Opportunity Rover Encounters Its Own Heat Shield 269
blamanj writes "Mars Rover Opportunity, a few meters shy of the 2km mark on its odometer, has come across the remains of the heat shield from its landing. This map traces the path of the rover for the past 11 months. It's been averaging about 6 meters/sol.
Spirit, which had to stop to dislodge a rock, is still climbing the "Columbia Hills". It's tough going, and Spirit experiences slippage of up to 80% as it climbs the hills."
Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the JPL (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the (Score:5, Informative)
They already knew where the heat shield was. They had a picture from the Mars Orbiter camera [planetary.org] that let them know exactly how far away it was. There's actually been several pictures. I forget how long ago they knew, but they've known for some time where it was.
I don't think anyone thought either rover would last this long, so it's only now that they get around to looking at it.
Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the (Score:5, Informative)
I was at a presentation by one of the members of the rover science teams six weeks ago.
If there are no surprises, he was talking about the rovers possibly lasting till June or July. By that time, he was suggesting that the rover's batteries would no longer be able to hold enough charge to keep the things operating.
For a while they had been expecting that the solar panels would fail first, but apparently the rate of dust accumulation is less than they expected. (Plus "martian carwash [slashdot.org]" events seem to have cleared off some of the dust. He felt such events were probably caused by dust devils that happened to cross over the rover.)
Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the (Score:3, Interesting)
IIRC, the first images of the shield came from the rover's "decent" cameras when it was a few miles high. The images were used by the lander system to correct for vertical motion, which would have otherwise caused the air-bag-encased rover to bounce and roll too much. The system simply kept the adjustment images for later use and they were sent back to Earth soon after landing.
Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the (Score:2, Informative)
The Pathfinder/Sojourner rover lasted longer than expected, but did conk out after about 30 days. They suspect battery fatique. The new set of Rovers are intentionally better built than Sojourner (which was an experimental probe), but it is basically t
Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the (Score:5, Informative)
The "90 days" was certainly something they expected - maybe even double that. But they also knew that the Martian winter was coming up and that Mars would go behind the Sun, causing Earth to lose contact with the rovers for a number of days.
I think they were really surprised both rovers made it through the Martian winter. That Opportunity is actually back up to the normal output for the solar panels is a welcome surprise.
Spirit doesn't seem to be doing nearly as well. There's problem with the lubrication of the wheels, the brakes may not be releasing - or the circuit that detects them releasing has gone bad, and the dust accumulation on the solar panels has taken it's toll.
There might be more wrong with the Spirit rover, but even I've been skipping some of the updates on the web site [nasa.gov].
Re:Must have been a classic "WTF?!" moment at the (Score:2, Funny)
Unfortunately (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Unfortunately (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Unfortunately (Score:5, Funny)
The Wicked Witch of the West was unavailible for comment.
Re:Unfortunately (Score:3, Funny)
ebay it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:ebay it (Score:2)
Re:ebay it (Score:2)
Or the Daihatsu ads: "Voxy!"
"Wonderful Small!"
Ascending (Score:5, Funny)
"It's tough going, and Spirit experiences slippage of up to 80% as it climbs the hills."
Sounds a bit like trying to get out of Gehennom with the amulet.
How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Funny)
"A potato-sized rock got caught in Spirits's right rear wheel on sol 339"
Come *on* NASA. Potatos vary so wildly in size that comparisons like this are totally useless!
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Funny)
NASA began using them as an engineering standard in the late 60s durring the Apollo missions. Today, Tater Tots are still as popular in the lab as they are in the dining room.
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Funny)
In standard space universal measure, roughly 1/2000 of a classic Volkswagen Beetle.
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:2)
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Funny)
POH-TAY-TOES!!
(don't use so many caps. it's like yelling.)
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:2)
Oh, I'm sure they had someone there do a statistical calculation of likelihood of potato sized rocks in the area and chances of the rover hitting them. This went along with the 2 year study of what size rocks will lodge in there which was a design spec on the wheels. And just like my last few lines, all the studies were pure BS.
Anyways, my solution, Spi
Re:How big is *your* potato? (Score:5, Funny)
In other news...... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:In other news...... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:In other news...... (Score:3, Funny)
Zerg season! Terran season! Zerg season! Terran season!
What the? (Score:2, Funny)
Map [nasa.gov]
I wonder if these rovers use Energiser (TM) solar panels... they just keep going and going and going :-)
Re:What the? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What the? (Score:2)
your parent might have been cracking a joke... but how true... I suppose when your millions of miles away on the martian surface, the old saying applies several orders of magnitude more:
its the journey, not the desination...
Re:What the? (Score:2, Funny)
Kenny P.
Visualize Whirled P.'s
After the heat shield (Score:4, Interesting)
After the heat shield, what will Opportunity look at? There's really not a whole lot--not even very many rocks--on that plain.
Are there scientific targets identified, or are they maybe going to try to "sprint" Opportunity and see how far it can get in the shortest amount of time? Maybe there's other potential sites of interest some distance away.
Here's the schedule (Score:5, Funny)
I have the NASA rover plans right here, and the schedule is as follows:
1. explore Endurance crater (complete)
2. examine discarded heat shield (complete)
3. run rover for endurance trials
4. sprint rover (you called it)
5. race rover
6. jump rover
7. make rover do acrobatic tricks
8. crash rover
9. profit
Re:After the heat shield (Score:2, Informative)
There is a large plain of exposed bedrock a couple of miles south from the current position. And further south there is a crater that is something like 5 times larger than the one the rover just crawled out of. However, the larger crater is a long-shot. Oppy would have to log roughly 3 times the distance of Spirit to get there, and Spirit's wheels have been showing multiple signs
heat shield (Score:5, Interesting)
How much buried? (Score:5, Interesting)
Slippage (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Slippage (Score:2, Funny)
I hope you are not posting YOUR photos on NASA sites.
Why look at the heat shield? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why look at the heat shield? (Score:5, Informative)
There's also a divot where the heat shield bounced. With any luck, it dug into the Martian surface far deeper than Opportunity could dig. This will give them a chance to examine what's underneath the surface layer - they hope.
Re:Why look at the heat shield? (Score:2)
Re:Why look at the heat shield? (Score:2)
Re:Why look at the heat shield? (Score:2)
Lutefisk?? (Score:5, Informative)
Lutefisk is a disgusting Norwegian dish, think of it as fish jell-o. You take some perfectly good pieces of dried fish (yuck) and soak them in lye (yes, really!) for 24 hours. Then you soak the fish in fresh water for 48 hours, before putting it in a pan and letting it simmer for about 20 minutes. Finally you wrap the fish in aluminium foil and bake in the oven at 200C for 30-40 minutes.
The result is a quivering mass of translucent, inedible fish that is served with potatoes, bacon, mashed peas and melted butter (or melted pork fat).
Now, what I want to know is, how did that disgusting dish of spoiled fish end up as the (informal) name of a rock on Mars?
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:5, Funny)
To make surströmming you take a perfectly good piece of raw fish, stick it in a tin can, and then let it sit there fermenting for at least a year (the longer the better, apparently).
After that, you open it, and eat it without any further preparation. Don't ask me what you normally have with it, because I don't know; 5 seconds after the can has been opened I am a few kilometers away, desperately attempting to escape the stench (generally together with everyone else in the neighbourhood).
So, just be thankful it's only Lutefisk on that map - had it been surströmming the martians would have accused us of chemical warfare!
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:2, Funny)
mmmm....sounds a bit like what we call tunafish.
No no no... (Score:2, Offtopic)
Not even close. Pickled herring has a bit of a strong taste that is not for everyone, but it's nowhere close to Surströmming, which you would never believe was meant for human consumption unless you saw people eat it. That is if you managed to stay in the room without throwing up.
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:2)
Then again I love Worchestershire sauce, made from rotted anchovie fish, so who am I to poke fun?
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:3, Interesting)
No, lutefisk isn't buried.
Rakørret is. Just another disgusting variety on the mostly-decayed-fish theme here in Scandinavia. You take salt in a big jar or bowl (must be thoroughly cleaned), add trout in layers (dorsal down, side-by-side, salt in between layers) and let it ferment (dig it down into the ground) for a month or three (6-10 weeks).
Every year some people die here in Norway from eating this "delicacy" prepared traditionally. When it's not done just right the meat is a perfect little place
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:2)
Speaking from personal experience, it ranged from "damn that's hot" to "where did my lower jaw go?"
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:2, Funny)
From what I've heard, people of nordic decent (of which there are a lot in MN) eat it as a tradition, definately not because of its taste, but as a reminder of harsh times.
As for why they named a rock after it, who knows. Do the rovers have taste sensors? I'm sure it doesnt taste much different.
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:3, Interesting)
anyhow, i reckon it was a way to preserve the fish.
it's total crap, thought the taste isn't that bad(hint, when properly done IT DOESNT HAVE A TASTE, though i'd be surprised if it had any nutrition or energy either after all that).
anyhow.. you're supposed to eat it with potatoes and some white sauce(i don't know the proper english name) and some spices(black pepper? it's been a while since i've had to eat the shit so can't remember).
could be because of it's sha
Re:Lutefisk?? (Score:3, Interesting)
A _lot_ of our dishes are actually designed to circumvent a problem we don't have much of any more: Meat/Vegetables spoiling before you're ready to eat it. Some of the options (Mayonaise for instance) are in the "cover it up" category, while Lutefisk is in the "preserve by any means possible" category. It turns out that if you drop the fish you catch into a bucket of ly
Mars rovers, keep going, and going, and going... (Score:2, Interesting)
I find it amazing that they can throw robots on a rocket, have them land on another planet, and they remain functional for over 300 days.
how far away is Beagle 2? (Score:2)
Re:how far away is Beagle 2? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's British... (Score:2)
Re:how far away is Beagle 2? (Score:4, Funny)
If they could get both rovers over there they could take a picture of one rover pointing at the biggest chunk from the debris field and NASA engineers could photoshop in a 'EuroSpaceTrash' sign. You know, like the kind you used to hang on passed out drunks in the frat house, or like Lyndie England might do.
The Freedom Fries Congress ought to vote NASA a budget increase after that.
Re:how far away is Beagle 2? (Score:2)
Re:how far away is Beagle 2? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:how far away is Beagle 2? (Score:2)
Museum? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a couple of theories as to what the human race will do with this stuff:
a) Cordon off the area around the rovers and heat shields etc. as a "heritage park" for people to visit and think about the events of the past
b) Take the stuff and stick it in a museum on earth
c) As above but create the museum on Mars
d) Melt it down and recycle it
e) Revive the electronics and re-purpose the robots etc.
f) Dump it in the nearest canyon as landfill
Any other suggestions?
Re:Museum? (Score:2)
Re:Museum? (Score:2)
Slow moving Rovers last longer (Score:3, Informative)
On Mars, theres nobody there to flip the Rover over, or even dislodge stuff from it's tires. They spend all day preparing for a slight bit of movement just so they don't make a mistake worth millions of taxpayer dollars.
Re:Slow moving Rovers last longer (Score:2)
On a more serious note, I witnessed a demonstration of a legged robot recently that could just as easily function upside down. It had a thin central body with four legs on each side, and the hinges for raising and lowering the legs could flip all the way around to allow them to work when the robot had its back to the floor.
The thing was pretty fast too, scaring a few people by charging
Humans haven't even landed there..... (Score:3, Funny)
Oh how much I wish... (Score:5, Interesting)
I know it isn't going to happen due to the distances involved, but I'd love it if one of these rovers (or one of the rovers to follow...) were to come across Viking I and/or II. It would be interesting to see how they have withstood the test of time in the last 28 years since their landing. I imagine there is quite a bit of useful science that could be conducted, as both are known variables from nearly 30 years ago, and we have a lot of data from them about their surroundings.
At the same time, Viking I and Viking II are two of the extraterrestrial missions I have early memories of. I was three when they landed, and continued transmitting data until I was nine. So these are old friends I wouldn't mind revisiting.
The current missions aren't close enough to either one to make it, but maybe a future mission will give up a glimpse of these past heroes. One can hope :).
Yaz.
Rebooting Viking II (Score:3, Informative)
nuclear powered rovers... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:nuclear powered rovers... (Score:2)
Re:What?! (Score:5, Informative)
Not at all. [nasa.gov]
The rovers are astonishing in what they can do, but a human would dramatically outpace them. What it might take a rover an entire day to do, a human could do in a 30-45 seconds. [unspace.net]
Re:What?! (Score:2)
We busted our asses to save yours!
Re:What?! (Score:4, Informative)
Sojourner [nasa.gov] only moved about 100 meters [sdsu.edu] and was a huge success. Its most popular accomplishment was taking this picture [kosmo.cz] before it even left the lander.
Re:What?! (Score:2)
Re:What?! (Score:4, Insightful)
You have to remember the goal of this mission isn't to move the furthest distance from the landing zone as possible. It's to explore the surface of Mars, something you find every few centimeters :).
Much of this "exploration" involves stopping every few metres to sit around for a day or so and test rock and soil samples.
And even when it is on the roll, each rover doesn't move terribly fast, and often needs to navigate around terrain. Nevermind the fact that if you did want to move a long distance, you'd only be able to move a few metres, take a snapshot of your surrroundings, send them back to Earth, and await the next set of movement instructions. Both sending the snapshot and retreiving the next set of instructions takes several hours due to the distances involved, resulting in quite a bit of time spent not going anywhere.
Yaz.
Re:What?! (Score:2)
They do script out a whole series of moves, but terrain can limit how far they can see ahead. Take the one moving up the side of the crater at this very moment. Where to head when it reaches the lip? What if there is a big rock in the way? How to tell what's behind it?
Remember too that part of
Re:What about the liquid or ice in this shot? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What about the liquid or ice in this shot? (Score:2)
Cool illusion, though, and a good example of why just pulling up photos might give someone the wrong idea.
Re:Yes. (Score:5, Interesting)
And no, I've not heard any comments on this picture yet. There are other pictures with frost, but water would be puzzling on the Martian surface at that pressure and temperature.
I'm pretty sure they'd have mentioned a leak in the Opportunity's radiator.
.... .. .... ..
Re:Yes. (Score:2)
Quite possible, but it still bizarre looking. A human could have examined the area more closely. Alas, one of the problems with robots.
At least so far....
Re:Yes. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:pictures (Score:5, Funny)
C:\My Documents\My Pictures\Mars Rover Mission
You'll find them there.
Re:pictures (Score:2, Funny)
Re:pictures (Score:4, Funny)
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\My Pictures\Mars Rover Mission
Cuz all those NASA geeks just *have* to be Admin, you know
Re:Stupid question (Score:2)
Re:Stupid question (Score:2)
Re:What's a "sol"? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:What's a "sol"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
That said, the science cameras (the ones on the periscope there), are also grayscale, like all digital cameras. Consumer digital cameras have a permanently installed filter that has microscopic red, blue and green squares that turn photosites into "color" pixels.
Astronomical and very high end digital cameras don't want that though, because it limits resolution. Having adjust
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
Here is a color image of the heatshield taken on sols 326 and 328 [lyle.org] taken through the 6 visi
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
Some photographers use B&W film for a similar reason (but it doesn't arise the same way; I believe it is simply more finely grained) -- you get much finer detail than you do from even color transpar
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
Interestingly, this is presumably because most of the visible light given off from the sun is in the yellow-green spectrum. Which also explains the predominance of green vegetation.
Its also why airport fire trucks are painted that somewhat odd color of green/yellow.
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
In the autumn, the chlorophyll breaks down in many plants, causing the natural underlying colors of the leaves -- which were there all along but masked -- to be revealed.
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
It is evolution at work; the green plants made most efficient use of the sun's radiation and lived on.
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:5, Informative)
The cameras used on the rovers have wide sensitivity to the whole visible light spectrum + more than just a bit on each side. Greyscale cameras are more useful when doing science. You plunk a variety of filters over it (I think they have 9?) and you can 'see' from UV down to infra-red.
"Simple" Red+Green+Blue cameras are a poor equivalent in comparison. For example, different minerals are clearly visible at certain wavelengths. Your "standard" colour camera will have a hard time picking out a mineral if it reflects light somewhere between red and green, where a specific filter on the greyscale camera can highlight it without trouble. To drastically simplify a whole heap-o-science, imagine a colour camera with Red+Green+Blue PLUS IR+Yellow+UV+Orange+Purple+Pink sensors. That's what's on the rovers.
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:3, Informative)
Also, a good deal of the 'debate' comes down to how to process the true color images from the auto-contrasted, separately exposed frames released as JPGs by NASA/JPL on a real time basis.
Re:Why not color photos ? (Score:2)
Uh, I presume you've never tried to use a digital camera in a closed room? The colors are nowhere near the thing you can see there with your own eyes.
You can try to correct it by setting the white point and compare it with what you think is right (which is what the brain does automatically, btw), but that's pretty much impossible when you have no clue how the area looks like to human eyes.