Slashdot Mirror
Schiaparelli Mars Lander May Have Exploded On Impact, European Agency Says (npr.org)
Instead of drifting gently onto Mars' surface, the Schiaparelli Mars lander hit the planet hard -- and possibly exploded, the European Space Agency said today. NPR adds: The NASA images, taken on Oct. 20, show two recent changes to the landscape on Mars' surface -- one dark blotch, and one white speck -- which are being interpreted as Schiaparelli's parachute and its crash site. With the warning that analysis is still ongoing, here are the details the ESA is sharing Friday: "Estimates are that Schiaparelli dropped from a height of between 2 and 4 kilometers, therefore impacting at a considerable speed, greater than 300 km/h [186 mph]. The relatively large size of the feature would then arise from disturbed surface material. It is also possible that the lander exploded on impact, as its thruster propellant tanks were likely still full." That sequence of events followed the lander's largely trouble-free approach to the Martian surface, a trip that was being widely watched on Wednesday, when the craft lost contact with the ESA and its Mars mothership, the Trace Gas Orbiter, just before its touchdown.
It's going to be hard convincing the Martians that "we come in peace" after this...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
"I did the calculations in feet....but I programmed the lander in meters..."
The space departments clean these landers quite well. But exploding on impact was either effective at sterilizing the craft in a final way or spread the contamination over the maximal area.
In both cases Mars maintains a reputation as the place that robots go to die.
"You cannot have a General Will unless you have shared experiences. You cannot be fair to people you don't know."
Well, this could be very interesting. This lander was targeted to land very close to the Opportunity rover. Now, it has blasted a big fresh crater in the surface.
If it would be possible to move Opportunity to that crater, unbelievable amounts of data could be potentially found.
Thankfully NASA took the pictures, so the ESA can't sit on them for a few days/weeks before suggesting the all-but-inevitable (the lander crashed). The ESA really needs to learn to be more open with their operations.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
https://science.slashdot.org/c...
LATE-BREAKING NEWS FROM THE COUNCIL: VICTORY! The Council of Elders has confirmed the blueworlders' resumption of aggression upon our noble red sands. K'Breel, Speaker for the Council of Elders, addressed the planet thusly: OKAY. Okay, so I'm K'Breel (even though anyone on Slashdot can assume the mantle merely by declaring themselves Speaker for the Council), and I'm late, but I'm merely chronologically late, not as in the Late Second Adjunctant to the Council Formerly Known As G'Ranee.
But domestic politics is beneath us tonight -- just take a glance at the blue world beneath us for a look at how bad that can get -- and let us focus on what's important: over the past sol or so, our Planetary Defense Force has been so good at pre-emptively distracting the blueworlders with tasks like landing comets, grabbing their prospective mates by their genitals, low-planetary orbit missions, and just general tribal infighting that we haven't had to shoot down any robotic invaders in quite some time. But when the opportunity presents itself, we take advantage of it, and so, we did. Hence the trivial elimination of yet another putative invader from elsewhere. We'd do it every day, except that the blueworlders lack the gelsacular fortitude to send us more targets. Now as to gelsacular fortitude, on to Second Adjunctant G'Ranee...
When a junior reporter pointed out that the destroyed invader was merely a technology demonstrator built on the cheap to see if a landing was possible, and that the blueworlders' actual payload was safely in orbit, K'Breel had the reporter's gelsacs launched into orbit alongside those of G'Ranee for a closer look.
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
"This is the captain. We have a little problem with our entry sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and then explode"
"We're gonna explode!? I don't wanna explode!"
When the propellants are two reactive liquids that ignite on contact with each other, a kaboom is a perfectly reasonable consequence of a sudden, severe rearrangement of the tankage.
Bugrit! Millenium hand and shrimp!
Assuming it isn't a solid rocket, it must contain an oxidizer tank in addition to the fuel tank or else it wouldn't be a very effective rocket. When the fuel combines with the oxidizer, it produces an exothermic reaction.
... unless, of course, somebody forgot to fill the oxidizer tank, in which case that's probably why there's a giant probe-shaped crater on the surface of Mars now.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
The lander used hydrazine as its fuel.
Hydrazine is a monopropellant, so it will react on its own. No oxidizer needed.
Ideally, it will react in a controlled fashion using a catalyst.
But since it is a monopropellant, it's a molecule that is only in a semi-stable state. So if enough energy is put into it (though say a high impact crash), it will burn or detonate by itself.
I believe it is because Mars halted adoption of the metric system. So far all of the countries that have successfully landed a probe on Mars use imperial.
It's not easy to have a successful mission to Mars. Of the 44 missions to Mars 18 have been successful, 23 failures and 3 made Mars orbit but the landers were not successful. Currently India is the only country to have a successful mission to Mars on the first try. This is the second time the ESA successfully got into orbit but lost the lander.
"That sequence of events followed the lander's largely trouble-free approach to the Martian surface..."
Er, not to split hairs here but it was a largely trouble free approach to MARS. ...and then all the OTHER steps of a fairly complex landing sequence went spectacularly wrong.
After it arrived at Mars and after the bit following orbital insertion and correction, the next steps would be:
- separation
- descent
So it's a heck of a stretch to say anything but a trivial portion of its "approach to the Martian surface" wasn't a complete botch...?
-Styopa
From the ESA Schiaparelli Impact Event Investigation Press Conference
(...)
[Michel Denis, ESA] We can also confirm that the parachutes were released earlier than the intended 1.3 kilometers above the surface.
[ESA Engineer, UK] Miles. 1.3 miles.
[Michel Denis, ESA] ?!?!!
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
We've always been a petty and small-minded people, thank you very much.
They aren't even that far from each other, relatively. They tried to put Opportunity onto a position to image the descent and landing, although apparently it didn't actually see it. Still, the place where it crashed is not that far from Opportunity, although the little guy can't move very quickly. It might take years before it shows up to get some pictures. I think they should re-designate their mission targets.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Here's an update from the Opportunity team:
http://www.planetary.org/blogs...
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
It wasn't on wheels, it was on a "crushable structure" designed to cushion the landing. It was a stationary lander, not a rover. Preliminary indications are that the structure did actually crush, and that it is in fact stationary.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
A rocket wouldn't work very well in a vacuum or thin CO2 atmosphere if it didn't have fuel and oxidizer on board.
FYI A rocket engine by definition has fuel and oxidizer on board. A jet engine is the one that doesn't have the oxidizer on board.
Even really smart people fail
This is a project where it's impossible to test your creation until it's used
Simulations are getting better, but without testing, all designs are a gamble
If the parachute is behind the lander (in the direction of travel) then the two smaller dark spots above the large dark spot are where chunks of the lander would bounce after impact. The chunks are in the 12 and 2 o'clock positions. Also the parachute is more than 1km from the impact site, which seems a lot given the altitude of separation. But it makes sense if the lander retained its horizontal velocity at separation, while the parachute braked in the atmosphere.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Preliminary indications are that the structure did actually crush, and that it is in fact stationary.
Success!
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Well, you've lost all your internet points. Hopefully that teaches you to stop making things up without googling. The landing area is the same as Opportunity's landing area, and Opportunity even attempted to image the landing: http://www.planetary.org/blogs...
This space intentionally left blank