Slashdot Mirror


How Do You Land a Nuke-Powered Mini-Cooper On Mars?

tcd004 writes "Miles O'Brien narrates this video simulation of NASA's next Mars shot, which promises to out-gun all previous efforts. The Mini Cooper-sized Mars Science Laboratory, which is now named Curiosity, will crawl the Martian surface under steam from a nuclear powerplant — but it's a gentle giant compared to its predecessors. Recent theories have emerged that previous attempts at identifying organic compounds in Martian soil may have actually cooked away any signs of life-giving elements. Curiosity will go to great pains to avoid scorching the Earth ... erm ... Mars."

218 comments

  1. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yo dawg we herd you liked mini coopers so we put a mini cooper on yo mars planet.

    1. Re:RTFA by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yo. stupid mods. you missed the typo in the story title.

      "How Do Yo Land a Nuke-Powered Mini-Cooper On Mars?"

    2. Re:RTFA by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "How Do Yo Land a Nuke-Powered Mini-Cooper On Mars?"

      Clearly, it's a pun on the word "Yo-yo".

      Since the plan is that it does down, but not back up again, it's just a "yo".

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    3. Re:RTFA by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Yo dawg, we herd yo and yo dawgs like yo yos so we put yo dawg in a yo yo so yo can yo yo yo dawg while yo dawg yo yos, dawg.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  2. Oy vey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    >gentile giant
    What, it's an uncircumcised, nuclear powered Mini Cooper?

    1. Re:Oy vey by yndrd1984 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, to be young again. And also a nuclear powered robot with an intact penis.

  3. Genitle Giant? by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 3, Informative

    As opposed to what, "Semitic Softie"?

    --

    I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    1. Re:Genitle Giant? by ChikMag777 · · Score: 1

      Genitle != Gentile

    2. Re:Genitle Giant? by tangelogee · · Score: 0

      further, gentile != gentle

  4. +1 by Kid+Zero · · Score: 5, Funny

    +1 for the great headline!

    Otherwise, I'll state the obvious: Carefully!

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

      You are at the wrong site cowboy! Go back to Fark

    2. Re:+1 by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      Today's article editing brought to you by Firefox Spellcheck.

      Yo, Slashdot editors, cmon! :|

    3. Re:+1 by Brian+Boitano · · Score: 1

      This was the funniest slashdot article ever :D.

      --
      What would Brian Boitano do?
    4. Re:+1 by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      Brian? is that you?

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  5. Gentile Giant? by Michael_Burton · · Score: 4, Funny

    Personally, I don't think the space lab's religion is any of our business.

    --
    When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
    1. Re:Gentile Giant? by Michael_Burton · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oh, drat. My witty and insightful comment has been rendered nonsensical by an edit of the post. It really did say "gentile giant," honest!

      --
      When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
    2. Re:Gentile Giant? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Personally, I don't think the space lab's religion is any of our business.

      I dunno... it could be a problem if it's a strict 6000-yr Creationist.

      NASA: Okay MSL, send us the data from the last sample analysis.

      MSL: I'll save some bandwidth and just give you the summary. No life, no precursors.

      NASA: Okay, but if you could please just send us the raw data, that'd be great. This sample looked really promising and...

      MSL: I said NO LIFE!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    3. Re:Gentile Giant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I don't think the space lab's religion is any of our business.

      like this :top

      movie2satu | download all movie

  6. Well... by lumpenprole · · Score: 1

    Very carefully?

    --
    Disclaimer: MINAA (Mummy! I'm Not An Animal!)
    1. Re:Well... by thrillseeker · · Score: 2, Funny

      "with sufficient thrust, even a brick can fly" - unknown F-4 pilot

    2. Re:Well... by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          I'm not sure that's originally attributable to an F-4 pilot. I've heard that quite a bit in the past, and always understood it to be a rocket reference.

          You may want to check RFC 1925 for probably the longest version I've seen.

      2. The Fundamental Truths

        (3) With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is
                      not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they
                      are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them
                      as they fly overhead.

      There are plenty of other ones, usually pertaining to pigs.

          But, we've been flying bricks (things with lots of thrust but no wings for aerodynamic lift) since long before the F-4 existed.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    3. Re:Well... by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      "There isn't enough thrust in Christendom to fix this plane"

      Admiral Thomas Connolly, speaking to Congress about the shortcomings of the F-111

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
  7. Car Chase by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

    This is a good plan. I saw that one movie, the Italian Job, I know how sturdy Mini coopers can be. I'm sure they can handle the harsh environment of mars.

    1. Re:Car Chase by c++0xFF · · Score: 1

      That movie also taught me Mini Coopers can handle much more powerful engines than you'd think. A nuclear-powered model is quite possible.

    2. Re:Car Chase by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Um, Smokey and the Bandit? Bullitt? You could fit more scientific gear in a Firebird or a Mustang. Or hell, how about a Blues Brothers cop car? From those flicks, Firebirds, Mustangs, and cop cars are invincible!

    3. Re:Car Chase by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      True enough, but nuclear powered Mini Coopers? If anything goes wrong, that's going to take the line "You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!" to a whole new level of understatement...

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    4. Re:Car Chase by tangelogee · · Score: 0

      Personally, I'd go with the 1980's black Trans-AM. (mostly) Indestructable, and can provide some riveting conversation on the way...

    5. Re:Car Chase by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Um, Smokey and the Bandit? Bullitt? You could fit more scientific gear in a Firebird or a Mustang. Or hell, how about a Blues Brothers cop car? From those flicks, Firebirds, Mustangs, and cop cars are invincible!

      Not possible, although there are clearly no roads on Mars, they just can't take the risk that the rover might one day need to turn a corner - what a way to waste millions of dollars if the thing gets stuck at a corner millions of miles away with no way for us to free it.

    6. Re:Car Chase by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      IIRC the Bluesmobile was a 1974 Dodge Monaco. Shitty gas milage, but it felt like doing 90 mph in your living room.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    7. Re:Car Chase by mangu · · Score: 1

      I saw that one movie, the Italian Job

      Which one, the good one, or the remake?

  8. Long live the ability to read ... by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

    It's always fun when you misread titles like this and end up with:

    "How Do Yo Nuke a Land-powered Mini-Cooper On Mars?"

    Not that I have any idea just how a land-powered vehicle would work, but the imagery was intriguing.

    1. Re:Long live the ability to read ... by OolimPhon · · Score: 1

      It's always fun when you misread titles like this and end up with:

      "How Do Yo Nuke a Land-powered Mini-Cooper On Mars?"

      Not that I have any idea just how a land-powered vehicle would work, but the imagery was intriguing.

      Obvious, really. You nuke it from orbit...

    2. Re:Long live the ability to read ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... only way to be sure...

    3. Re:Long live the ability to read ... by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      Not that I have any idea just how a land-powered vehicle would work

      Well, you could roll it down a hill.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    4. Re:Long live the ability to read ... by Drethon · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean the way real people would nuke a living tree and its nine foot tall blue worshipers?

    5. Re:Long live the ability to read ... by ntropia · · Score: 1

      I don't see what's the problem... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGwn_0k_TQo Well, unless the Mini-Cooper they have is not convertible... eNjoy

  9. Corporate sponsorship... by drosboro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One wonders how much BMW paid to have "the Mini Cooper" used to describe this thing... :)

    1. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Thanshin · · Score: 4, Funny

      One wonders how much BMW paid to have "the Mini Cooper" used to describe this thing... :)

      Two libraries of Congress.

      And a ping-pong ball.

    2. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. A BMW to the right person in the NASA Communications dept. would do the trick, I imagine.

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    3. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One wonders how much BMW paid to have "the Mini Cooper" used to describe this thing... :)

      Well they could have said "small car", but that is kinda subjective as what amounts to a small car in the US is gi-friggining-normous everywhere else in the world. Instead I'm guessing that the news program just went with a recognized make/model that is in use all over the place, and that no money changed hands.

      Mini Cooper - the new Library of Congress for volume measurements!

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    4. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      They could have said "X by Y by Z", where X is the length, Y is the width, and Z is the depth.

    5. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could have said "X by Y by Z", where X is the length, Y is the width, and Z is the depth.

      They did, and in the only units understood internationally since VM Bugs stopped being familiar in too many markets.

    6. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 1

      That requires more thought to understand. If you say "the size of a mini cooper" you get it in less than a second, with dimensions it takes me 5 or 10 seconds to process it all and get an understanding. As much as football fields, mini coopers and libraries of congress are ridiculous and imprecise, they are pretty decent references for public, non-technical descriptions.

      While 5 or 10 seconds may not be much in the grand scheme of things, if you're reading a news article, you're likely to ignore measurements but a reference to an everyday object will get the point across very easily. And having seen both Mini Coopers and MSL, its a pretty apt comparison.

    7. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Mini Cooper - the new Library of Congress for volume measurements!

      Actually, the old volume measurement was "Volkswagens" (as in a Volkswagen Bug). So the Mini Cooper is the new Volkswagen Bug.

    8. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by c++0xFF · · Score: 1

      Time has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing.

      It's all about making an analogy. For some reason, cars are a particularly common choice.

      The advantage of the analogy is that almost anybody can understand the meaning at a glance and with very little effort. Time plays a part of the effort, of course, but it's not the core component. In the end, a person will try to imagine how big X, Y, and Z are and realize, "So X by Y by Z is about the size of a small car ... maybe a Cooper?"

      Why not just make that leap for them, and move on to more interesting things (such as the nuke-powered part)?

    9. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JPL engineers started describing it that way years ago when trying to give people an idea of how much more payload capacity MSL has compared to the MER rovers. A Mini Cooper is memorable, and about the right size. BMW didn't have to pay anything - they just had to make a car that sticks in the minds of Southern Californians.

    10. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by ThiagoHP · · Score: 1

      They could have said "X by Y by Z", where X is the length, Y is the width, and Z is the depth.

      Then someone would use imperial units, which are less useful to almost anyone outside the USA than Mini Cooper measures. ;)

    11. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by t0p · · Score: 2, Funny

      As much as football fields, mini coopers and libraries of congress are ridiculous and imprecise, they are pretty decent references for public, non-technical descriptions.

      What, so they're gonna drop a mini cooper the size of a football field onto the library of Congress? I didn't get that from the video...

      --
      http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
    12. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Leafheart · · Score: 1

      They could have said "X by Y by Z", where X is the length, Y is the width, and Z is the depth.

      Sorry. I don't check science news expecting to do any math.

      --
      --- "When you gotta do something wrong. You gotta do it right. (Fighter)"
    13. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by t0p · · Score: 1

      No, you mean the new Mini Cooper is the new old Volkswagen Bug.

      --
      http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
    14. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Not in the headline. They already had to drop the "u" in "you" for length.

    15. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Metric would be better, and easy to convert; a meter is only a few inches bigger than a yard.

    16. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      "Two meters by six meters by three meters" isn't exactly advanced trigonometry.

    17. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      To be precise, it isn't trigonometry at all. You have specified nothing about any angles, their sines, or their cosines.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    18. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I live in Euclidean space where length, width and height are generally assumed to be mutually perpendicular.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by Katatsumuri · · Score: 1

      Volkswagen Golf is the standard unit, I believe.

    20. Re:Corporate sponsorship... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      To be precise, it isn't trigonometry at all.

      Then it can hardly be advanced trig, can it?

  10. "Its" is possessive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    "It's" is a conraction. It means "it is."

    Please note that saying
    "...but it is a gentile giant compared to it is predecessors."
    makes no fucking sense.

    1. Re:"Its" is possessive by Xeleema · · Score: 5, Funny

      "It's" is a conraction. It means "it is."

      I think you mean't "contraction"

      --
      "When I am king, you will be first against the wall..."
    2. Re:"Its" is possessive by Shikaku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The law of correcting typos: attemping to correct a previous poster's typo creates a typo from the current poster.

    3. Re:"Its" is possessive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "It's" is a conraction. It means "it is."

      I think you mean't "contraction"

      I think you meant "meant"

    4. Re:"Its" is possessive by Meumeu · · Score: 5, Funny

      The law of correcting typos: attemping to correct a previous poster's typo creates a typo from the current poster.

      You meant "attempting", apparently it's recursive...

    5. Re:"Its" is possessive by svtdragon · · Score: 5, Funny

      You meant "recursive"; apparently it's recursive.

    6. Re:"Its" is possessive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a misspeal-o-ramma!

    7. Re:"Its" is possessive by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      "it's a gentle giant compared to its predecessors" is correct, did you misread it or did they correct it?

      For people who think "oh, possessive, you need an apostrophe in a possessive" (the cat's feet) it's
      he's she's it's
      his hers its

    8. Re:"Its" is possessive by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Con'raction?

    9. Re:"Its" is possessive by tool462 · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes. The Conservation of Accuracy, as it's known. The total number of typos being committed in a particular language at a particular time is constant. This is why I do not lose heart when I see some of the writing atrocities you come across on the internet. With them doing their part to consume the number of available errors, the way is left clear for someone, somewhere, to produce some of the most beautiful English prose we will ever see. It's the reason it takes 1e6 monkey-typewriter-years to produce the works of Shakespeare. It's not a statistical phenomenon (indeed, random chance would put it outside the lifetime of the universe), it's that it takes 999 monkeys typing absolute gibberish (gibbonish?) for 1000 years straight to allow that one remaining monkey to become the fabled Bard.

      So the next time you see someone typing l1k3 th1s LOL!!!!111, don't berate them, thank them--the literary linemen that they are. It is by their grace and sacrifice that the likes of Frank McCourt or Michael Chabon are able to spin their gold.

    10. Re:"Its" is possessive by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Comma goes inside the quotes.

      It's the typographical equivalent of physics 101: typos can not be created or destroyed; they can only change from.

      --
      Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
    11. Re:"Its" is possessive by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Con'raction?

      She was the lead Vulcan in a Star Trek novel with gold lettering and bad airbrushed artwork on the cover.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    12. Re:"Its" is possessive by t0p · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't that be "apparently its recursive"?

      --
      http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
    13. Re:"Its" is possessive by SBFCOblivion · · Score: 2, Informative
    14. Re:"Its" is possessive by northstarlarry · · Score: 1

      they can only change from.

      Change from. . . from what?

      This thread is amazing! I can only hope that I've misspelled something or made a grammatical error without realizing it so we keep it going!

    15. Re:"Its" is possessive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that supposed to be sarcastic?

    16. Re:"Its" is possessive by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

      I believe that works differently in different English speaking countries. In the language's country of origin, the last punctuation make can go outside the quotes... and that's a semicolon, not a comma.

    17. Re:"Its" is possessive by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      "It's" is a conraction. It means "it is."

      I think you mean't "contraction"

      I think you meant "meant"

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    18. Re:"Its" is possessive by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Way to break the chain. You're just not any fnu.

      --
      Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
    19. Re:"Its" is possessive by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Like I said to the other guy: way to break the chain. You're jsut not any fun. :/

      --
      Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
    20. Re:"Its" is possessive by aqk · · Score: 0

      I thimk. You ment.

    21. Re:"Its" is possessive by one+cup+of+coffee · · Score: 1

      This is why I read Slashdot!

    22. Re:"Its" is possessive by northstarlarry · · Score: 1

      Well, Ifigured it had to be unintentianal to count! I did my bset to screw something up! Sory!

  11. Land? by sarlos · · Score: 1

    I always thought "landing" was over-rated. Give it a parachute and external airbags then just crash it into Mars and be done with it...

    --
    Government's view of the economy: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving,regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
    1. Re:Land? by c++0xFF · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Over-rated? The Mars Polar Lander didn't fare so well during its landing.

      Granted, that was a different system, but I'm not sure an airbag system will work for something over five times heavier than Spirit or Opportunity. Landing is definitely a hard thing to do.

    2. Re:Land? by sarlos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It worked on that egg I dropped from the third floor...!

      --
      Government's view of the economy: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving,regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
    3. Re:Land? by geekoid · · Score: 2, Funny

      If playing hero system has taught me anything, it's that just putting plate armor on it will keep it safe from impact.

      Just like an egg put in a steel box and dropped for 500 feet.

      Almost exactly like it, in fact.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Land? by c++0xFF · · Score: 1

      DJ used nature's perfect shock absorber: a twinkie.

      It didn't work.

    5. Re:Land? by Third+Position · · Score: 1

      Land it? You'll be lucky to get it off the ground after the eco-weenies hear the word "nuclear". But hey, nice try!

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    6. Re:Land? by sarlos · · Score: 1

      I thought of that. With a little graffiti, it becomes a "Nike-Powered Mini Cooper," evoking images of the Flintstones and, hey, who can be against the Flintstones?

      --
      Government's view of the economy: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving,regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
    7. Re:Land? by eclectro · · Score: 1

      I always thought "landing" was over-rated. Give it a parachute and external airbags then just crash it into Mars and be done with it...

      Agreed. Heck, they could even dispense with the parachute, airbags, and expensive science package and just crash a real mini cooper into Mars and be done with it.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    8. Re:Land? by sarlos · · Score: 1

      Hell, they did it to the moon already, why not Mars too, amirite?

      --
      Government's view of the economy: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving,regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
    9. Re:Land? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You'll be lucky to get it off the ground after the eco-weenies hear the word "nuclear".

      Whenever I see a statement like that, it makes me sure that the person saying it is too young to remember what it was like before the Clean Air act and the Clean Water Act, a high-ranking executive of a polluting industry like ADM or Monsanto or BP, or is just brainwashed by the second group.

      Yes, there are extremist environmental nutjobs, but your "eco-weenies" suggests that you are a wingnut yourself, just on the other wing. Only a fool is anti-environment, and only a fool drives nails in trees to keep them from being cut down.

    10. Re:Land? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pfft. Landing is easy. Being able to walk away from it is a mite trickier. Re-using the delivery vehicle? There's the rub.

    11. Re:Land? by t0p · · Score: 1

      I saw a movie where a manned mission to mars landed using the "parachutes and airbags" approach, and the astronauts survived that just fine.

      It's true that they went on to be butchered by an insane robot or something, but that kind of thing could happen with a rocket-assisted landing too...

      --
      http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
    12. Re:Land? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      I remember watching a Discover channel doc where the scientists said the airbag system stresses were right at the peak of its fault tolerances, so they won't use it anymore.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    13. Re:Land? by Third+Position · · Score: 1

      Whenever I see a statement like that, it makes me sure that the person saying it is too young to remember what it was like before the Clean Air act and the Clean Water Act

      Sorry pal, I was born in 1957, and actually I lived downwind of Gary, Indiana when we still had a steel industry in this country. Which makes me not only old enough to remember what it was like before the Clean Air act and the Clean Water Act, but to remember hippies, as well.

      They stank then, and they stink now. Between the two, I'll take the smell of the steel mills, any day, any day, any day.

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    14. Re:Land? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I remember life before the Clean Air act. That's exactly why we need more Nuclear development.

      Environmentalists completely lost there way in the 80's. In fact I remember when Green Peace was about getting a cleaner environment, and not just hating Corporations and lying to get donations.

      "Eco-weenies" suggest he has a poor grasp on humor, nothing more.

      Anyone with a sig the implies the rich don't know who their true friends are, and that the poor are somehow magical and know who their true friends are, has sloppy logic skills.

      Hint - Poor people are more likely to use you under the guise of friendship then the rich. The rich don't really need anything, while the poor are on the cusp of not having anything to eat. Now which group do you think is more likely to screw you?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    15. Re:Land? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I agree with your post, especially about nuclear power; the enviromental extremists hurt their own cause, like any extremists. But "Eco-weenies" is just juvenile and stupid.

      As to the sig, re-read it. A poor man, as you say, will pretend to befriend a rich man for his own gain, but the rich man befriending the poor man IS a friend, without a doubt. An old song from Blood, Sweat, and Tears:

      And when you got money, you got lots of friends
      Hangin' round your door
      But when the money's gone, and all your spendin' ends
      They won't be 'rourd no more, no no.

      I'm neither rich, nor poor, but friends better off than me I know are friends, those worse off I can't be sure of.

    16. Re:Land? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You should have lived by a Monsanto plant, your opinion would be drastically different. Driving past Monsanto made your lungs burn if the windows were rolled down. Steel plants were clean as a whistle compared to them. The smell was the least of it; people who worked there had to have their car windows replaced every two years because the air would etch the glass it was so unhealthy.

      The Monsanto plant is still there, Monsanto still makes shitloads of money, but you can drive past the place now.

      ADM makes Decatur still stink, but at least it won't kill you.

      I think you fall into the third category -- you got laid off when the steel plant closed, and blamed the environmentalists.

    17. Re:Land? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone, be aware, "Third Position" is an American Neo-Nazi group that calls for "preservation of the European heritage" of the American population.

      They're concerned that in a few generations our children won't still have such fair skin.

      When you see this guy acting all normal, like one of the gang, bear in mind you're just dealing with Colonel Hans Landa with his uniform packed neatly away in storage.

      I aim to make sure that as long as he posts here, the swastika on his forehead shines brightly. I'm just sorry I've already modded in this discussion, or I'd sign this little warning label, as I have done before.

  12. English-to-metric conversion? by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Funny

    How many Volkswagens equal one Mini-Cooper?

    rj

    1. Re:English-to-metric conversion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dunno about that but they could advertise a Bug with...

      Farfromfusion

    2. Re:English-to-metric conversion? by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      You just made the same mistake NASA did once; a Mini-Cooper is smaller than a VW.

  13. Nuclear powered Mini Cooper by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    When can I get one? This solves all the foreign oil and global warming problems with current automobiles.
    Also how do I fill it up, or does it come with a full tank that lasts 10 years?

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:Nuclear powered Mini Cooper by CompMD · · Score: 1

      This guy Emmitt Brown told me he knows some Libyans that will sell you uranium.

  14. Simple... by thijsh · · Score: 1, Redundant

    NUKE IT FROM ORBIT!!!

    1. Re:Simple... by onepoint · · Score: 1

      No, tell NASA to take a ride on heavy metal, they have been landing vettes for a while now.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    2. Re:Simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Simple... by t0p · · Score: 1
      --
      http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
  15. Miles O'Brien by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DAMNIT!

    I was expecting an Irish Starfleet Engineer.

  16. You should know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use DS9's tractor beam?

    1. Re:You should know... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      We canna doit, we don hae anough power!

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:You should know... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Use DS9's tractor beam?

      They would have to first build all the remaining eight Deep Spaces to get to Deep Space nine in the first place, and only then would they be able to pull this one off.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:You should know... by trapnest · · Score: 1

      Humans didn't build Deep Space 9, the Cardassians did. I don't think we're in range of their tractor beam emitters...

  17. With Rockets by geekoid · · Score: 1

    and a parachute. After laning, have it drive 10 Kilometers from the landing sight to get away from the effects of rocket assisted landing.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:With Rockets by aqk · · Score: 0

      and a parachute. After laning, have it drive 10 Kilometers from the landing sight to get away from the effects of rocket assisted landing.

      You sight. I cite. Its site.
      Please: no more lame laning conractions, unless they are Braxton-Hicks during its berthing.

  18. Easy. Here is a demo: by geekoid · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Easy. Here is a demo: by Bogtha · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, here is a demo of the prototype, constructed from a Reliant Robin to keep costs down.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  19. Appropriate narrator by MobyDisk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For those who don't know, Miles O'Brien is also the name of the transporter chief on ST:TNG and Chief of Operations for DS9. I clicked the link really hoping that they paid the actor to narrate this. Oh well. :-(

    1. Re:Appropriate narrator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was hoping for Colm Meany as well.

      He should get more work.

    2. Re:Appropriate narrator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hear, hear!

    3. Re:Appropriate narrator by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      If it had been Colm Meaney who narrated it it wouldn't have said "Miles O'Brien", now would it? BTW, Meany did a good job in Die Hard 2: Die Harder. It would have been better if, after he crashed hi airplane, somebody would have said "He's dead, Jim."

    4. Re:Appropriate narrator by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 1

      If it had been Colm Meaney who narrated it it wouldn't have said "Miles O'Brien", now would it?

      I dunno, this is Slashdot, you know.

      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    5. Re:Appropriate narrator by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      Anyone who does not know that should turn in his/her geek card immediately!

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    6. Re:Appropriate narrator by Kamokazi · · Score: 1

      Ditto, especially hit me hard since I am playing STO and subseqently decided to re-watch DS9 in its entirety which I am halfway through (Netflix ftw). My first thought was "Hmm, shouldn't they say Colm Meaney instead of Miles O'Brien?" Then I started watching and was like, "Oh."

      This experience has made me realize something though. I'm never going to get laid ever again.

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    7. Re:Appropriate narrator by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      For those who don't know, Miles O'Brien is fairly well respected aviation and space journalist.

    8. Re:Appropriate narrator by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Good point, you got me there!

    9. Re:Appropriate narrator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know I tagged the article !colmmeaney

    10. Re:Appropriate narrator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I thought I was the only one who clicked on it for that reason. Very disappointed :(

  20. A better question by AP31R0N · · Score: 2, Funny

    How do we stop submitters from using questions for headlines?

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    1. Re:A better question by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How do we stop submitters from using words like "yo" in the headline?

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:A better question by OzPeter · · Score: 2, Funny

      How do we stop submitters from using questions for headlines?

      Thats simple, you just employ editors who have the professional knowledge to bring headlines and summaries into the best format

      ... oh .. sorry.. I forgot where I was .. my bad

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:A better question by sbeckstead · · Score: 2, Funny

      How do we stop submitters.

    4. Re:A better question by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with questions?

    5. Re:A better question by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      questions are a burden to others
      answers are a prison for one's self

    6. Re:A better question by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      All of science is based on questions. All of technology is based on answers.

    7. Re:A better question by travdaddy · · Score: 1

      Pay them?

      --
      Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
    8. Re:A better question by BoppreH · · Score: 1

      How do we stop?

    9. Re:A better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we stop?

    10. Re:A better question by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

      Do stop.

    11. Re:A better question by sbeckstead · · Score: 1

      stop!

    12. Re:A better question by slashqwerty · · Score: 1

      Support longer headlines. This one was at the limit. Spelling out 'you' would have made it too long. Alternatively, the author could have rephrased the headline.

  21. Nuclear Powered by physburn · · Score: 3, Informative
    Its not a full reactor, just a RTG, radiothermal generator powered by radioactive decay.

    ---

    Space Craft Feed @ Feed Distiller

    1. Re:Nuclear Powered by confused+one · · Score: 1

      It's still nucular = bad in the minds of too many people.

    2. Re:Nuclear Powered by Knara · · Score: 3, Funny

      Won't stop anti-Nuke whargarblers from protesting about the nuclearization of space. Apparently we're supposed to send diesels up there or something.

    3. Re:Nuclear Powered by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Diesel??? And flood the Martian atmosphere with deadly carbon dioxide?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    4. Re:Nuclear Powered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An where would you be getting this carbon dioxide from?

  22. Gee... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't it terrible that they privatized the space industry? /sarcasm

  23. I want one! by mi · · Score: 1

    a Nuke-Powered Mini-Cooper

    I want one! Here, on Earth... It can even be bigger in size than a mini-Cooper — so as to be able to accommodate passengers and cargo. But, on the other hand, it does not need to be so sturdy as to survive a landing on Mars — only the reactor needs to be protected so as to not explode upon falling into Grand Canyon.

    Will I ever have one? Ok, if not me, maybe, it can be produced in an 18-wheeler form-factor? No? A rail-road locomotive?

    Talk about eliminating dependency on (foreign) oil!

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:I want one! by camperdave · · Score: 1

      only the reactor needs to be protected so as to not explode upon falling into Grand Canyon.

      There's nothing that can explode on an RTG. Nothing is pressurized. It's basically a hot rock with a bunch of wires stuck to it.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:I want one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We used one nuclear merchant ship in the 1960s to early 70s. It has been decommissioned, but had a range of over 300,000nm without refueling while carrying over 14,000 tons of cargo. That's almost 14 laps around the world at the equator. Guess how much the fuel weighed? 163lbs

  24. Not so gentle, it has a Nuclear powered LASER! by wisebabo · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know why they claim it is a "Gentle Giant". It's got a nuclear powered LASER used for remotely zapping targets of interest to determine their composition!

    I mean, how would you like it if a giant robot dropped out of the sky and started shooting frikking laser beams at you! ;)

    1. Re:Not so gentle, it has a Nuclear powered LASER! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Depends, is the nuclear powered LASER Gentle?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Not so gentle, it has a Nuclear powered LASER! by marsmark · · Score: 1

      At least it doesn't look like a shark... that'd be trouble. Ok, it'd be cool, but still trouble.

    3. Re:Not so gentle, it has a Nuclear powered LASER! by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      ROBO: "Hmmm what are you made out of I wonder?" ZAP!
      ROBO: "Log entry 412: Unidentified Item composed of non-laser compatible matter. May have contained methane as it burned a pretty green color!"
      ROBO: "Possible life fore discovered, ascertaining composition" ZAP!
      ROBO: "Log entry 413: False positive on Life assessment. Composed of combustible, non-laser resistant material"
      ROBO: "ASSIMILATE!"

  25. Skycrane by Cally · · Score: 4, Informative

    Absolutely terrifying animations of the Skycrane EDL architecture : http://www.youtube.com/results?aq=f&search_query=MSL+skycrane&search_type=&hl=en-GB&gl=GB&oq= Skycrane's intended as =the= standard EDL system for all future Mars landers. Frankly MSL scares the crap out of me, because there's only one shot at getting it right, and so much riding on it. Apart from anything else it's the last Mars lander planned for the next decade, apart from the vapourware joint JPL/ESA dual-rovers nonsense supposedly pencilled in for 2016. IMHO that'll never make it past the Powerpoint stage. If MSL lands perfectly it should last years, certainly longer than the astonishingly long-lived MER rovers Spirit and Opportunity. If it fails - that's it until the 2020s.

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
    1. Re:Skycrane by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That device seems to need a lot of on board material for the thrusts. I didn't see where it could old that much material in the device that was shown.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Skycrane by mosb1000 · · Score: 0

      It's important to note that one of the rovers has lost mobility due to the martian terrain. This rover will be vulnerable to that as well, despite it's virtually limitless energy supply.

    3. Re:Skycrane by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Frankly MSL scares the crap out of me, because there's only one shot at getting it right, and so much riding on it.

      Which is pretty much true of every Mars lander.

    4. Re:Skycrane by Jeng · · Score: 1

      per the TFA it is not limitless. It will only have enough nuclear fuel to power it for approximately two years.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    5. Re:Skycrane by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      No, the mission is planned to last two years the same way the current rover's missions were planned to last 90 days.

      The RTG has a minimum life span of 14 years but most likely the rest of the rover will die before the RTG stops producing usable power. The fuel never runs out, btw, but simply produces less and less power over time.

    6. Re:Skycrane by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      I hope not! The RTG has already been sitting at the JPL for two years due to project delays. For comparison: Voyager 1, launched in 1977, is still able to be contacted by radio.

    7. Re:Skycrane by theCoder · · Score: 1

      The top half -- the part at the top of the ropes -- seems to have a number of propellant containers. You can see them more clearly as it flies away after letting go of the rover on the ground. Keep in mind that the rover is car sized, and that top half looks bigger than the rover, so the tanks probably have a fair bit of propellant.

      The animation makes it seem like it lets go of the parachute pretty early. I would think they could save propellant by drifting down on the parachute longer. But IANARS (rocket scientist) so I'm sure they have a good reason.

      --
      "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
    8. Re:Skycrane by Bertie · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, talk about over-elaborate. Who came up with that, Wallace and Gromit?

      Surely if they cut down on all the crazy bits and pieces flying out at various stages, they could fit more sensors and gadgets to the actual probe?

    9. Re:Skycrane by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      The Martian atmosphere is extremely thin. Since wind resistance increases as the square of velocity, you get the most benefit at high speeds -- a parachute big enough to work at landing speeds would take up most of the mission's mass budget. This is why every Mars lander does either aerobrake->parachute->retrorocket or aerobrake->parachute->airbags.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    10. Re:Skycrane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we can drive this new rover on over to the stuck one and pull it out of the sand.

      RR

  26. Put it in the back of a nuclear-powered Hummer? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

    What do you expect - ask a stupid question ...

    1. Re:Put it in the back of a nuclear-powered Hummer? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      There are no stupid questions, only ignorant questions, and all questions are ignorant. But there are stupid answers; any answer that doesn't alleviate the questioner's ignorance is a stupid answer, especially since the questioner is looking for alleviation of ignorance.

  27. Going Home to Mars. by jimwelch · · Score: 1

    We all migrated from Mars. The ecology went south, so we moved to Mars. It was a giant meteorite, not man's pollution.

    This is why there are two creation stories in Genesis! It also explains why we used to have such great tech to build the pyramids.

    [/sacarsm]

    --
    Never trust a man wearing a coat and tie!
  28. Show of hands... by theghost · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Who was disappointed not to see Colm Meaney? Yeah, me too.

    --
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
    1. Re:Show of hands... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah...that's the only Miles O'Brian that I knew about this before now. I guess I gotta get outta my parent's basement more. Yo!

    2. Re:Show of hands... by sohp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I can't stand listening to Miles O'Brien, his voice grates on me. Worse, he really doesn't seem to know what he's talking about much of the time.

    3. Re:Show of hands... by macbuzz01 · · Score: 1

      So if I have to ask who Colm Meaney is, which card will I be required to turn in?

    4. Re:Show of hands... by pluther · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For not knowing, you'd have to turn in your Trekkie card.

      For having to ask, that'll be your Google license.

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    5. Re:Show of hands... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't he have to turn in his Stargate:Atlantis card as well?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  29. News reader by Qlither · · Score: 0

    That has to be the most generic faced news reader of all time.

    It will be a miracle if they make this work, the points at which it can fail during landing makes it almost insane.

    --
    -1 is for flame bait and trolls, not because you disagree with someone.
  30. How do I shot web? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do yo edit title but not fix obvious spelling error?
    It's bad enough to see this horrible title on my RSS feed twice, but you couldn't even fix the error the second time.

  31. cost NASA an extra billion to develop by peter303 · · Score: 1

    With a delay of two and a half years. Some in the Bush and Obama administrations were ready to cancel this.

  32. I suggest... by sbeckstead · · Score: 1

    I would suggest the best way to land a nuclear powered Cooper Mini on Mars be done with a nuclear powered sling shot! Worked for me!

  33. How Do Yo Land a Nuke-Powered Mini-Cooper On Mars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Carefully.

  34. From Orbit... by squizzar · · Score: 1

    ....It's the only way to be sure

    1. Re:From Orbit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, Com Scan has detected an energy field protecting an area of the sixth rock of the Hoth plain. The field is strong enough to deflect any bombardment.

      This is why the MSL comes prepared for a surface attack.

      Video proof, including the targeting system, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noy8o0lN1fE from 2:30 onwards.

  35. that'd be COOOL!!! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Actually, I'd like to see somebody do a skycrane entrance in a Mini Cooper on Earth. Maybe in the next James Bond?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:that'd be COOOL!!! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I don't know it it's possible in Earths Gravity.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  36. Yes! by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    I don't know about the rest of you, but as soon as I read "...crawl the Martian surface under steam from a nuclear powerplant..." my first thought was Steampunk! We're gonna send a steampunk probe to Mars!

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  37. As if bombing the Moon wasn't bad enough already by iprefermuffins · · Score: 1

    ...now we're going to nuke Mars?!

  38. How Do Yo Nuke a Land-powered Mini-Cooper On Mars? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure, but we'll need to make one much bigger than the regular 58 grams size.

  39. Talking about funny misreadings... by gbutler69 · · Score: 1

    his hers tits

    --
    Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
  40. Bad Design... by cjjjer · · Score: 1

    This based on the video:

    1. The same wheel/traction design as Spirit
    2. A rover that weighs 3x more than Spirit
    3. The unknown Sedimentology of mars

    Anyone else see what is wrong with this picture....

  41. Are we going to wrong way about it? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    Instead of sending a single, big, expensive unit, shouldn't we increase our chances and areas of exploration by sending dozens if not hundreds of smaller, cheaper units?

    If the landing of that Mini-Cooper goes wrong, we lose the only unit. If the landing of 300 small units goes wrong, we still have a chance that some units may still be intact on landing not to mention that less mass equals less impact force. And even if all goes well, we can explore a lot more area with 300 small units than with a single big unit.

    Leave the launcher in orbit, have the units communicate with it (less energy and smaller antenna required) and have the launcher/orbiter communicate with earth.

    I'm sure NASA has thought about that scenario, so where's the flaw in that idea since they're not doing it?

    1. Re:Are we going to wrong way about it? by vbraga · · Score: 1

      There's only so much you can get from limited space (ie, can't miniaturize sensors any further) and power supply (bigger -> more power);

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    2. Re:Are we going to wrong way about it? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      But bigger = heavier = requires more power to move around.

      What if you had specialized units? That way you reduce the cost, the number of sensors, the size and the required power all at the same time. Let's say 100 units that can do task X, 100 units that can do task Y and 100 units that can do task Z, similar to how ants are specialized.

    3. Re:Are we going to wrong way about it? by vbraga · · Score: 1

      The same way 9 women can't have a baby in a single month.

      If a sensor is K units of mass heavy, getting 10 K/10 heavy vehicles is not useful.

      And, besides, you're probabily adding up in volume with more units (less density) and launching things to space is also about volume, not only mass.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
  42. subscription required by OFnow · · Score: 1

    The linked newscientist article requires a subscription to actually see it in full. No way. Forget it.

  43. Been there, done that... by Anonymice · · Score: 1

    ...sort of.
    This just reminds me of the time popular UK show Top Gear tried to make a space shuttle out of a Reliant Robin.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b4WzWFKQ20

  44. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Italian Job meets Total Recall? Interesante!

  45. How to Land Safely? by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

    Step 1: Get your damn units straightened out ahead of time.

    Following that, the rest should be a piece of cake.

    1. Re:How to Land Safely? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That was an ESA mistake, not a US mistake.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  46. What type of engine by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    Is a mini-cooper some kind of SUV? Are we exporting global warming to Mars?

    By the way, what type of nuclear engine are they using. Maybe something like this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion
    Scroll down to the picture of the two engines parked by the parking lot. They actually built a hanger for the plane that these things were going to power. It is now a very large office building.

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  47. And the answer is.... by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    Very Carefully!

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  48. Relative sizes by camperdave · · Score: 1

    ...or they could just have shown a picture.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:Relative sizes by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Oops! Sorry folks, messed up the URL: Here's the picture.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:Relative sizes by t0p · · Score: 1

      ...or they could just have shown a picture.

      What, you mean like when the guys from Top Gear dropped a piano on a Morris Marina?

      --
      http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
    3. Re:Relative sizes by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It would have been better if they'd had a man standing there. Nice picture though, this is certainly the age of science fiction turned into fact.

    4. Re:Relative sizes by Unbeliever · · Score: 1

      For reference, the mast cams on MER (the one on the left) are at eye-level for a person 5'8"-5'10" ish tall.

      --
      --Carlos V.
  49. This bodes ill for any Martian Felines by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    This bodes ill for any Martian Felines, for we all know about Felines and Curiosity....

  50. To big to bag [Re:Land?] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    Give it a parachute and external airbags then just crash it into Mars and be done with it...

    "Crashes" would be right. MSL is too heavy for airbag landing, I'm afraid.

    We had real problems with the airbag system for even the MER, and MSL is twice as large in all dimensions.

    It's that cube-square thing-- "a horse splashes". (--Haldane)

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  51. Wrong units for NASA... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    NASA's next Mars shot, which promises to out-gun all previous efforts. The Mini Cooper-sized Mars Science Laboratory...

    Sigh, not again. Points for the car analogy, but the Cooper is a European car, thus a metric analogy. Please pick a more suitable English equivalent for NASA, lest we see a repeat of the Mars Climate Orbiter...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  52. .... killed the cat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i don't get the search for life mania, seems to be like all the mars and lunar explorations are all about some hypothetical bacteria that may or may not exist far away from us in red/gray dust. what does it really matter if there any any lifeforms out there, as long as they are not intelligent its not going to change anything, few biologists get to poke at it for a while and that will be all. and we sure as hell are not going to find any green men wandering around at our galactic backyard any time soon. there are more important things to accomplish with space exploration, like: moonbases, empires, deathstars.... we need to make space profitable, cheaper, easier. cheaper initial costs, less maintenance, shorter rerun times for out orbital vehicles. Earth is not going to last forever, for the looks of in not very long at all even, humanity needs to be able to escape this confinement or we will destroy ourselves sooner or later(probably sooner)

  53. Nuclear Powered Mini Cooper by whitedsepdivine · · Score: 0

    Where exactly do you pick up a nuclear powered Mini Cooper? I when to the BMW dealership and they didn't have any in stock. I hope it gets good MPG. I wonder how long your tank can last for. I want mine turbo charged with rims.

  54. OLYMPUS MONS NEWS - *BREAKING HEADLINE* by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    *ALERT* *ALERT* *ALERT* *ALERT* *ALERT* *ALERT*

    Earth Intentions Finally Revealed.

    Our spies on the watery blue-green third planet have intercepted secret transmissions between the Simian inhabitants' space agency and their woeful oppressed subjects that reveal new plans to attack our beloved world.

    This new device will be a behemoth, equipped with a powerful laser and a fission powerplant, so it is clearly a craft of war.

    However, there is no need to allow your flagellum to swell; our agents-in-place are preparing to once again to deploy an array of tactics all have which been successfully used to sabotage earlier Human missions. This vessel too will either pass into deep space or crash harmlessly into some meaningless, uninhabited zone of Mars. (We remind all ONCE AGAIN that the impact of the last Earth-invasion-craft into the nesting home of our political opponents was entirely an accident, and we will endeavor to avoid a repeat of that regrettable incident.)

    At this point there is no cause for alarm, no need to slither for your lives. Cover your egg sacs as usual, and excrete soothing pheremones to your swarming younglings. Know that we, your beloved and compassionate Ruler, have this crisis well in tentacle.

    NOTE: It is doubly important that we make sure to keep the canal covers in place. The effort to destroy the reputation of an Earth astronomer in this century would exceed our available resources.

    Olypus Mons News: FAIR AND BALANCED.
    A Rupert Murdoch Company.

    --
    -Styopa
  55. Curiosity.... by sconeu · · Score: 1

    I hope there are no cats on Mars...

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  56. MINI Cooper sized? by sdiver · · Score: 1

    What ever happened to the Volkswagen Beetle (VwB) unit of measurement? Has NASA replaced the VwB with the MINI Cooper (mC) as it's official unit of measurement?

  57. Clarkson the new head of NASA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The subject makes it sound like the Top Gear team has taken control of NASA... perhaps Obama should consider it? I can certainly see The Stig as a new ace test pilot.

  58. Parent post is underrated - Funny by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Parent post is underrated -> Funny

    The Viking landers in 1976 established that the atmosphere on Mars is 95.3% CO2.

    -- Terry

  59. Re:the BEST question by aqk · · Score: 0

    how do we stop submitters?

  60. the best question by aqk · · Score: 0

    stop!

    how?

  61. Good grief by MaDeR · · Score: 1

    If I see "nuclear powered" as description of RTG once, just once more... no, I will sadly NOT snap. But someone woulda thought that tech-savy site would not give that dumb title.

    --
    What modern Obelix would say today? Of course, "Those crazy Americans!".