they used to have up there.

    2. Re:Unfortunately by Zorilla · · Score: 4, Funny

      The crushed-body of an evidently indigenous species was found sprawled in the impact zone of the heat shield....

      The Wicked Witch of the West was unavailible for comment.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    3. Re:Unfortunately by rark · · Score: 2, Funny

      interplanetary war to be declared at 11

    4. Re:Unfortunately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Followed by our movie pick tonight, Bloodsport.

    5. Re:Unfortunately by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      In true Western Civilization fashion, all we have to do is introduce the Human concept of "airborne hazard insurance" to the Martians, then we can pat outselves on our backs for being "good guys".

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    6. Re:Unfortunately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ive been following this slashdotthing for about half a year now and this is the single most funny comment ive ever stumbled across ... still laughing

  3. ebay it by phoric · · Score: 5, Funny

    That stuff is gonna be worth a lot of money some day, when a kid digs it up in their back yard. On Mars. You know, after we all move there.

    1. Re:ebay it by Epistax · · Score: 1

      True, but by that time we'll have several more layers of prefixes. I am predicting "z-x-i-e-bay".

    2. Re:ebay it by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Heh, reminds me of a commercial for a TV I saw here in Japan...."Zexy!" I'm guessing it was either for Zenith or Sony.

      Or the Daihatsu ads: "Voxy!"

      "Wonderful Small!"

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    3. Re:ebay it by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      but by that time we'll have several more layers of prefixes. I am predicting "z-x-i-e-bay".

      If they don't solve the Paypal complaints, it will simply be fbay or exbay.

  4. Ascending by lowpass_wilter · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It's tough going, and Spirit experiences slippage of up to 80% as it climbs the hills."

    Sounds a bit like trying to get out of Gehennom with the amulet.

    1. Re:Ascending by syrinx · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      "It's tough going, and Spirit experiences slippage of up to 80% as it climbs the hills."

      Sounds a bit like trying to get out of Gehennom with the amulet.


      hahahahahahaha

      +5, Funny. If only I had mod points.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    2. Re:Ascending by Irashtar · · Score: 0

      and thats why you should play SLASH'EM. you don't have to worry about slippage. wait, nm, SLASH'EM won't even let you get the amulet

    3. Re:Ascending by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1, Funny

      S'funny, I was immediately reminded instead of John Kerry's campaign.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  5. How big is *your* potato? by myowntrueself · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the article;

    "A potato-sized rock got caught in Spirits's right rear wheel on sol 339"

    Come *on* NASA. Potatos vary so wildly in size that comparisons like this are totally useless!

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    1. Re:How big is *your* potato? by SYFer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Perhaps they should have used the more precise "tater tot" standard.

      --
      "...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
    2. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Cliffy03 · · Score: 1

      True, but including the words "tater tot" just kills the front page news drama in the story.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Nigel makes plans for you!
    3. Re:How big is *your* potato? by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      what the hell is a tater tot anyway?

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    4. Re:How big is *your* potato? by thomasa · · Score: 1

      How about milliVolkswagenBeetle size rock?

    5. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Have+Blue · · Score: 4, Funny

      "What's 'taters', NASA?"

      POH-TAY-TOES!!


      (don't use so many caps. it's like yelling.)

    6. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon! Saying the obstruction was the equivalent of "4.256 US Tater Tots" not sciency enough for ya? Bah.

    7. Re:How big is *your* potato? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's the photo. Look to the wheel on your left hand side. I wonder if they were anticipating this happening.

    8. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a pre-pubicent potato.

    9. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon, I'm from California, the land where everything has mayonaise on it (ick!), and even I know what those are!

    10. Re:How big is *your* potato? by SYFer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Tater Tots are a product of the Ore-Ida corporation and are a delicious processed potato treat. They were developed in 1953 and introduced to a grateful public in 1954.

      NASA began using them as an engineering standard in the late 60s durring the Apollo missions. Today, Tater Tots are still as popular in the lab as they are in the dining room.

      --
      "...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
    11. Re:How big is *your* potato? by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      thanks! (from someone a little bit further away than California)

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    12. Re:How big is *your* potato? by mtrisk · · Score: 3, Funny

      I see the engineers didn't play with their cheap Tonka sets out in the dirt enough when they were young...

      --

      Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
    13. Re:How big is *your* potato? by avgjoe62 · · Score: 4, Funny
      what the hell is a tater tot anyway?

      In standard space universal measure, roughly 1/2000 of a classic Volkswagen Beetle.

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    14. Re:How big is *your* potato? by isomeme · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's a standard metric potato-size. Unfortunately, NASA's contractors inadvertantly prepared for Imperial potato-sized rocks, hence the wheel jam.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
    15. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Say, that rock looks about the same size as a potato!

    16. Re:How big is *your* potato? by morcheeba · · Score: 1

      a delicious processed potato treat. They were developed in 1953 and introduced to a grateful public in 1954.

      Ha Ha. Ever since then, tater tots have shredded the competition, especially following the potato reform act of 1955.

    17. Re:How big is *your* potato? by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

      I find the part of that picture that looks like water pipe insulation held on by tape and zip ties that weren't even cut very short to be most interesting.

      Oh, I'm sure they had someone there do a statistical calculation of likelihood of potato sized rocks in the area and chances of the rover hitting them. This went along with the 2 year study of what size rocks will lodge in there which was a design spec on the wheels. And just like my last few lines, all the studies were pure BS.

      Anyways, my solution, Spinners on the next one. Some Bling with practicality.

    18. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well.... does NASA measure them in metrics or imperial units?

    19. Re:How big is *your* potato? by jericho4.0 · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how being blessed with an abundance of mayonaise would prohibit you from learning what a tater-tot was.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    20. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They usually do the calculations in feet, but program the lander in metres. That's why they failed last time.

      Remember: http://clive.canoe.ca/CNEWSHeyMartha9911/10_metric .html

    21. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Deideldorfer · · Score: 0

      Damnit, now I'll have this song stuck in my head all day again!

      --

      Power off before disconnecting connecting connector. Seen on a cash register
    22. Re:How big is *your* potato? by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Approximately 2 dekatatertots.

    23. Re:How big is *your* potato? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I fail to see how being blessed with an abundance of mayonaise would prohibit you from learning what a tater-tot was.

      I believe he was comparing the relatively plebeian nature of mayonnaise to the fine cuisine that is the "Tater Tot."

    24. Re:How big is *your* potato? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Spinners on the next one. Some Bling with practicality.

      That is a surprisingly good idea. However, since a "crash landing" (come on, it's not like these things really land) is guaranteed, the spinners' bearings would have to be of pretty amazing quality.

      Perhaps a better idea is to not make the wheels so sharply concave, where things can wedge into it.

    25. Re:How big is *your* potato? by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

      well, any bearings in this whole thing have to be pretty good.

      The wheels are probably made as they are for

      1) light weight

      2) ease of making them over making them hollow and such

      3) not wasting space. With them shaped as is, when packaged they can fold stuff into that cavity.

      I'm actually kinda surprised they don't do like they did for apollo rovers and make collapsable wheels out of piano wire. then it could have some suspension too. But that might be to heavy and complex for this.

      The could also look into fenders and mudflaps (with naked ladies)

  6. What?! by AA1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I dont know all that much about these rovers, but jeez... it has only moved 2km in all this time. Surely this is a typo?!

    1. Re:What?! by Rob+Carr · · Score: 4, Informative
      it has only moved 2km in all this time. Surely this is a typo?!

      Not at all.

      The rovers are astonishing in what they can do, but a human would dramatically outpace them. What it might take a rover an entire day to do, a human could do in a 30-45 seconds.

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    2. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      >> he rovers are astonishing in what they can do, but a human would dramatically outpace them. What it might take a rover an entire day to do, a human could do in a 30-45 seconds.

      Parent has never seen a unionized workplace...

    3. Re:What?! by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      Former card-carrying member of FAPP Local #1.

      We busted our asses to save yours!

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    4. Re:What?! by MagPulse · · Score: 3, Informative

      In this picture taken by Spirit early in the mission, you can see "Husband Hill" labeled as "E", about 3km away. It's on this hill right now. Opportunity has spent more time carefully looking around a dangerous crater instead of going for distance.

      Sojourner only moved about 100 meters and was a huge success. Its most popular accomplishment was taking this picture before it even left the lander.

    5. Re:What?! by Laivincolmo · · Score: 1

      Weird... I swear I can see the rover having left the lander...

    6. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What it might take a rover an entire day to do, a human could do in a 30-45 seconds. ...including suffocation & hypothermia.

    7. Re:What?! by Inthewire · · Score: 1

      "We busted our asses to save yours!" until break...then we parked it for the rest of the day.

      --


      Writers imply. Readers infer.
    8. Re:What?! by Yaztromo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I dont know all that much about these rovers, but jeez... it has only moved 2km in all this time. Surely this is a typo?!

      You have to remember the goal of this mission isn't to move the furthest distance from the landing zone as possible. It's to explore the surface of Mars, something you find every few centimeters :).

      Much of this "exploration" involves stopping every few metres to sit around for a day or so and test rock and soil samples.

      And even when it is on the roll, each rover doesn't move terribly fast, and often needs to navigate around terrain. Nevermind the fact that if you did want to move a long distance, you'd only be able to move a few metres, take a snapshot of your surrroundings, send them back to Earth, and await the next set of movement instructions. Both sending the snapshot and retreiving the next set of instructions takes several hours due to the distances involved, resulting in quite a bit of time spent not going anywhere.

      Yaz.

    9. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont know all that much about these rovers, but jeez... I think I'll make an inane, ill-informed comment anyway. Surely my whole post is a typo?!

    10. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Far be it for me to assume, but couldn't nasa build build theyselves a telescoping observation point, and script out a whole series of movements? After all, it's not like things are all a hustle bustle on mars.

    11. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh oops

    12. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, aside from surviving on the surface of Mars for the greater part of a year, or requiring no resources other than solar power, or travelling to the surface of Mars in a compact little shoebox? The robot wasn't built for speed, dipshit. Maybe next time we can send an RC racer over there.

    13. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The rovers are astonishing in what they can do, but a human would dramatically outpace them. What it might take a rover an entire day to do, a human could do in a 30-45 seconds.

      I read your link but what you people fail to understand is this little thing real scientists call time. The technology to put a robot on Mars is here now with us. The technology to put a man on Mars is not here with is. That takes time. The time we spend wasting on deciding who builds the plastic food trays and where to locate the launch site is also time we can have robots actually there and exploring. Not to sound like a troll but people like you blow my mind. It's like you don't understand the difference between real life and what you see on Star Trek/Wars/Gate/whatever.

    14. Re:What?! by Yaztromo · · Score: 1
      Far be it for me to assume, but couldn't nasa build build theyselves a telescoping observation point, and script out a whole series of movements? After all, it's not like things are all a hustle bustle on mars.

      They do script out a whole series of moves, but terrain can limit how far they can see ahead. Take the one moving up the side of the crater at this very moment. Where to head when it reaches the lip? What if there is a big rock in the way? How to tell what's behind it?

      Remember too that part of the movement isn't just a path planning problem. It isn't only "what is the best route to get from A to B" -- it's also a matter of "where should we go next for the best science bang for our buck?". If you don't stop and look around every so often and wait for instructions, you could easily bypass a potentially scientifically interesting site. You don't want to script it to move 50m meters at once, only to find afterwards that you've passed a small depression containing ice (remember, this isn't realtime -- if you find out at all that you've passed something interesting it won't be for several hours after the rover has actually done so).

      This isn't a race -- it's a sight-seeing tour. As such, you move a bit, look around for anything interesting in your local area, test some rocks, move a bit more -- etc.

      Yaz.

    15. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention, Sojourner was the rover, not the lander. The lander was named Carl Sagan (BHA!) Memorial Station.

    16. Re:What?! by bananasfalklands · · Score: 1

      Are nasa also worried about getting speeding tickets ? I mean just think a martian might ban nasa from 'driving' in the solar system.

      --
      Send Peter Clifford Francis Macrae comdoms to 23 Bedford St, St.Neots, PE19 1AX, England
    17. Re:What?! by dbacher · · Score: 1

      Interesting...

      So you're arguement would be Dr. Steve Squires assertion that the technology won't be there for an adequate rover during any of our lifetimes, as publicly stated on the record not just once but several times, and that his assertion that a human scientist can do all of the work that Spirit and Opportunity take days to accomplish in a matter of minutes is based on Star Trek?

      At a Nasa safety conference, the good doctor spent some time discussing safety and robotic missions, and told a story. During testing and design of the Mars Exploration Vehicles, they were out in the desert, collecting rock samples with some geologists. The prototype vehicle was having some issues, and wasn't operable, so he took them on a little rock hunt, and sat there with a stenographer's pad recording ballpark or rough time it took them to see things, make decisions, and act on the decisions, and to perform various science.

      On the average, a task that would require the rover two to three days was accomplished in under twenty seconds by a human being.

      He said, and this is an almsot driect quote, that it really irked him when people said that robotic missions were adequate and could provide the science, because the amount of science they can perform is so small compared to a human being there, on the planet.

      He said, again an almost direct quote, that there would not be a robotic mission in his lifetime that could adequately answer the questions that scientists have, and that there might never be the capability to answer the questions by robotic means.

      Now I'm not going to argue that sending someone there isn't a technological feat, and that it won't require a great deal of effort and technological progress.

      At any rate, the line you quote is an almost direct, word for word, quote from the head of the MERV program, who, I would say, most definitely has the scientific knowledge to make the determination.

      --
      If your code is acting bloated, and is running rather slow, it's likely and predicted that some loops you will unroll.
    18. Re:What?! by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > stopping every few metres to sit around for a day or so and test rock and soil samples.

      Granted, my only experiences that I know of are on Earth and are therefore limited, but in an area of 20 meters, isn't it pretty likely that two soil samples would be nearly identical? I would think depth would be the only factor -- in which case they would want to go INTO a deep crater, instead of around it (except for that whole "no communication" thing if deep enough).

      On Earth, you would have to go quite a number of miles to find big variations, except near certain special places (mountainous areas, hot springs, etc). IANAGeologist, of course.

  7. In other news...... by RabidChicken · · Score: 3, Funny

    NASA discovered microbes in the immediate area...

    1. Re:In other news...... by Fjornir · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pwobabwy tewwan!

      --
      I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
    2. Re:In other news...... by Zorilla · · Score: 2, Funny

      Huhuhuhuhuhuuhh!

      Zerg season! Terran season! Zerg season! Terran season!

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  8. So l337!#$!#$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Sol 337 was in fact leet, as was this entire mission, dewds.

    A "Sol" is one Martian day, btw.

    1. Re:So l337!#$!#$ by Himring · · Score: 1

      A "Sol" is one Martian day, btw.

      Thanks. I was in process of looking up what it meant. All that quickly was recalled from memory was "shit of out luck" of course.... Which made sense: "here's where we were sol due to potato sized rock, and here's where we were sol with another potato sized rock" ... etc.

      --
      "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
    2. Re:So l337!#$!#$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A "Sol" is one Martian day, btw.

      I run that from the run line in Windows and got something completely different. Am I doing something wrong?

  9. What the? by BladeMelbourne · · Score: 1, Funny
    The shortest distance between two points is a straight line... did mission control get one of their offspring to draw the route with a red kiddy marker?

    Map

    I wonder if these rovers use Energiser (TM) solar panels... they just keep going and going and going :-)

    1. Re:What the? by FuturePastNow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Straight line? You act as if the goal of the mission is to actually have the rover cover distance. When I look at that map, I see the rover going from one interesting object to the next. It's cool that they've covered two kilometers, but it's the stopping and looking, not the moving, that is the point.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:What the? by KennyP · · Score: 2, Funny

      I was driving the rover. Just because I'm a raging drunk doesn't mean that I won't get there sooner or later!!!

      Kenny P.
      Visualize Whirled P.'s

    3. Re:What the? by PopCulture · · Score: 1

      Aye,

      your parent might have been cracking a joke... but how true... I suppose when your millions of miles away on the martian surface, the old saying applies several orders of magnitude more:

      its the journey, not the desination...

      --

      Here's to finally giving Bush his exit strategy in November
    4. Re:What the? by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      When I look at that map, I see the rover going from one interesting object to the next. It's cool that they've covered two kilometers, but it's the stopping and looking,...

      Sounds kinda like a dog looking for a place to pee.

      --
      What?
    5. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The shortest distance between two points is not always a straight line when you have a bird's eye view. What if there are hills there? Anyway, the shortest distance between two points can be wormhole, or a wrinkle too. Nonetheless, your point that the rover is not taking a direct route for the heat shield is ridiculous. The mission aim wasn't to examine the heatshield.

    6. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when your millions of miles away

      "you're".

    7. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hence the name...Rover.

    8. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a joke, dick.

    9. Re:What the? by PopCulture · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      those are "my" millions of miles (federally subsidised of course) so yeah, I will lay claim to the posessive. Deal with it, bitch :)

      --

      Here's to finally giving Bush his exit strategy in November
    10. Re:What the? by -kertrats- · · Score: 1

      who says they were aiming for the heat shield?

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
    11. Re:What the? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Straight line? You act as if the goal of the mission is to actually have the rover cover distance. When I look at that map, I see the rover going from one interesting object to the next. It's cool that they've covered two kilometers, but it's the stopping and looking, not the moving, that is the point.

      It is similar to the famous "traveling salesman" problem in that the targets are not in a strait line, but all over the map. From any given spot, the rover may spot several interesting new targets in many different directions. A strait line cannot cover that.

      Plus the crater edges are slippery, and they sometimes had to take odd routes to find the flattest or levelest path.

    12. Re:What the? by fataugie · · Score: 1
      They're lost,

      but making damn good time.

      --

      WTF? Over?

    13. Re:What the? by NateTech · · Score: 1

      Straight, not "strait".

      --
      +++OK ATH
  10. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Rob+Carr · · Score: 5, Informative
    Since I assume that they would not know the precise location of the shield

    They already knew where the heat shield was. They had a picture from the Mars Orbiter camera that let them know exactly how far away it was. There's actually been several pictures. I forget how long ago they knew, but they've known for some time where it was.

    I don't think anyone thought either rover would last this long, so it's only now that they get around to looking at it.

    --
    This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  11. Lawyers on Mars, no signs of intellegent life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Realitives of the dead Martian filed suit today naming NASA in a 10 million wrongful death case. Their lawyers had no comment.

  12. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

    Even if they did not know exactly where the shield was, I'm sure they would have recognized it instantly. There's really nothing else it could be.

    --
    Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
  13. After the heat shield by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 3, Interesting


    After the heat shield, what will Opportunity look at? There's really not a whole lot--not even very many rocks--on that plain.

    Are there scientific targets identified, or are they maybe going to try to "sprint" Opportunity and see how far it can get in the shortest amount of time? Maybe there's other potential sites of interest some distance away.

    --

    --
    $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    1. Re:After the heat shield by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Examining the ground where the heat shield impacted may yield some information.

    2. Re:After the heat shield by Unholy_Kingfish · · Score: 1
      I was looking on the MER site for the exact info, but it must be in one of the old daily updates which I can't find.

      I remember reading that after the heat shield they are going to head south across the plains. There isn't really any a known objects of interest on the plains, but beyond there is a crater that makes Endurance Crater look like a pothole. It is like 4 km southeast I believe.

      There still is plenty of science to do with the little rovers. Opportunity will get data on the heat shield for Lockheed Martin(and the soil the impact dug up), Spirit will keep climbing up the hills and see more rock layers. If they keep running, Opportunity will head south, and Spirit will keep exploring the hills. They will run these rovers until they stop rolling, or until the money runs out. And even both of those things happen, they will keep them active as weather stations until the batteries die.

      --
      Fear Is the Only God
    3. Re:After the heat shield by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Informative

      After the heat shield, what will Opportunity look at? There's really not a whole lot--not even very many rocks--on that plain.

      There is a large plain of exposed bedrock a couple of miles south from the current position. And further south there is a crater that is something like 5 times larger than the one the rover just crawled out of. However, the larger crater is a long-shot. Oppy would have to log roughly 3 times the distance of Spirit to get there, and Spirit's wheels have been showing multiple signs of wear. Robots get repetitive motion problems also it seems.

      But, if the rover can move by even two wheels, it could possibly drag itself there the hard way. NASA has vowed to "run them into the ground" to get the max science out of them. That is if thermal cycling does not crack some circuit first. Oppy is also showing arm wear, so it may not be able to do much more than take some snapshots by the time it gets to the mighty crater and has done some "white plains" work.

    4. Re:After the heat shield by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Robots get repetitive motion problems also it seems.

      Whenever a moving part is involved (unless suspended in air by magnetism, etc), wear will happen. One unfortunate side effect of friction.

  14. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and then the rest of the vets had a good laugh at the expense of the "new kid" they failed to clue in on the location of the shield they had been knowing. Ahh, c'est la vie.

    --

    kurzweil_freak

    5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

    Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

  15. What about the liquid or ice in this shot? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 1, Interesting
    1. Re:What about the liquid or ice in this shot? by helioquake · · Score: 1

      Considering possible contamination risks, I do not believe that the rovers carry any liquid coolant.

    2. Re:What about the liquid or ice in this shot? by slinted · · Score: 2, Informative

      Its highly unlikely that its either liquid, or ice. We're seeing a smooth area of sand falling down into the crater from above. Keep in mind that although it may look flat, it is actually, quite steep

    3. Re:What about the liquid or ice in this shot? by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      Thanks. The photo you pulled up puts the rock in context, and you're right - it can't be water because of the slope of the hill.

      Cool illusion, though, and a good example of why just pulling up photos might give someone the wrong idea.

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  16. heat shield by helioquake · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's not often that we get a chance to examine the integrity of the remaining heat shield in these missions. Let it take a look and see what JPL guys can learn from it for future missions, eh?

    1. Re:heat shield by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Nothing for you to see here. Move along.

    2. Re:heat shield by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh, good idea. Let's do that, and then we can tell the JPL all about it....

  17. How much buried? by FuturePastNow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It will be interesting to see how much sand has been blown over the shield in almost a year. Might give more insights into Martian weather.

    --
    Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:How much buried? by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

      Now that I read more on the Opportunity mission page, I see that an "engineering examination" of the heat shield is planned. What other things will they be looking for? Will they use the microscopic imager and the spectrometers on it?

      (Sincere aplogies for replying to my own post.)

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:How much buried? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It will be interesting to see how much sand has been blown over the shield in almost a year. Might give more insights into Martian weather.

      It would be a hoot if they found graffiti all over it, such as "Yanks go home!"

    3. Re:How much buried? by uberdave · · Score: 1

      It's only been half a year. A year is 668 sols long, and we've only been there for 350 or so sols.

      ...Oh! You meant Earth years.

  18. Slippage by Icarus1919 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, I had 80% slippage my first time, too. But you get better after that and it's not as embarassing.

    1. Re:Slippage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] Spirit experiences slippage of up to 80% as it climbs the hills.

      Five steps forward, four steps back...

    2. Re:Slippage by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, I had 80% slippage my first time, too. But you get better after that and it's not as embarassing.

      I hope you are not posting YOUR photos on NASA sites.

  19. Why look at the heat shield? by Vellmont · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd assume the value in looking at the heat shield is to determine how well it performed. I'd guess that's one thing you can never adequately test and maybe getting pictures of the shield can determine if it performed better, worse,or as expected. Obviously this could make future missions more reliable, cheaper, etc.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Why look at the heat shield? by Rob+Carr · · Score: 4, Informative
      You got it. They couldn't test the entire heat shield at once. Also, performance was based on estimates of how thick the Martian atmosphere was.

      There's also a divot where the heat shield bounced. With any luck, it dug into the Martian surface far deeper than Opportunity could dig. This will give them a chance to examine what's underneath the surface layer - they hope.

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    2. Re:Why look at the heat shield? by amichalo · · Score: 1

      Another purpose is that the heat sheild probably made a nice, fresh hole in the ground where it hit. This is a good way to examine what is under the surface which couldn't be done without drilling tools the rovers do not have and also allows them to compare fresh holes to those that have been on the surface exposed to the atmosphere.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    3. Re:Why look at the heat shield? by NoseBag · · Score: 1

      Naaa...Opportunity is just looking for her return ticket.

      --
      Cloned foods give the statement "We had that last week!" a whole new meaning.
    4. Re:Why look at the heat shield? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      Also, as TFA describes, they want to see how the heat shield has been affected by a few months of Martian weather.

    5. Re:Why look at the heat shield? by Plutor · · Score: 1

      Let's not also forget that a high-speed impact of a heavy object like a heat shield is likely to expose some otherwise-covered rocks to the surface. Investigating the impact site itself may likely reveal things about Martian geology.

  20. What's a "sol"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is a sol a day relative to the planet or something? 6 meters seems pretty slow for that, but I dunno.

    1. Re:What's a "sol"? by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 4, Funny
      What's a "sol"?
      A "sol" is something that leaves your body when you die. When NASA refers to "325 sols", they mean that the rover has run over 325 Martians.
      --
      Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
    2. Re:What's a "sol"? by dustinbarbour · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The sun is named Sol. A "sol" is what we calls days except a sol is longer. Mars doesn't rotate as quickly as Earth thus making the days longer. Apparently the guys at JPL felt funny about making the "day" longer than the traditional 24 hours we experience here on Earth. They even began sleeping according to Martian sols.

    3. Re:What's a "sol"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A sol is a local solar day. On Mars, that's 24 hours, 39 minutes, 35.2 seconds. Maddeningly close to ours, but no cigar.

      Here's a nice discussion of the topic, with pictures and everything.

  21. Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adobe put it there.

    This is the direct result of p1r4cy...all sorts of dumbasses get a hold of Photoshop and think they can fool people with badly modified images.

    1. Re:Yes. by Rob+Carr · · Score: 4, Interesting
      No. That's the exact same photo from the MERM web site.. To find the photo, you can use this page to decode the photo name. Danged if I can get the seconds to work out (the 3rd through 11th digits).
      • 1 Opportunity
      • P Pancam
      • 155450047 Number of seconds since Jan 1, 2004 at 11:58::55.816. (works out to Sol 307)
      • Data product full frame EDR
      That sort of stuff. I lost interest at that point.

      And no, I've not heard any comments on this picture yet. There are other pictures with frost, but water would be puzzling on the Martian surface at that pressure and temperature.

      I'm pretty sure they'd have mentioned a leak in the Opportunity's radiator.

      .... .. .... ..

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    2. Re:Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'd never seen this shot before, but I went and downloaded all of the relevant images. I'm quite convinced that the "icelike" feature is just a dust accretion. In this wavelength it does look a bit watery, but if you look at the other shots there's obvious continuity in features and texture with the dust lane running up the left-hand side of the rock.

    3. Re:Yes. by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1

      Quite possible, but it still bizarre looking. A human could have examined the area more closely. Alas, one of the problems with robots.

      At least so far....

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    4. Re:Yes. by CosmicRocker · · Score: 1

      Thank you for posting that. Very few appreciate the different filters used in the MER pancams, and the difficulties involved when tryng to interpret them.

      That image is floating all over the internet, and so many think it looks like water. It is dust, exactly as you have said.

    5. Re:Yes. by Gurana · · Score: 1

      Jeebus... wtf is up with that naming scheme? Wouldn't it have been easier to just name that the file? Or include some sort of descriptiong to go along with some serial number? I'll assume that there is a good explanation for this... I mean they managed to send two rovers to Mars and keep them around for a little while.

    6. Re:Yes. by Rob+Carr · · Score: 2, Informative

      The naming scheme is designed for a computer to work with. The file name itself allows you to locate photographs by rover, camera, time, image processing, and a number of other things that I found boring. If you go to the web site, you'll find an interface that makes use of those names and allows a human to find photographs based on some of these criteria. I wonder if the name of each photo is assigned by the Rover itself. It's a simple way of attaching useful information to the photo without having to embed it in the image file itself. Also, I'm sure that the naming convention seemed like a good idea at the time and alcohol was involved. If you've ever read how the Declaration of Independence was created, you'll realize that it was developed using those two criteria.

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  22. Lutefisk?? by Graabein · · Score: 4, Informative
    In the image showing Spirit's course there is a rock called "Lutefisk" (Sol 296, top right).

    Lutefisk is a disgusting Norwegian dish, think of it as fish jell-o. You take some perfectly good pieces of dried fish (yuck) and soak them in lye (yes, really!) for 24 hours. Then you soak the fish in fresh water for 48 hours, before putting it in a pan and letting it simmer for about 20 minutes. Finally you wrap the fish in aluminium foil and bake in the oven at 200C for 30-40 minutes.

    The result is a quivering mass of translucent, inedible fish that is served with potatoes, bacon, mashed peas and melted butter (or melted pork fat).

    Now, what I want to know is, how did that disgusting dish of spoiled fish end up as the (informal) name of a rock on Mars?

    --
    And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
    1. Re:Lutefisk?? by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      Bobby Hill seemed to like it the day before he burned down the Church.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:Lutefisk?? by CoolGopher · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you reckon Lutefisk is bad, you obviously have not yet had the "pleasure" of encountering the Swedish "delicacy" known as "Surströmming".

      To make surströmming you take a perfectly good piece of raw fish, stick it in a tin can, and then let it sit there fermenting for at least a year (the longer the better, apparently).

      After that, you open it, and eat it without any further preparation. Don't ask me what you normally have with it, because I don't know; 5 seconds after the can has been opened I am a few kilometers away, desperately attempting to escape the stench (generally together with everyone else in the neighbourhood).

      So, just be thankful it's only Lutefisk on that map - had it been surströmming the martians would have accused us of chemical warfare! ;-)

    3. Re:Lutefisk?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      To make surströmming you take a perfectly good piece of raw fish, stick it in a tin can, and then let it sit there fermenting for at least a year (the longer the better, apparently).

      mmmm....sounds a bit like what we call tunafish.

    4. Re:Lutefisk?? by smeat · · Score: 1

      Icelanders eat something similar called Skata. It's disgusting, at least the smell is. I'll eat pretty much anything, but trying to shove something down your throat when the contents of your stomach are exiting is not an easy task.

      --
      "Let's not bicker about who killed who." Monty Python
    5. Re:Lutefisk?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Lutefisk?? by dasunt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      "Surströmming" == "Pickled Herring"???

      The raw fish and horrible smell sounds about right.

      Back before I gave up eating meat, I used to love the stuff.

    7. Re:Lutefisk?? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      I thought lutefisk got buried in the ground for a season in a jar before proper consumption. Is that just old-school? Maybe your recipe is for instant lutefisk? :)

      Then again I love Worchestershire sauce, made from rotted anchovie fish, so who am I to poke fun?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    8. Re:Lutefisk?? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      I'm glad someone mentioned that, I was fighting the urge to as well. I suppose if it detects any methane we shouldn't jump to too many conclusions.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    9. Re:Lutefisk?? by MasterDirk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, lutefisk isn't buried.

      Rakørret is. Just another disgusting variety on the mostly-decayed-fish theme here in Scandinavia. You take salt in a big jar or bowl (must be thoroughly cleaned), add trout in layers (dorsal down, side-by-side, salt in between layers) and let it ferment (dig it down into the ground) for a month or three (6-10 weeks).

      Every year some people die here in Norway from eating this "delicacy" prepared traditionally. When it's not done just right the meat is a perfect little place for bacteria, and general nasties. Incidentally, just now is the time we eat it (well, I don't), so if you read Norwegian you could keep an eye on our newspapers for the yearly deaths. Should be coming up any time now.

      --

      "Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."

    10. Re:Lutefisk?? by RollingThunder · · Score: 1

      I think you've got your Norwegian and Korean wires crossed. Kimchi, which is essentially pickled and spiced cabbage with spicy fish paste, is often said to be buried in a clay pot for a year while it ferments.

      Speaking from personal experience, it ranged from "damn that's hot" to "where did my lower jaw go?"

    11. Re:Lutefisk?? by jtriska · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm from Minnesota, where the dish is rather common. (Though I've never eaten it.. yuck)

      From what I've heard, people of nordic decent (of which there are a lot in MN) eat it as a tradition, definately not because of its taste, but as a reminder of harsh times.

      As for why they named a rock after it, who knows. Do the rovers have taste sensors? I'm sure it doesnt taste much different.

    12. Re:Lutefisk?? by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      yeah.. it's eaten in finland sometimes too.

      anyhow, i reckon it was a way to preserve the fish.

      it's total crap, thought the taste isn't that bad(hint, when properly done IT DOESNT HAVE A TASTE, though i'd be surprised if it had any nutrition or energy either after all that).

      anyhow.. you're supposed to eat it with potatoes and some white sauce(i don't know the proper english name) and some spices(black pepper? it's been a while since i've had to eat the shit so can't remember).

      could be because of it's shape? who knows... the old people seem to like it once a year or so(and really, it's not _that_ bad with the proper sauce and spicing, because as said when properly done it doesn't have a taste to speak of).

      now that i did some digging about it, it was mainly eaten because of the fasting rules of the catholic church(so it dates back to medieval times). you weren't supposed to eat meat on the day before big days like xmas.

      and the lye is to soften up the hard dried fish.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    13. Re:Lutefisk?? by RFC959 · · Score: 1

      I think you're thinking of gravlax. (Old-school gravlax, apparently, not the new stuff that's just made with dill and whatnot.)

    14. Re:Lutefisk?? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1


      Since you're apparently a fish conoisseur, I'll follow this OT.

      I did some looking around on the web to learn what it would take to make my own sushi, and learned the history of the food in the process. Turns out, E Asians used to catch a nice fish, bury it in the ground and let it rot for awhile. A month or so later, they would eat it.

      How it didn't kill them outright I dunno. Isn't rotted meat, like, one of the most toxic things you can eat? How they bore the stench, I dunno. Who was the first guy to try it? I'm betting someone's little brother.

      In any event, they stopped letting the fish meat ferment; but they still add vinegar to sushi rice to approximate the "tang" of the rotted fish (inasmuch as vinegar is essentially spoiled wine). Helps counterbalance the fattiness of the fish, and frankly, they have a point--sushi without the vinegar would be too rich.

      Interesting that both the E. Asians and the N. Europeans would rot their fish on purpose. I guess there's a survival strategy there. If you can't preserve it, learn to like the taste of spoiled food?

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    15. Re:Lutefisk?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess there's a survival strategy there. If you can't preserve it, learn to like the taste of spoiled food?

      http://www.svensson.com/norge/sur1.htm

      According to this source, that's part of it. The rest is that salt was (at some point) harder to come by, so an alternate means of long-term preservation had to be invented.

      Also, there's a bit of technique to eating it:

      All of the people who is going to participate in the dinner must sit close to the can when opened and they should as soon as possible inhale the smell. if you are more than 20 feet away from the can you will not be able to inhale a concentration big enough. This is the trick - you must as quick as possible see to that you strike out your smelling sence. Now you are ready to start eating!

      I suppose its also no suprise that the page also reccomends that you eat it cold (harder to taste i'd imagine).

    16. Re:Lutefisk?? by milkman_matt · · Score: 1

      Now, what I want to know is, how did that disgusting dish of spoiled fish end up as the (informal) name of a rock on Mars?

      And what I want to know is how a dish like that came into existence.. Somebody had to say "let's try soaking it lin lye, soaking it in water, simmering it and then baking it and serving it with -- etc" Weird. ;)

    17. Re:Lutefisk?? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      [shrug] Lutefisk can be disgusting if it's done badly, but it can also be pretty good. There are a lot of ethnic dishes for which people loudly declare their revulsion -- haggis and menudo come to mind -- ignoring that fact that people wouldn't eat the stuff at all if it were uniformly terrible.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    18. Re:Lutefisk?? by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of ethnic dishes for which people loudly declare their revulsion -- haggis and menudo come to mind -- ignoring that fact that people wouldn't eat the stuff at all if it were uniformly terrible.

      Menudo! Ackkk. Add me to that list of people. If you can choke down a wad of tripe, more power to you. It's even worse than fried cow's brains (with ketchup - shudder). Excuse me, I have to go hurl.

    19. Re:Lutefisk?? by jandrese · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'll give you a hint, it came from a time before refrigeration but after the invention of fishing boats capable of multple day cruises.

      A _lot_ of our dishes are actually designed to circumvent a problem we don't have much of any more: Meat/Vegetables spoiling before you're ready to eat it. Some of the options (Mayonaise for instance) are in the "cover it up" category, while Lutefisk is in the "preserve by any means possible" category. It turns out that if you drop the fish you catch into a bucket of lye, it won't rot (because the lye kills everything living on the fish). Of course lye is poisonous, so you have to soak the fish thouroughly before you eat it. Unfortunatly it completely destroys the texture and flavor of the meat as well, but that's a small price to pay for not eating always-spoiled meat (supposedly).

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    20. Re:Lutefisk?? by milkman_matt · · Score: 1

      Ahh, makes a lot more sense now, thanks for the insight!

    21. Re:Lutefisk?? by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      That's nothing compared to what they do in Iceland. First everyone pisses on a dead shark then it is buried underground for several months. Then it's dug up, cut into cubes and served as a delicacy. Sources: 1, 2. Sadly I haven't been to Iceland to experience this, though members of my family have.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  23. pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heres varios pictures of mars from the lander

    1. Re:pictures by Xeo+024 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Parent forgot to post where the pictures are, go to:

      C:\My Documents\My Pictures\Mars Rover Mission

      You'll find them there.

    2. Re:pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or on linux: /mnt/hdd1/pics/marsrover

    3. Re:pictures by nxtr · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually it would be C:\Documents and Settings\Mars Rover Mission\My Documents\My Pictures. NASA wouldn't dare risking the Mars mission to Windows 95/98! Only the best for the Mars rovers: Windows Server 2003 with the Workstation hack installed!

    4. Re:pictures by Amata · · Score: 3, Funny

      Close.

      C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\My Pictures\Mars Rover Mission

      Cuz all those NASA geeks just *have* to be Admin, you know :p

  24. Mars rovers, keep going, and going, and going... by Nalez · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So, are these rovers going to make it to being opearional a year after they landed?

    I find it amazing that they can throw robots on a rocket, have them land on another planet, and they remain functional for over 300 days.

  25. mmm...dehydrated water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope it knows what to do when it encounters the Sarien Spider Droid.

    (Hint: push rock)

  26. how far away is Beagle 2? by polished+look+2 · · Score: 1

    If Beagle 2 is not too far away perhaps they can set one of the rovers over and take a looksee at it and determine what happened.

    1. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's quite far away. Keeping in mind that the entire distance the rover has traveled is about 2km, if the beagle probe was only 10km away (really, really, really close in planetary terms), it would still most likely be "out of reach". And even if we could get to it, what would we do? Poke at it with the rock abrasion tool?

    2. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by Phil246 · · Score: 1

      Nah, but you could examine just how nice a 'splat' mark it made. :)

    3. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it crashed.

    4. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Funny

      And even if we could get to it, what would we do? Poke at it with the rock abrasion tool?

      If they could get both rovers over there they could take a picture of one rover pointing at the biggest chunk from the debris field and NASA engineers could photoshop in a 'EuroSpaceTrash' sign. You know, like the kind you used to hang on passed out drunks in the frat house, or like Lyndie England might do.

      The Freedom Fries Congress ought to vote NASA a budget increase after that.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by wizarddc · · Score: 1

      If you look at the map (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/mer/2004-12-27/MER B_Traverse-med.jpg), you'll see 200 of the 300 days spent up there have been tooling around Endurance Crater. The majority of its travels have been from Anatolia to the crater, and that took 30 days, and then from the crater to the heat shield, which took 7. So after they finish checking out the heat shield and the soil it unearthed (or unmarsed), they could easily travel 10 km. Whether beagle 2 is only 10 km is a fact that elludes me.

      --
      Th
    6. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by GlasWolf · · Score: 1

      Beagle 2 is far too far away from the rovers - it's one of the FAQs on the ESA site here.

    7. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mission director would carve his initials on it.

    8. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Beagle 2 was supposed to land on Isidis Planitia (10.6N, 270W). Opportunity landed on Meridiani Planum (354.4742E 1.9483S). Spirit landed in Gusev Crater (175.4785 E 14.5718 S). Neither are nowhere near Beagle 2. I couldn't find a high resolution map of MARS with the landing sights, but this should give you an idea.

    9. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 1

      Sorry to reply to myself, but this comment gives a better layman's explanation of the distances involved.

    10. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by SirBruce · · Score: 1

      Here's an excellent Java applet that can you can use to visually display the landing sites of various Martian probes (by default it only shows MER-A and B):

      http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/mars24/

      Bruce

    11. Re:how far away is Beagle 2? by hashwolf · · Score: 1

      "And even if we could get to it, what would we do? Poke at it with the rock abrasion tool?"

      Hmm... why not!

      I mean, is there anything else more entertaining to do in the vicinity?

      --
      - "They misunderestimated me."
  27. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I don't think anyone thought either rover would last this long...

    It seems I hear this just about every mission that doesn't explode/crash within 24 hours of launch. Do you really think that they had no idea how long it would last under ideal conditions?

  28. Martian Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dub thee, Sir Phobos, Knight of Mars, Beater of Ass!

  29. Here's the schedule by i41Overlord · · Score: 5, Funny

    After the heat shield, what will Opportunity look at?... Are there scientific targets identified, or are they maybe going to try to "sprint" Opportunity and see how far it can get in the shortest amount of time?

    I have the NASA rover plans right here, and the schedule is as follows:

    1. explore Endurance crater (complete)
    2. examine discarded heat shield (complete)
    3. run rover for endurance trials
    4. sprint rover (you called it)
    5. race rover
    6. jump rover
    7. make rover do acrobatic tricks
    8. crash rover
    9. profit

  30. Museum? by _Hellfire_ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When (yes when) humans colonize Mars and non-engineer/scientific humans are living there I wonder what they will do with the man made stuff from long ago that will be sitting there inert.

    I have a couple of theories as to what the human race will do with this stuff:

    a) Cordon off the area around the rovers and heat shields etc. as a "heritage park" for people to visit and think about the events of the past

    b) Take the stuff and stick it in a museum on earth

    c) As above but create the museum on Mars

    d) Melt it down and recycle it

    e) Revive the electronics and re-purpose the robots etc.

    f) Dump it in the nearest canyon as landfill

    Any other suggestions?

    --
    "And then I visited Wikipedia ...and the next 8 hours are a blur..."
    1. Re:Museum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Museum? These exocomps are LIFEFORMS, damn it. They are not your slaves to examine rocks and then be relegated into a museum. :-(

    2. Re:Museum? by Malicious · · Score: 1

      How about un-burrying it first. Considering the planet is a giant beach minus the water, the sand will likley cover all of our instrumentation many times over before we ever arrive.

      --
      01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
    3. Re:Museum? by My_Dirty_Facist_Ass · · Score: 0
      "...a) Cordon off the area around the rovers and heat shields etc. as a "heritage park" for people to visit and think about the events of the past

      b) Take the stuff and stick it in a museum on earth

      c) As above but create the museum on Mars

      d) Melt it down and recycle it

      e) Revive the electronics and re-purpose the robots etc.

      f) Dump it in the nearest canyon as landfill

      Any other suggestions?..."

      g) ?????

      h) Profit!

    4. Re:Museum? by cwaldrip · · Score: 1
      Um, you forgot about eBay.

      Planetary federal law in 2240 mandated that all surplus current and former government equipment must be sold on the government owned Internets-3 neuro-holosite eBay, with no reserve of course.

      All proceeds go to paying Microsoft for the expected licensing fees for Longhorn which is due to ship in only a few more month.

    5. Re:Museum? by starseeker · · Score: 1

      Almost certainly reuse it, IMHO. Sending finished goods to Mars is EXPENSIVE, and I see no reason the people there wouldn't do their best to make use of available resources. A Mars colony would be remote and resource poor (at least in the beginning) like no colony in human history, and I suspect every gram of refined metal, and every tool that can be coaxed into working again, will be invaluable.

      --
      "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    6. Re:Museum? by laejoh · · Score: 1

      make a beowulf cluster our of the remains?
      run linux on it?
      run longhorn on it? (it should be available)

    7. Re:Museum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forsee a movie staring Ben Affleck being stranded on mars and they find the needed parts off the rover to restart the ships engines to escape some type of Hollywood space monster.

    8. Re:Museum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      g) Worship it

    9. Re:Museum? by SecretAsianMan · · Score: 1

      Probably choice A - the administration will claim it creates jobs for the fungineers.

      --

      Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.

  31. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think what is quoted at the beggining of missions is a worst non-disater case (ie worst case other than a sudden unexpected failure)

    they fit the important stuff into that time and then if it survives beyond that they do more stuff

    Think of it like designing consumer goods To keep the cost of replacements down you need to make lasting the warranty period almost a certainty. To do that you need to push the mean lifetime way beyond the warranty period.

  32. Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard that, somehow, the rover has been mysteriously dusted off a few times on Mars. - it's been dirty, then cleaned.

    My leg was probably being yanked, but has anyone else heard this?

    1. Re:Stupid question by stfvon007 · · Score: 1

      The wind blew off some of the dust. Thats how it got cleaned.

      --
      All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
    2. Re:Stupid question by dustinbarbour · · Score: 1

      Yeah.. it's true. Actually, there was an article posted here the other day about it. Perhaps yesterday or the day before.

    3. Re:Stupid question by elFarto+the+2nd · · Score: 1

      Really?, that's not what I heard. http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20041107

      Regards
      elFarto
  33. Slow moving Rovers last longer by Inmatarian · · Score: 3, Informative

    Its a bit subtle, but consider when you drive your RC car around and it hits a rock, flops over, and you walk over and flip it over.

    On Mars, theres nobody there to flip the Rover over, or even dislodge stuff from it's tires. They spend all day preparing for a slight bit of movement just so they don't make a mistake worth millions of taxpayer dollars.

    1. Re:Slow moving Rovers last longer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it is expected to last 300 days, and on the 280th day it gets stuck, is that really a million dollar mistake ? The project is a pretty cheap one by NASA standards.

    2. Re:Slow moving Rovers last longer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dislodge stuff from it's tires

      "its".

    3. Re:Slow moving Rovers last longer by adeydas · · Score: 1

      no wonder it moved only 2Kms.

    4. Re:Slow moving Rovers last longer by johannesg · · Score: 1
      On the other hand, if they had watched Robot Wars they would have known how to build a basic self-righting mechanism...

      On a more serious note, I witnessed a demonstration of a legged robot recently that could just as easily function upside down. It had a thin central body with four legs on each side, and the hinges for raising and lowering the legs could flip all the way around to allow them to work when the robot had its back to the floor.

      The thing was pretty fast too, scaring a few people by charging them. It was only about a meter long, but it looks a bit like a giant spider, and instinct takes over when you see a giant spider come at you at speed ;-)

      Clearly it was still at the technology demonstrator stage (it carried no useful payload, and it had a power cable - that is impractical when you are on the surface of Mars), but it will be interesting to see what this evolves into.

    5. Re:Slow moving Rovers last longer by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > It had a thin central body with four legs on each side

      Unless all your equipment was mounted in a way to allow full free rotation and still be usable (the hard part), this wouldn't be a terribly good idea.

      Without the rotation, as soon as you get flipped, your images are upside down (no big deal) and your soil sample collectors, etc are all pointing at the sky. And your million-dollar antenna is broken in half, on the ground millions of miles away.

      Another thing to note is that these probes have to not just survive, but be fully functional after an extremely high-speed crash landing. Good luck making something with leg joints (16 of them, no less, 4 legs x 2 sides x 2 hinges each, I assume) that will still work reliably after that. If one hinge gets stuck, it could jeopardize locomotion compeletely. That's a big advantage to wheels.

      HOWEVER (a big one), if the robots were to accompany humans that had to survive the trek & landing, yours would be a great idea!

  34. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by PierceLabs · · Score: 0

    Let the alien spacecraft/civilization coverup conspiracy theories commence :)

  35. Why not color photos ? by MorseKode · · Score: 1

    Does someone knows why the rovers usually take grey scale photos ? Why don't they take them all in color ? To save bandwith ?
    Anyone knows ?

    1. Re:Why not color photos ? by Blastercorps · · Score: 1

      Because the rover only has a grayscale camera onboard. To get color pictures they put different colored filters on it and combine it back into a color picture as a human being would see it.

    2. Re:Why not color photos ? by Canordis · · Score: 1

      >Because the rover only has a grayscale camera onboard.

      WTF? You mean they spend millions of dollars on mass spectrometers, articulate robot arms, independently-moving wheels and high-efficiency solar panels and then install a grayscale camera?! In the name of Eris, why?

      --
      I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.
    3. Re:Why not color photos ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      There is some info here and some more on the pancam here

      Also, see here for more on rover tech.

    4. Re:Why not color photos ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A color digital camera is just a grayscale sensor with a bunch of tiny red, green, or blue filters stuck over the various pixels. The camera system NASA provides (grayscale with moveable fullsize filters) provides higher resolution and fewer artifacts. And better science since you can look in wavelengths other than R,G,B. For more mundane tasks like navigation, grayscale does give more bang for the buck (it takes a lot of bucks to ship a bit of data from Mars to Earth).

    5. Re:Why not color photos ? by Buran · · Score: 1

      Because you can get far higher resolution from such a camera since all the pixels in the CCD are dedicated to detecting shades of grey instead of one-third for red, another third for blue, another for green. Since the rovers are not looking for anything fast-moving, they can take their time taking each shot.

      Some photographers use B&W film for a similar reason (but it doesn't arise the same way; I believe it is simply more finely grained) -- you get much finer detail than you do from even color transparency film.

    6. Re:Why not color photos ? by ColaMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      This has been pointed out before:

      The cameras used on the rovers have wide sensitivity to the whole visible light spectrum + more than just a bit on each side. Greyscale cameras are more useful when doing science. You plunk a variety of filters over it (I think they have 9?) and you can 'see' from UV down to infra-red.

      "Simple" Red+Green+Blue cameras are a poor equivalent in comparison. For example, different minerals are clearly visible at certain wavelengths. Your "standard" colour camera will have a hard time picking out a mineral if it reflects light somewhere between red and green, where a specific filter on the greyscale camera can highlight it without trouble. To drastically simplify a whole heap-o-science, imagine a colour camera with Red+Green+Blue PLUS IR+Yellow+UV+Orange+Purple+Pink sensors. That's what's on the rovers.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    7. Re:Why not color photos ? by rebelcool · · Score: 1

      These are photos from the navigation cameras, which are black and white because the autonomous navigation system doesnt need color.

      That said, the science cameras (the ones on the periscope there), are also grayscale, like all digital cameras. Consumer digital cameras have a permanently installed filter that has microscopic red, blue and green squares that turn photosites into "color" pixels.

      Astronomical and very high end digital cameras don't want that though, because it limits resolution. Having adjustable filters also allows you to scope things out in infrared and UV.

      --

      -

    8. Re:Why not color photos ? by rebelcool · · Score: 1

      To be technical about it, the Bayer pattern found on consumer cameras is actually 50% green, 25% red and 25% blue. This is because human vision is more sensitive to green.

      Interestingly, this is presumably because most of the visible light given off from the sun is in the yellow-green spectrum. Which also explains the predominance of green vegetation.

      Its also why airport fire trucks are painted that somewhat odd color of green/yellow.

      --

      -

    9. Re:Why not color photos ? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      [Why B&W] Because the rover only has a grayscale camera onboard. To get color pictures they put different colored filters on it and combine it back into a color picture as a human being would see it.

      I saw some color-filtered images taken that may later be assembled into color mosaics. The delay may be first because it takes some manual effort to merge and process them into color, and second there were some sections missing from some of them. The rovers store images until explicitly told to delete them. Often there are communications gaps that result in image gaps. Commands are then given to resend the missing portions, such as "please resend section D of image #2345". Until they fill in the gaps via resends, the color images would look a bit funny, although the internal staff may still be working with unfinished drafts.

    10. Re:Why not color photos ? by stevens · · Score: 1
      You plunk a variety of filters over it (I think they have 9?) and you can 'see' from UV down to infra-red.

      What I hate is all of the 'science' it takes to make an approximation of what a human would see out of all these 'superior' filters.

      There are people still arguing about the color-correction on these photos--which you'd expect to be a simple and straight-forward thing for these scientician-types.

      At least with a standard camera we know that its output actually looks right to us. I don't know about the photos from the rover cameras.

    11. Re:Why not color photos ? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Being able to "see" something in many wavelengths essentionally turns it into a kind of Trek-like "Tricorder" that can identify composition without touching it. One can plot the spectrum of any given point and do typical curve matching techniques to assertain probable composition by comparing the actual curve to controlled lab readings of many substances.

      Further, you get better resolution using filters than direct color because each pixel can be used for the current given filter wavelength rather than having to dedicate each one to a specific color (frequency), as commercial cameras usually do in order to better capture potentially moving objects. But as far as we know, not much moves on Mars (except dust and occasional clouds).

    12. Re:Why not color photos ? by Buran · · Score: 1

      Ah, thank you for the info on the cameras. However, the reason that plants are green is that they photosynthesize by means of a chemical called chlorophyll, which happens to be .... green.

      In the autumn, the chlorophyll breaks down in many plants, causing the natural underlying colors of the leaves -- which were there all along but masked -- to be revealed.

    13. Re:Why not color photos ? by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 1

      There are eight positions on each filter wheel with one position on the left wheel. The filters are not installed in pairs, sans two sets (positions 2 and positions L7/R1) See the Cornell Athena site for technical details.

    14. Re:Why not color photos ? by jrockway · · Score: 1

      And you think chlorophyll just happens to be green for no good reason?

      It is evolution at work; the green plants made most efficient use of the sun's radiation and lived on.

      --
      My other car is first.
    15. Re:Why not color photos ? by slinted · · Score: 1

      They do. The rovers use filters to capture specific (~40 nm) color ranges in 12 individual wavelengths ranging from infrared to blue, which can later be combined to form a near-true-color view of the scene. It is specifically useful for doing analysis of the spectrum of light thrown by rocks or the sky using 12 points of along the spectrum, instead of just 3 which you would get from a standard red/green/blue camera.

      Here is a color image of the heatshield taken on sols 326 and 328 taken through the 6 visible light filters (albeit from the auto-contrasted jpgs released by NASA, so it is not true color)

    16. Re:Why not color photos ? by slinted · · Score: 2, Informative

      Superior for science isn't the same as superior for viewing. They were designed towards the goal of geologic investigation, and to that end, aren't actually all that great at capturing 'true human vision color' at all. The filters are narrow and don't overlap in coverage, missing entire segments of our visible spectrum.

      Also, a good deal of the 'debate' comes down to how to process the true color images from the auto-contrasted, separately exposed frames released as JPGs by NASA/JPL on a real time basis. The folks at NASA (and those that are using the calibrated files released by NASA through the Planetary Data System) are working with good data, whereas a huge number of people are working with the jpg's that weren't designed to be combined to make color. That alone is the source of most of the debate over the MER missions.

      It is very easy to create wildly different colors simply by balancing the frames in a certain way, which has to be done anyway to undo some effects that aren't calibrated out by the time the raw jpg images are released. So a person who is sitting down to "properly" balance the frames will see a variety of possible outcomes, some of those balancing acts produce images that agree with the calibrated (true) view, and others will produce blue skies and green dirt, further fueling the debate.

    17. Re:Why not color photos ? by am+2k · · Score: 1
      At least with a standard camera we know that its output actually looks right to us.

      Uh, I presume you've never tried to use a digital camera in a closed room? The colors are nowhere near the thing you can see there with your own eyes.

      You can try to correct it by setting the white point and compare it with what you think is right (which is what the brain does automatically, btw), but that's pretty much impossible when you have no clue how the area looks like to human eyes.

    18. Re:Why not color photos ? by shobadobs · · Score: 1

      Well, the green plants are green because they reflect the green light and absorb the bluer and redder shades. Which by the above standpoint would be considered inefficient use. (But I am sure there are other good reasons for chlorophyll being the chemical of choice.)

    19. Re:Why not color photos ? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      Well, if the sun puts out more light in that frequency range (green), maybe plants are green only because there is SO MUCH green light coming in to be reflected?

      Or maybe I need to go back & take more science classes.

  36. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Rob+Carr · · Score: 4, Informative
    To do that you need to push the mean lifetime way beyond the warranty period.

    The "90 days" was certainly something they expected - maybe even double that. But they also knew that the Martian winter was coming up and that Mars would go behind the Sun, causing Earth to lose contact with the rovers for a number of days.

    I think they were really surprised both rovers made it through the Martian winter. That Opportunity is actually back up to the normal output for the solar panels is a welcome surprise.

    Spirit doesn't seem to be doing nearly as well. There's problem with the lubrication of the wheels, the brakes may not be releasing - or the circuit that detects them releasing has gone bad, and the dust accumulation on the solar panels has taken it's toll.

    There might be more wrong with the Spirit rover, but even I've been skipping some of the updates on the web site.

    --
    This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  37. Humans haven't even landed there..... by fred911 · · Score: 2, Funny

    We're already trashing up the place!

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  38. It's British... by rarose · · Score: 1

    The rock abrasion tool could probably provide some useful dentistry.

    --
    --Rob
  39. millions of taxpayer dollars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The rovers have already done their job--they were only supposed to keep working until sol 90! That they're still working is borderline miraculous, and the science they're still doing is pure gravy. We taxpayers got one heck of a deal!

  40. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by dragons_flight · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't think anyone thought either rover would last this long

    I was at a presentation by one of the members of the rover science teams six weeks ago.

    If there are no surprises, he was talking about the rovers possibly lasting till June or July. By that time, he was suggesting that the rover's batteries would no longer be able to hold enough charge to keep the things operating.

    For a while they had been expecting that the solar panels would fail first, but apparently the rate of dust accumulation is less than they expected. (Plus "martian carwash" events seem to have cleared off some of the dust. He felt such events were probably caused by dust devils that happened to cross over the rover.)

  41. Mod parent up / RTFA mods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, it is explicitly on-topic. RTFA mods

  42. Eat it timothy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i p00st on your LJ

    http://slashdotmirror.cjb.net/

  43. Oh how much I wish... by Yaztromo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know it isn't going to happen due to the distances involved, but I'd love it if one of these rovers (or one of the rovers to follow...) were to come across Viking I and/or II. It would be interesting to see how they have withstood the test of time in the last 28 years since their landing. I imagine there is quite a bit of useful science that could be conducted, as both are known variables from nearly 30 years ago, and we have a lot of data from them about their surroundings.

    At the same time, Viking I and Viking II are two of the extraterrestrial missions I have early memories of. I was three when they landed, and continued transmitting data until I was nine. So these are old friends I wouldn't mind revisiting.

    The current missions aren't close enough to either one to make it, but maybe a future mission will give up a glimpse of these past heroes. One can hope :).

    Yaz.

  44. It had to be said. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Act 1, Scene 1

    Somewhere on Mars, Opportunity crests a rise and sights the Beagle probe. Several hours later, it rolls up to it and begins to extract its rock abrasion tool.

    BEAGLE[In British accent] : Is that a rock abrasion tool in your pants or are you just happy to see me?

  45. No no no... by Gorimek · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    "Surströmming" == "Pickled Herring"???

    Not even close. Pickled herring has a bit of a strong taste that is not for everyone, but it's nowhere close to Surströmming, which you would never believe was meant for human consumption unless you saw people eat it. That is if you managed to stay in the room without throwing up.

  46. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by SWTP_OS9 · · Score: 1

    It did help to get that "Car Wash" recently from the locals...

    Too bad the other is out in the boonies to far for MAA. { Mars Automobile Association } to sprits it also.

  47. Re:Big deal by Inthewire · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Read the submission, not just the emission.
    DOJ reports crack is getting cheaper.

    Morons.

    Learn to read, tards.

    --


    Writers imply. Readers infer.
  48. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice, you got me. I should have known better.

  49. Re:Mars rovers, keep going, and going, and going.. by adeydas · · Score: 1

    the longer the merrier.

  50. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Informative

    [I don't think anyone thought either rover would last this long...] It seems I hear this just about every mission that doesn't explode/crash within 24 hours of launch. Do you really think that they had no idea how long it would last under ideal conditions?

    The Pathfinder/Sojourner rover lasted longer than expected, but did conk out after about 30 days. They suspect battery fatique. The new set of Rovers are intentionally better built than Sojourner (which was an experimental probe), but it is basically the same kind of power technology.

  51. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They already knew where the heat shield was. They had a picture from the Mars Orbiter camera

    IIRC, the first images of the shield came from the rover's "decent" cameras when it was a few miles high. The images were used by the lander system to correct for vertical motion, which would have otherwise caused the air-bag-encased rover to bounce and roll too much. The system simply kept the adjustment images for later use and they were sent back to Earth soon after landing.

  52. Re:Mars rovers, keep going, and going, and going.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats what she said.

  53. nuclear powered rovers... by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They would last years (assuming the dust doesn't screw up the wheels), be able to travel much farther, and opperate at night.

    --
    I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    1. Re:nuclear powered rovers... by ConsumedByTV · · Score: 1

      What happens when the ship crashes?

      --


      "Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
    2. Re:nuclear powered rovers... by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

      Nothing... The nuclear-powered satellites and space probes sent up so far have all their nuclear material in a hardened box designed to survive reentry and crashing.

      The space shuttle Colombia apparently had a similar box (although I believe it contained something else like data recorders) that survived and was recovered intact after Colombia broke up during reentry.

    3. Re:nuclear powered rovers... by ConsumedByTV · · Score: 1

      I think that if it wasn't possible to have it taint the area, it could be a good idea. But I don't think it's that great of an idea if that's not the case. You can't take it back, you know?

      --


      "Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
  54. It's easy. by eobanb · · Score: 1

    Just apply a sort of orangish tint in Photoshop.

    --

    Take off every sig. For great justice.

  55. Rebooting Viking II by cmholm · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah, if only. Viking II was accidentally powered down by mission controllers. It'd be a (moderately) interesting engineering exercise to look at the what it would take to recycle the logic in situ. However, even if the two MERs were bullet proof designs, capable of 1k+ miles of travel, they wouldn't be able to make it, Viking II being too far north for the rovers' solar panels to generate sufficient juice.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  56. 2009 Mars Rover will be Nuclear Powered by MeridianOnTheLake · · Score: 1

    You asked for it, you got it: 2009 Mars Rover will be Nuclear Powered
    http://www.nuclearspace.com/a_2009_Rover.htm

  57. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the first images of the shield came from the rover's "decent" cameras

    While I'm sure the cameras were more than decent, I'll bet you probably meant the cameras used during the rover's descent to the surface. You had me confused for a short while there.

  58. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by urbanmatador · · Score: 1
    The new set of Rovers are intentionally better built than Sojourner

    rather hard to accidentally build the new one better than the old, don't you think?

    --
    there can be hours between the so and the what of the so.
  59. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To do that you need to push the mean lifetime way beyond the warranty period.

    Most warranties don't cover being dropped on an alien planet. Always check the fine print when in doubt.

  60. Re:Why not color photos ... here's some by Hynee · · Score: 1

    I do these myself:
    Front View
    Back view
    The impact site
    Misc junk just to left of above image
    Highly brightened image to show inner heatshield material (looks kinda black).

    They usually send down enough data to construct a colour image, but it invovles at least 3 shots with different filters.

    --
    Damn, I already moderated this topic. Now I'll have to log in with my sock puppet to comment.
  61. Had to be her by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes it had to be the wicked witch of the west 'cause Dorothy kill the wicked witch of the east a long time ago....

  62. 20 times pathfinder; 1/5th the lunar rovers by peter303 · · Score: 1

    The pathfinder only went about 110 yards over its two month career. The two Russian Lunakhods lasted just under a year in the harsher lunar climatea and went about 11 km each. The Russians had the advantage of a nuclear power source and semi-interactive remote control (3 second round trip delay).

  63. will money be the limiting factor? by peter303 · · Score: 1

    The MERS had an original operational budget of three months, with two six-month renewals until March 2005. At some point the 2007 and 2009 lander preparations will intrude. NASA cut budgets for Magellan-Venus and Jupiter-Galileo before they completely wore out, but 3-5 times longer than their original design lifetimes.

  64. Martians rescued the Rovers? by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Recently, the much of the dust was observed to have been removed from the solar panels. Wind is suspected, but not seen. This combined with approaching Martian summer bodes well for battery recharging. There were plans to have rovers "sleep-recharge" every other day or every two of three days, but that isnt needed yet.

  65. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Mountain Dew is only one of the 99 problems NASA is having right now, but a Bitch ain't one of them.

  66. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by tftp · · Score: 1

    That's how evolution works...

  67. New Frontier domination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Americans have long dominated the litter industry here on earth. It's encouraging to see their desire to continue that domination on other planets. Too bad their are no Native Martians in need of extermination.

  68. Rovers can move autonomously by ToSeek · · Score: 1

    And even when it is on the roll, each rover doesn't move terribly fast, and often needs to navigate around terrain. Nevermind the fact that if you did want to move a long distance, you'd only be able to move a few metres, take a snapshot of your surrroundings, send them back to Earth, and await the next set of movement instructions. Both sending the snapshot and retreiving the next set of instructions takes several hours due to the distances involved, resulting in quite a bit of time spent not going anywhere.

    This isn't the whole story. The rover travels in either of two modes: either directly controlled from Earth in complete detail, or instructed by Earth to move to a specific location but allowed to determine its own path (or to give up if there's no safe path). The rovers would not get very far - and certainly Spirit would not have made it the several kilometers from the landing site to the Columbia Hills - if the movement instructions had to be fully scripted from Earth since typically there's only once chance to upload instructions every Martian day.

    More information here and a Quicktime animation video here.

  69. After:etched terrain and Victoria Crater by ToSeek · · Score: 1

    According to Steve Squyres.

  70. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    rather hard to accidentally build the new one better than the old, don't you think?

    One can find out after the fact.

  71. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    While I'm sure the cameras were more than decent, I'll bet you probably meant the cameras used during the rover's descent to the surface.

    I thought that word looked funny when I typed it, but I could not put my finger on the problem. Thanks.

  72. Red Rover by jeephistorian · · Score: 1

    "Red rover, red rover, send and astronaut over..."
    ...or something....eh...

    _______________

    --
    Huh?
  73. Your Sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (oop.ismad.com) Under W the US is like a big geek: Technically powerful, but not popular.

    Well, I would probably have replaced "big geek" by bully. Powerful and unpopular still applies.

  74. Funny Thingy In Photo by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

    I wonder what that thing is just to the lower-left of the heat shield. When I first saw it, the picture was shrunk by my browser, so it looked like a plastic water bottle. On zooming to full size, it looked like some kind of metal spring.

    Oh, I just noticed a second one off to the right.

    I wonder what it was used for.

    1. Re:Funny Thingy In Photo by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I wonder what [the spring] was used for.

      Perhaps they were between the probe & the shield, so that when the latches were released to shed the shield, it would push away from the lander (crasher). If it did not do this, the shield could (although unlikely) land directly on top of the rover, breaking something.

      Ah yes, science through wild speculation.

    2. Re:Funny Thingy In Photo by slinted · · Score: 1

      It is indeed a spring, one of the 6 "kickoff springs" used to guarantee the heatshield seperated from the rest of the lander. There is another visible in this image:
      http://www.lyle.org/~markoff/processed/1P157122779 EFF40A3P2577L234567M1.JPG

  75. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by stanmann · · Score: 1

    WOW!!! That is also how Intelligent design works... Are you saying that Evolution is powered by intelligence?

    --
    Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  76. You left out the final step. by devphil · · Score: 1


    You take some perfectly good pieces of dried fish (yuck) and soak them in lye (yes, really!) for 24 hours. Then you soak the fish in fresh water for 48 hours, before putting it in a pan and letting it simmer for about 20 minutes. Finally you wrap the fish in aluminium foil and bake in the oven at 200C for 30-40 minutes.

    Then throw the fish away and eat the foil.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:You left out the final step. by Graabein · · Score: 1
      Then throw the fish away and eat the foil.

      Hehe, excellent. Alternatively, you could try to eat the fish jell-o, like Clay Shirky did:

      http://www.shirky.com/writings/lutefisk.html

      --
      And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
  77. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by bar-agent · · Score: 1

    Opportunity is actually back up to the normal output...Spirit doesn't seem to be doing nearly as well.

    It is funny how the rovers' names match their situations. Opportunity is lucking out. But Spirit is trying hard against adversity, and its body is weak.

    Those kids that named 'em must have been psychic, or something.

    --
    i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  78. Better pictures by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

    Here are links to pictures taken when Opportunity was standing a bit closer:

    http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/opportu nity_n331.html http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/opportu nity_n332.html

    I always thought that the heat shield should be a little higher on the list of priorities. Examination of how the heat shield weathered the fall would yield invaluable information that could be used to better safeguard future missions.

    But that's just one layman's opinion....

    --
    *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
  79. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by uberdave · · Score: 1

    Sojourner was the rover, and the Sagan Memorial Station was the lander/base station. Both the base station and rover had basic, non rechargeable batteries. They were chosen because of the 30 sol maximum mission profile, and rechargeables didn't fit into the "better, faster, cheaper" design.

    Actually, Sojourner's mission lasted a lot longer than its batteries. During the last days, it was limited to daytime operations only. The Pathfinder mission was shut down because the Sagan Memorial station stopped transmitting. (The rover transmitted to the base station, which relayed the data to Earth. So, as soon as contact was lost with the base station, contact with the rover was lost as well.) The rover was commanded to circle the base station once they realized that they might lose communications. For all we know, Sojourner is still circling the Sagan Memorial station, on solar power, waiting to hear from Earth.

    Spirit, and Opportunity, however, were designed with solar powered rechargeable batteries. They were necessary because the 90 sol mission profile precluded the use of standard batteries.

  80. Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the by uberdave · · Score: 1

    They know it's not a sensor malfunction. They can tell by the tracks, and the fact that the rover is veering off to one side. In order to get the rover to travel in a straight line, they have to command some of the wheels to rotate faster than the other side to compensate for the drag.