Armadillo Aerospace Claims Level 2 Lunar Lander Prize 134
Dagondanum writes "Armadillo Aerospace has officially won the 2009 Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge Level 2, on a rainy day at Caddo Mills, Texas. Reports came in from various locations during the day and spectators posted videos and images using social networking tools such as Twitter. The Level 2 prize requires the rocket to fly for 180 seconds before landing precisely on a simulated lunar surface constructed with craters and boulders. The minimum flight times are calculated so that the Level 2 mission closely simulates the power needed to perform a real descent from lunar orbit down to the surface of the Moon. First place is a prize of $1 million while second is $500,000."
Re:Woohooo (Score:5, Informative)
Re:good... so far (Score:5, Informative)
Re:good... so far (Score:5, Informative)
Wow...so many things wrong in so few sentences.
1) They landed on the X (well, with the X within the space defined by the legs of the craft). In fact, the craft didn't move much horizontally in the last 30 seconds or so...it pretty much hovered over the X for long enough to meet the 180 sec limit.
2) The flames were from the simulated lunar surface that it lit on fire, not the craft itself. If I were them, I wouldn't be too concerned with lighting the surface of the moon on fire...it seems unlikely.
3) The contest is run in stages, and there are prizes for being the first (and second) team to finish each stage, so they did in fact claim a prize for being the first to finish stage 2 of the contest. Yes, there is still a stage 3, and there is a separate prize for being the first to finish stage 3.
Re:Google x-prize? (Score:3, Informative)
The orginal x-prize took 8 years for someone to win, and that prize had a strong commercial (space tourism) appeal, while the Google prize have not.
Re:Woohooo (Score:1, Informative)
Actually it was up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A
Re:Woohooo (Score:5, Informative)
Yep, the main engine is thrust vectoring. Roll control is handled by small cold-gas thrusters that use the same helium supply that pressurizes the main propellant tanks.
Note also that "it most certainly looks top-heavy" is actually an example of the pendulum fallacy [wikipedia.org]. It doesn't matter whether the center of mass is far above, a little above, or below the rocket engine, you need active stabilization on a hovering rocket. (On a rocket flying a vertical trajectory, passive stabilization via fins will suffice to hold it basically straight.)
Re:good... so far (Score:1, Informative)
I was reading about a recent test of a much larger rocket (I forget the details), and it was suggested that it was doused with CO2 at the end not because it wouldn't burn out on its own, but to preserve the engine in whatever state it was at the end of the burn to allow more information to be extracted from it.
You may be thinking of the Ares rocket test a few days ago. YouTube has a video that includes CO2 at the end. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ixQigIsob3tfbvoJ86LbHGi1MSswD9AKOBOG0 [google.com]
Re:Rainy day ..... simulated moon landing? (Score:1, Informative)
This is why this contest was for 3 minutes of hovering - with moon gravity, it translates to about 18 minutes of hovering, which is enough energy to softly land on or take of from the moon.
There are many things in this challenge that do not try to fully simulate the moon - they are not required to operate in heat or cold of the moon, hard vacuum, their vehicle even uses GPS for navigation.
The challenge simulates the most important part of lunar lander - vertical takeoff and landing, and prolonged hovering time.
Re:Woohooo (Score:3, Informative)
I kind of doubt the thing will be in an oxygen atmosphere on the moon, so there won't be any need to douse it in CO2 after landing.
Re:good... so far (Score:3, Informative)
OK, but the simulated lunar surface looks a lot like concrete. Also, they seem to have some inside their engine, as that's where the flames are coming from ;)
Re:Woohooo (Score:3, Informative)
The corrections they were making near the end are so that they land as close as possible to the center of the pad, because that counts in determining who gets first place if another team also wins the challenge.
It's not over yet; They didn't actually win (Score:3, Informative)
The summary is misleading. They didn't actually win the $1 million yet. Masten Space and Unreasonable Rocket are both going to have a crack at the prize and have until October 31 to best Armadillo's performance.
Re:good... so far (Score:5, Informative)
That's not correct. First, they already won Level 1 last year, so there's only 2nd place of Level 1 available for grabs. This year the rules were changed a bit so that each team can try for the challenge at their home bases, and only Armadillo has so far. There are 2 other competitors that have yet to fly. If they succeed at the Level 2 then they will determine who gets first place by looking at who landed the closest to the center of the pad. So even though Armadillo succeeded, the other teams can still do better in theory and claim first place.
Re:Woohooo (Score:2, Informative)
Lunar Lander [wikipedia.org] was made by Atari, not Konami.
Re:good... so far (Score:3, Informative)
Are you sure the flames were from the simulated lunar surface? It seemed to be coming out of the bottom of the rocket booster and then shooting towards the ground (3:15 in the first video). I think someone mentioned this was done intentionally to freeze the engine's state for further data collection purposes.
Though it does look like the safety personnel sprays the extinguisher at both the lunar pad and the booster.