Solar-Powered Moon Rover To Explore Apollo Landing

Mike writes "Carnegie Mellon roboticist Dr. William Whittaker has teamed up with Astrobiotic Technology to develop a solar powered moon rover that will explore the Apollo landing site in 2011. The photovoltaic clad robot features two electric motors in the hub of each wheel, and a half cone of solar generators up top that will power the wheels, run computers, and beam stereo HD video back to earth. The project has been entered in the $25 million Google Lunar X Prize competition."

Comments

No

[amstrad]

I think the Apollo landing sites need to be preserved for posterity.

Re:No

[dohzer]

But they've already dismantled it!

Re:No

[FlyingSquidStudios]

Then they re-used the sets for Capricorn One.

Re:No

[Darkness404]

Why? Sure, its "cool" to preserve everything, but its a heck of a lot more valuable to see how the machines have fared for the eventual colonization of the moon and for future generations. I'm not exactly sure what the point is if we are looking back on history rather than creating it.

Re:No

[auLucifer]

Mod parent up. Why should we preserve it? How are we suppose to move forward (by seeing how the machines have fared and see if it is possible to use this as a launch to Mars or possible location for colonisation) if we refuse to tread on the steps of those that came before? Simply keeping the markings there for no other reason then posterity just sounds like a waste to me when there are things we can learn.

Re:No

[camperdave]

IIRC the LEM already knocked it over when it blasted off for the return flight. Theoretically a lot of the bootprints will also have been erased by the exhaust as well.

I'm not so sure about that. The LEM consisted of two parts, the descent stage, and the ascent stage. The Ascent stage stood about 11 feet off of the ground atop the descent stage. The descent stage would have acted as a deflector, shunting aside the ascent motor exhaust and protecting the bootprint. If you watch the Apollo 14 and Apollo 17 ascents, you can see how surprisingly gentle they are. The bootprints may have been filled in a little, but likely they wouldn't have been erased by the exhaust. You've got to remember, there's no atmosphere on the moon, so the exhaust expands in all directions. Furthermore, it doesn't push any air out of the way, so there's no collateral dust movement. The final frame of this montage of Apollo 15's ascent shows rover tire marks surviving the exhaust.

No, the thing that would have destroyed the first steps was the astronauts themselves as they did their moonwalks.

Re:No

[timepilot]

According to http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo_11_30th.html the Apollo 11 flag was knocked over.

Re:No

[ivan256]

Where do you think the second guy coming down the ladder stepped?

The first footprint on the moon lasted less than 20 minutes.

Buzz Aldrin punch

[t000lish]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

Re:Buzz Aldrin punch

[DigiShaman]

This single punch is all that's required to earn my respect. No speech, interview, or biography holds as much weight to the punch he threw. It's an act of pure love and protection of the sacrifice he made to make history for all mankind.

Buzz Aldrin, you f-ing ROCK!!!

Re:Buzz Aldrin punch

[macshit]

The case was tossed out too, making him look even more stupid!

I can imagine the Judge's reaction upon viewing the video evidence...

My verdict: you are a mega-wanker; he should have hit you harder!

NEXT!

Please leave the landing sites alone!

[jms]

Sending a mouse to disturb the eternal footprints of giants. Sort of a metaphor for the current state of NASA, sadly.

Here's hoping they'll observe from a distance

[TinBromide]

I hope that they put on a really really good telephoto lense. Those original footprints have the chance of lasting for thousands of years if WE DON'T STOMP ALL OVER THEM WITH A FRICKING ROBOT.

Re:Here's hoping they'll observe from a distance

[Abcd1234]

You are aware that most (if not all) of the footprints were obliterated by the rocket that took the astronauts off the moon, right?

Uh, no they weren't. In fact, you can see the tracks of the astronauts in the latest images of the Apollo 11 landing site returned by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

Aldrin's famous first footprint exists only as a photograph.

That's not at all obvious. When the rockets of the ascent stage were fired, thus beginning the return to rendezvous with Columbia, the surface of the moon may have been shielded by the components of the LM that were left behind.

Re:Here's hoping they'll observe from a distance

[Da Cheez]

In fact, you can see the tracks of the astronauts in the latest images of the Apollo 11 landing site returned by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

Um, maybe it's just me but I don't see any footprints in the LRO image of the Apollo 11 landing site. Perhaps you're referring to the footprints in the Apollo 14 image? Those footprints go quite a long ways away from the LM and due to the pixelation of the image it's hard to tell just how well-preserved they might be that close to the descent stage.

Re:Here's hoping they'll observe from a distance

[dbIII]

Wait a few seconds and I'll be back with Buzz Aldrin and some brass knuckles :)

Horrible Idea

[MarkLR]

I think the Apollo landing sites should be off limits. One mistake and Armstrong's first boot prints could be destroyed. I cannot believe that a group of scientists have the audacity to mess around with the Apollo 11 site.

Re:Horrible Idea

[Eric Smith]

Armstrong's first boot prints must surely have been destroyed when the ascent module fired its main engine. However, there are probably other footprints further from the LM site that should be preserved.

Re:Horrible Idea

[Gadget_Guy]

If only Armstrong made a giant leap instead of a small step then the first footprint might have survived.

Re:Horrible Idea

[JPLemme]

Armstrong's first boot prints were most likely destroyed the minute Buzz Aldrin hopped off the ladder after him. It's the last bootprints that would have been obliterated by the ascent module.

Re:Horrible Idea

[Saint Fnordius]

Actually, the first bootprints might have survived due to the LEM base acting as an umbrella. Sure, the flag may have been knocked over (Aldrin saw it fall), but the lack of atmosphere means there would be no swirling of the dust.

Could someone please explain

[JayTech]

Why is it necessary that we go back and explore what was accomplished in the past? Call me stupid, but it seems like a rover on the moon could do something more useful than exploring a bunch of dusty boot prints and some used equipment. Anyone care to enlighten me?

Re:Could someone please explain

[isaac338]

Why is it necessary that we go back and explore what was accomplished in the past?

Because the relics of the past visits will give us valuable insight into long-term exposure of our machinery in the environment of the Moon - something that is surely relevant to future efforts of colonization. All the things we left behind have been sitting (hopefully?) untouched for 40 years getting bombarded with micrometeoroids, experiencing huge temperature swings and moonquakes, and generally experiencing the reality of existing there.

I find it fascinating and am excited to see pictures of how the sites have weathered.

Re:Could someone please explain

[stfvon007]

Does this mean google moon will soon feature streetview?

Moonquakes

[jofer]

While they're at it, it would be awesome to deploy a few more seismometers...

Moonquakes are pretty damn cool from a seismological perspective. Beyond that, some of the ones recorded by Apollo-installed seismometers were >Mw 5. Big enough to be damaging.

The moon isn't tectonically active, of course, but it is seismically active, and the data recorded in the 70's indicates that the moon's lithosphere is a very different beast compared to earth's. At any rate, it would produce some extremely neat data!

Re:Moonquakes

[Poobar]

Check out Moonlite, a (hopefully) upcoming British mission to do just that.

Good for science, good for the comedy value of saying "penetrator" and giggling a lot.

Re:Moonquakes

[mbone]

One of the things that I think was near criminal about the post Apollo period was that the ALSEPs were turned off, including the seismometers, to satisfy Senator Proxmire. So many billions of dollars to put them on the Moon, but $ 250,000 / year to keep collecting data was just too much.

This entire thread, summarized:

[Anonymous Coward]

"Bet they can do it on the sound-stage in Nevada" - Idiot who doesn't understand that every other idiot also thought of the same joke at the same time.

"But we didn't go to the moon! I saw it on Fox, so it must be true" - Flaming moron who couldn't find their ass with both hands, a copy of an anatomy textbook and a full length mirror.

"LOL, wut, we didn't go to the moon, you peeps are sheep" - Troll, pretending to be the above idiot, thereby becoming a recursive idiot instead (idiot^2).

"NASA SUCKS!!!" - Multiple varieties of idiot, any one of whom very well might be a community college certified rocket scientist.

"NOES! They'll destroy the historic bootprints!" - Idiot who believes that lack of erosion signals lack of change. The bootprints are likely long gone, due to heating and cooling of the rocks, vibrations from the ground and, at the landing sites proper, the exhaust from the ascent stage of the lander. Nobody but your high school science teacher seriously thinks they'll last a hundred years, or whatever numeric value you were told.

"Git offa my lawn you kids!" - Angry curmudgeon tired of being able to predict slashdot posts in advance, just by seeing the fucking story title.

There, now you don't have to read the thread. You just read every post, condensed into one. You're welcome. Now, go defy expectations and RTFA instead.

Re:This entire thread, summarized:

[Ihmhi]

Now, go defy expectations and RTFA instead.
defy expectations and RTFA instead.
and RTFA instead.
RTFA

RTFA? What are you some kinda young'un who don't know who things work around here? Get offa my lawn!

Re:2 Motors?

[cbhacking]

Possibly just rednendency. The Mars rovers have shown us that a little design redundency and simple, good engineering can go a really, really long way. It sounds like this moon rover is hoping to follow in their metaphorical footsteps. This seems an excellent approach (one that we should take more often) and I wish it the best of luck!

WHY?

[DynaSoar]

First off, it's bullshit. They may develop the thing, but it's not going to fly itself. The Google X-Prize money is for the development, not the flying, and it's not enough to get it there anyway.

They WANT to have it explore the moon (actually they want to be seen wanting to do so, in order to increase their chances of getting the prize money; you think the timing of the announcement was random?). There's nothing here about anyone else wanting them to.

And given their announced target, I think they've just pointed the space demodulator at their foot. Far too many people would be offended.

All in all, this is a PR job. The guy may be capable of developing, but the chances are that having teamed up with this company, their plans are to get the prize money, maybe develop, maybe not, and know for certain ahead of time it'll never leave the ground. They just want the money. The tip off? Such a device could do valuable research, such as roving around the south pole looking for ice. Are they planning any useful or noble venture like that? No. They're planning on some virtual tourism, and true to big ticket money tourist ideals think that they're permitted to walk on anyone's lawn they wish just so they can take their holiday photos.

Fuck 'em. If you think they're hosebags for wanting to trundle all over what may be the most historic of historic sites, complain to the Google Lunar X-Prize people http://www.googlelunarxprize.org/lunar/contact-us and tell them not to support this project.

Re:WHY?

[The_Duck271]

the chances are that having teamed up with this company, their plans are to get the prize money, maybe develop, maybe not, and know for certain ahead of time it'll never leave the ground. They just want the money.

What? There's no prize money until you land on the Moon. From the prize website: "The first team to land on the Moon and complete the mission objectives will be awarded $20 million."

I heard Red Whittaker, the team leader, speak last summer; he said he does expect to make money off the project. Not from the prize, as the costs are several times the prize money, but from all the money that can be generated from the publicity of the landing. He wouldn't be doing the project if it was going to lose money; he's not in it for the science or the benefit to humanity. So yes, it is in large part a PR thing. But they definitely plan to launch; they've bought a launch rocket from NASA for several million dollars. Personally, I'm all for it; I think the lander is unlikely to mess up the Apollo site more than the launch rockers of the return stage already have, and it's perhaps the only site that will generate a bunch of public interest. As someone who wasn't alive during Apollo, I'm excited to see the video.

Re:2 Motors?

[thatkid_2002]

RAID 1 mirrored drives. When one drive breaks the other can keep going.

Re:Rocket Blast

[fishbowl]

Well, not all of them, and the truth is we don't actually know what the landing sight looks like with very close resolution. Didn't you see the photo of the footpath? Some of the footprints from Apollo 11 remain, certainly. Such details of the LEM pad site are a matter of speculation.

Re:Why visit old relics?

[Darkness404]

But thats the thing, we need to see if they were non-rusting or not. Sure, we can know that they aren't rusted but 40 years of moonquakes, micro-meteoroids and just general disuse is going to make it a valuable insight into a future plan of colonizing the moon.

I'll support this if...

[techoi]

I can fully get behind this if: 1) the robot proves all "the moon landing was a hoax" a-holes wrong once and for all, and... 2) we build another robot to finish the ass kicking that Buzz Aldrin started on that fuckwad Bart Sibrel.

Really? REALLY?

[TiggertheMad]

Oh, for fuck's sake...we go to the trouble to build a super slick rover to explore the surface of another planet, and they want to waste time visiting the .0001% that we already have explored? If there isn't something better to be exploring on the moon, why the hell are we going again?

I knew we were a glorified pack of narcissistic monkeys but this just take it.

"Lets go look and see where we landed LAST time we were here, that seems like a good idea."

Re:I'm sick of the lies and the crap

[Mogster]

Sir, if you would just look this way for a minute...

**flashythingy**

Now aliens do not exist. We do not, and never have had anti-gravity or free energy tech. Now go sell all your possessions and join a missionary group in inner Papua New Guinea. Have a nice life.

*the* Apollo landing site?

[Anonymous Freak]

What's with the summary's "the" Apollo landing site? Last time I checked, there were 6 landing sites. (Apollos 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17.)

Why they are returning to an Apollo site

[The_Duck271]

To those whining about returning to an Apollo site instead of doing some new exploration/science: This isn't a science mission, and the people doing it aren't scientists. The Lunar X Prize isn't trying to promote lunar science. It's about improving space technology. By returning to an Apollo site, the teams can generate lots of public interest that will help them make some money to cover their costs, and break even on the finances. If they went somewhere else these private teams would likely have to absorb millions of dollars in losses. Plus, there's a bonus prize for photographing man-made objects on the moon. Don't you want to see the pictures?