From my knowledge of the system, it really is largely a 1-in-4 chance to land base petal down since everything leading up to its final rest is chaotic bouncing and rolling.
As far as the airbags go, it was only (thus far) base petal down pre-deflation...the deflation of the airbags could leave it in another configuration entirely.
As I understand it, the "faster, better, cheaper" game is all but over for NASA. After several notable failures (read: Mars Polar Lander and Climate Orbiter, etc.) NASA has scaled back significantly and is now trying to focus more heavily on testing and verification.
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA, for example, is establishing the Laboratory for Reliable Software to aid in building, uh, more reliable software.
I agree, though, that the budgetary restrictions set by Congress are likely to be a problem. Trying to produce projects with the same old budgets, but with more robust verification procedures, can only reduce the amount of science that can be done on any given mission.
Slashdot Mirror
Closer to accurate than the Los Angeles Times front page blurb on the Cassini orbit insertion, which heralded its entrance into the orbit of Jupiter.
They had a one-in-nine chance of getting the planet right, I guess.
From my knowledge of the system, it really is largely a 1-in-4 chance to land base petal down since everything leading up to its final rest is chaotic bouncing and rolling.
As far as the airbags go, it was only (thus far) base petal down pre-deflation...the deflation of the airbags could leave it in another configuration entirely.
...Destroy the Sun!
As I understand it, the "faster, better, cheaper" game is all but over for NASA. After several notable failures (read: Mars Polar Lander and Climate Orbiter, etc.) NASA has scaled back significantly and is now trying to focus more heavily on testing and verification.
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA, for example, is establishing the Laboratory for Reliable Software to aid in building, uh, more reliable software.
I agree, though, that the budgetary restrictions set by Congress are likely to be a problem. Trying to produce projects with the same old budgets, but with more robust verification procedures, can only reduce the amount of science that can be done on any given mission.