Mars Rovers Moving After Winter Hibernation 82
jcasman writes to mention an article at Astronomy.com discussing the now on-the-move Mars rovers, which have been effectively in hibernation over the long Martian winter. Spirit has been stationary in the Columbia Hills area, just barely powered up and taking the finest panoramic shot of the planet to date. On the other side of the world, Opportunity has been skulking around the Victoria crater. Scientists have been getting to know the area before attempting to send Opportunity into the geographical feature itself. "Opportunity now is traversing Victoria's rim, and mission scientists are naming features they find after places visited by Ferdinand Magellan and his crew during the first circumnavigation of Earth. (Victoria Crater itself is named after the lone ship that completed Magellan's quest.) [Steve Squyres of Cornell University] and his team are committed to driving Opportunity into the crater eventually, if they're sure the rover will be safe -- in other words, that they can get it out again. Squyres is confident they can, and he thinks it will be sooner rather than later."
The #1 Threat to America (Score:4, Funny)
I knew it. This is just more evidence of the vast bear conspiracy that's mauling our government from the inside out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That rock sucks. It only keeps tigers away.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Global Warming on Mars!!! (Score:2)
This is just more evidence of the vast bear conspiracy that's mauling our government from the inside out.
Not only are the Bears breeding like rabbits [telegraph.co.uk], but now the Bear SUV's are causing global warming on Mars [slashdot.org]!
I need a cigarette (Score:5, Funny)
Opportunity now is traversing Victoria's rim,
Re:I need a cigarette (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Double nerdpoints if it feels better than live touching.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, L Vegas.
The mars rovers produce imagery so vivid, I think I can touch it!
strangely erotic (Score:4, Funny)
anyone else find that strangely erotic?
Re:strangely erotic (Score:4, Funny)
Sure. They guy that just posted 2 before you did.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WDFD! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Recently a search took me to a Sprit status report from about sol 60 which described the rover as "almost middle aged"
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Recently a search took me to a Sprit status report from about sol 60 which described the rover as "almost middle aged"
It might be that this "aging" was judged in part by the output of the solar panels. The winds or whatever that keep the panels clean probably don't do a complete job. They probably slowed the initial buildup so that middle age in terms of output arrived later, i.e. day 60 instead of day 45. Beyond that, we know it eventually leveled off, with the solar panels remaining usable at some level pretty much constantly for the last few years.
Re:WDFD! (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder what might happen when they drive the rover into the crater. If the end up driving it somewhere where this isn't much of a wind, will the solar panels get covered in dust and stop working?
Also--raging personal opinion based on no facts whatsoever--I think NASA low-balled on purpose. It's easier to ask for money to "extend the mission" than it is to ask for the money in the first place. If NASA had asked for the money to run two rovers around Mars for three years, they'd've been shot down. But once you have the rover on the surface and it's running, it's easier to go and say, "Hey, we've already spent this money and the equipment is still working so can we have more money to keep it running?"
It's a good way to deal with government bureaucracy...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:WDFD! (Score:4, Informative)
Regarding the low-balling: The 90 day mission time and the driving distance goal were based on the performance of the previous Pathfinder mission. That one lasted about 3 times as long as it was supposed to before what was probably an electrical failure ended the mission. During that time, they also monitored the gradually decreasing power as the solar cells dirtied. Based on the data and improvements to the rovers, they made their estimates.
90 days (and 600 meters driving, and I think X number of observations) was actually the requirement for them to be able to call the mission a success. The mission budget included a 90 day operating extension if everything looked good at that point. Furthermore, there was a 180 day extended mission (with slightly reduced staff) if they were still rolling well after 6 months. Effectively, they needed 90 days, they built them to last 180 days, and were hoping for 360.
When 1 year passed, they actually had get a special budget allocation from Congress to keep running. 2 years later, most of the team has moved on to other projects and a lot of the tasks have been automated, but they're still running with a purpose.
The rover team has repeatedly expressed pleasant flabbergastation at their performance. They're probably more surprised than the rest of the world. I know it's going to be tough for them when the rovers finally do kick the bucket, or harder yet, are abandoned to focus resources on newer projects like MSL.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It's a good way to deal with government bureaucracy...
I thought that was by definition government bureaucracy
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, they think it is whirl-winds because the "cleaning" seem to happen suddenly (power increase the next day).
into the crater. If the end up driving it somewhere where this isn't much of a wind, will the solar panels get covered in dust and stop working?
Actually, I think the first detected cleaning was *in* Endurance crater. They speculated that being inside the crater created water vapor condensation
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't ask for a three-year mission because, at the time, they didn't think it possible; or at least, they couldn't guarantee it on any reasonable
Re: (Score:1)
Meanwhile, the poor devil with the sign "will clean solar panels for food" is still standing there waiting for his tip.
Re: (Score:2)
Take a look at a photo of Victoria Crater [nasa.gov], taken by the HiRISE [arizona.edu] camera aboard the Mars Reconnaissance orbiter (look close and you can actually see Opportunity sitting atop a ridge overlooking Duck Bay). Notice the sand dunes in the bottom of the crater. Aeolian features like these aren't probable in the absence o
Re: (Score:2)
Either that or the Martians have found a new god and are worshiping it with Windex.
NASA reports... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
McMurdo Panorama (Score:5, Interesting)
First reply from rovers after powering up (Score:4, Funny)
Obligatory theonion (Score:4, Funny)
What? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Things have really changed in space exploration (Score:5, Funny)
Machine's
Re: (Score:1)
More likely: Error in updater. Press 'C' to continue: __
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Solar system rovers (Score:4, Interesting)
We would need a new design.
RTG dude... (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The GP was asking about scores of the "present" design of Mars rovers.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The Huygens (spell?) probe had a chance to land on a likely lake. The area just happened to be dry at the time but was suspected to be a lake-bed or at least a flood plane. Bummer. It was even designed to float. Maybe next time...
They must be running Windows XP: Space Edition (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Just type "install linux" and it will be up and going in no time.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Documents and Settings\anonymous coward>install linux
'install' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
C:\Documents and Settings\anonymous coward>
Rovin' (Score:2, Funny)
They hatin'
Re: (Score:1)
Too Cautious (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Too Cautious (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Too Cautious (Score:4, Informative)
I'm pretty sure I saw a quote a while back saying they would go in even if they didn't think the rover could get back out, as long as they thought it would still be operational after the descent. They do want to examine the rim first, since they may well not get another chance, and they need to find a safe way down.
Re: (Score:1)
Plus it is the deepest crater that Opportunity has yet to investigate. It may reveal layers older than anything yet seen and thus is perhaps the biggest scientific target oppy has encountered so far.
They do want to examine the rim first, since they may well not get another chance
But what is so important about the rim? The real scientific pay-dirt would probably come from drilling the cra
Re: (Score:1)
Spending too long checking out the rim and descent routes runs the risk of the rover failing before it gets to the good stuff.
Somewhere in between there must be a happy medium. If were up to me I'd probably opt to go faster, but I trust their judgment much more than mine.
Re: (Score:1)
There may be, but inside seems to be where one is more likely to find evidence of the oldest layers. Plus, the rover is fairly likely to be able to get back out; and it has already explored the rim to a fair extent. Go for the buffalo first, and get the rabbits later.
Re: "find a safe way down" (Score:1)
Many of the slopes they already investigated don't look noticably steeper than those used in Endurance[1], and slippage was well within tolerance in Endurance. (It did have big slippage problems on some of the Endurance banks it was investigating, but not entry/exit.)
[1] I haven't formally measured, I should point out.
Re: (Score:2)
So in your opinion your car/truck is on borrowed time when it runs out of warranty? After all that's a pretty fair comparison. Nobody on the rover teams said the rovers wouldn't keep working, they only planned on a mission duration. The automakers don't say your car will drop dead after three years or 36000 miles; that's just the duration they plan to "support" it. And like the rover teams' extension, most if not al
The backup plan (Score:1)