# Mars Rover attempting landing tonight - BFD



## webbie (Aug 5, 2012)

This is a really BFD.....many years and mucho dinaro in the making.

This is a full-size rover with the capability of telling us whether and when there was life on Mars.

Then again, something could go wrong. But, if it succeeds, it will be one of the finest hours of mankind.


----------



## Jack Straw (Aug 5, 2012)




----------



## MasterMech (Aug 5, 2012)

Some kind of televised coverage?

More likely YouTube?


----------



## fossil (Aug 5, 2012)

I don't think there's anyone out on Mars with a vidcam. NASA's got a terrific website, though:

http://www.nasa.gov/

http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/participate/


----------



## Lousyweather (Aug 5, 2012)

mmmm...yeah......I honestly and truly dont give a rat's a$$ wherethere there was, is, or can be, life on mars....divert the funds somewhere else......ignorant, I know....


----------



## Gark (Aug 5, 2012)

Interesting.. it will take 7 minutes for the thing to land itself but it takes 14 minutes for telemetry or signals to get back here. Gonna be alot of 'watching closely' at the labs tonight.


----------



## Gary_602z (Aug 5, 2012)

Thanks for reminding me Craig. I had forgotten about it. Kind of a junkie on that kind of stuff!

Gary


----------



## Gasifier (Aug 5, 2012)

What time is the rover suppose to land?


----------



## fossil (Aug 5, 2012)

Gasifier said:


> What time is the rover suppose to land?


 
You can learn everything there is to know about it from the source:

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/participate/


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 5, 2012)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57486458-76/watch-nasas-live-coverage-of-mars-rover-landing/

I can't stay awake when the Mets are playing on the West Coast, how can I possibly stay awake to 1:30 AM?


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Aug 5, 2012)

Thanks for the reminder Web & the links Fossil. See if we can stay awake for the landing, hope all goes well for all those that have invested so much of their lives in this. Science community is pretty pumped about this up here.


----------



## fossil (Aug 5, 2012)

This link will take you directly to where the landing "show" will be aired, starting at 9:00 PM PDT (they're doing background fluff right now).  The feed will be, as I understand it, live from JPL in Pasadena:

http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/mars/curiosity_news3.html


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 6, 2012)

I watched it live...what a friggin show. Once in a lifetime opportunity. 2.5 billion dollars coming down to 7 minutes of terror! What a show..congratulations NASA..job well done! It was quite the celivery system.

Andrew


----------



## woodchip (Aug 6, 2012)

Brilliant timing here, it landed about 5-30 am GMT just as I got up.

Perfect for breakfast TV!

Well done NASA


----------



## Gark (Aug 6, 2012)

It landed, and one of the first pictures-


----------



## fossil (Aug 6, 2012)

The complexity of what that team has accomplished is mind-boggling.  What a superb job so far!


----------



## Jags (Aug 6, 2012)

It took 79 pyrotechnic explosions to jettison, cut, blow off, etc. all the things that the lander had to get rid of.  Any single one of them not going perfect would have ended in failure.  Amazing.  Just getting this thing on the surface was some sort of crazy stuff.

Patiently waiting for this thing to start roving.


----------



## webbie (Aug 6, 2012)

Amazing feat. I'll chip in my $8 (that's about how much per person it cost)


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 6, 2012)

I must confess . . . after reading the information on this landing ahead of time I was a bit negative in my thinking as I figured that anything traveling that far, that fast, for that long in the conditions of space (cold, debris, radiation, etc.) and relying on an experimental landing of such complexity . . . well I figured that there was a really, really good chance of this thing ending up in one tangled mass of metal and electronics on the surface of Mars.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 6, 2012)

China just called. They are calling our note on the rover and want the title and keys.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 6, 2012)

A pic from the orbiter of the descent.


----------



## woodchip (Aug 6, 2012)

firefighterjake said:


> I must confess . . . after reading the information on this landing ahead of time I was a bit negative in my thinking as I figured that anything traveling that far, that fast, for that long in the conditions of space (cold, debris, radiation, etc.) and relying on an experimental landing of such complexity . . . well I figured that there was a really, really good chance of this thing ending up in one tangled mass of metal and electronics on the surface of Mars.


 
That was what I was worried about. It is so complex, so many tiny things could have gone wrong.
Mars is a graveyard for many a previous attempt to land and uncover it's secrets.
Question is, how many questions will be answered, and how many new questions will arise..........

Such is the nature of Curiosity..........


----------



## ScotO (Aug 6, 2012)

Jags said:


> It took 79 pyrotechnic explosions to jettison, cut, blow off, etc. all the things that the lander had to get rid of. Any single one of them not going perfect would have ended in failure. Amazing. Just getting this thing on the surface was some sort of crazy stuff.
> 
> Patiently waiting for this thing to start roving.


 What's even more amazing Jags is the fact that they can do all this, yet still can't get one damm thing done in Congress.....


----------



## fossil (Aug 6, 2012)

Scotty Overkill said:


> What's even more amazing Jags is the fact that they can do all this, yet still can't get one damm thing done in Congress.....


 
You're talking about two completely different "they"s.


----------



## ScotO (Aug 6, 2012)

And furthermore, my honest opinion is that it is a HUGE waste of money to even do this crap.  We are spinning out of control in this country financially, and they waste this money to go to MARS?  How 'bout a big WTF?  They've already proven that Mars is unable to sustain human life.......the atmosphere is inhabitable.


----------



## ScotO (Aug 6, 2012)

fossil said:


> You're talking about two completely different "they"s.


Maybe we should deploy some of those NASA scientists to fix the economy.  I think they could do a better job than the clowns we have in there now.


----------



## begreen (Aug 6, 2012)

Uh oh, first color picture is coming in now.


----------



## ScotO (Aug 6, 2012)

begreen said:


> Uh oh, first color picture is coming in now.
> 
> View attachment 71536


 ROTFLMAO......that's probably right on the money!  Suprised the sign doesn't say "You screwed up your planet, go back the F@#K home and leave ours alone!"


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 7, 2012)

LOL. Love the sign BeGreen. Perhaps it is true.

As an ex-scientist, I can appreciate what it took and the level of precision required to pull this off. Sending something to another planet is easy...it can crash on it and simply not work.

 Sending something to another planet, have a rocket propelled descent after the supersonic parachute disengages, crane drop off delivery system and everything work afterwards is a different story.


----------



## MishMouse (Aug 7, 2012)

link to the fact sheet on the mission.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/fact_sheets/mars-science-laboratory.pdf

A very amazing piece of equipment.
Who knows what technological break throughs will come of this.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Aug 7, 2012)

Meme of the day


----------



## Delta-T (Aug 7, 2012)

at long last we will get to see the ruins of the great cities of Barsoom. With any amount of luck we will be able to discover how they were able to harness the 8th and 9th rays of the spectrum to power their mighty flying ships. Ya, I read those Edgar Rice Burroughs books. I did not see the movie though.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 7, 2012)

I just want them to get pics of Marvin's house.


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 7, 2012)

I find there is a good bit of cynicism in the fact that a bunch of old school wood burning men/women (wood burning as a source of  heat being fairly primitive) have such an interest in a technological feat. Then again, stove technologies are progressing quite quickly. If only I could get my hands on a radioisotope power generator....lol. See, I was right, Nuclear Energy *is *the way of the future...just look at my icon!

Andrew


----------



## kalevi (Aug 8, 2012)

Here is why we should continue space exploration http://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/


----------



## Jags (Aug 8, 2012)

Cool read Kalevi.


----------



## btuser (Aug 8, 2012)

We need a hobby. People need a hobby. Mars is a hobby, so are pyramids, so is religion. I pick Mars.

After we got past the point of starvation we needed something to do. As a nation we've spent over 900 billion dollars maintaining a fleet of 12 nuclear submarines equipped with warheads for which we've never had an occasion to use. We spend over 50 billion dollars yearly on pets in this country, and we spend more money in America every year on chewing gum (something with almost no purpose) than a 10yr mission to Mars. All the while poor children around the planet are starving to death.

Please people, don't chew gum. Just think how evil it is to support a 20 billion dollar worldwide market devoted to chewing mouths while people go hungry. OH THE SHAME!


----------



## fossil (Aug 8, 2012)

btuser said:


> ...a fleet of 12 nuclear submarines...


 
Not exactly. Currently active in the fleet are 11 nuclear powered Aircraft Carriers and 71 nuclear powered Submarines, 14 of which are configured to launch the ballistic missiles to which you refer.


----------



## btuser (Aug 8, 2012)

fossil said:


> Not exactly. Currently active in the fleet are 11 nuclear powered Aircraft Carriers and 71 nuclear powered Submarines, 14 of which are configured to launch the ballistic missiles to which you refer.


 
How much do they cost?


----------



## fossil (Aug 8, 2012)

btuser said:


> How much do they cost?


 
Well, if you have to ask...


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 8, 2012)

More than cat food?


----------



## fossil (Aug 8, 2012)

BrotherBart said:


> More than cat food?


 
I don't think there _are_ that many cats.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 8, 2012)

About time to take this one to the Ash Can but I believe there are some folks in Libya today that would say that our investment in those subs with something other than nukes in the tubes was well worth it.


----------



## begreen (Aug 8, 2012)

Here's some tweets from Curiosity.


----------



## fossil (Aug 8, 2012)

Tomahawks'll git 'er done without a messy mushroom cloud.


----------



## btuser (Aug 9, 2012)

I just read a book called Thirteen Things That Don't Make Sense by Michael Brooks (my personal list is a lot longer) that went through the Viking probe and how they thought they'd discovered life, then redacted, but then the scientist who thought up the experiment waited 10 years and said the only explaination that makes sense for what they found was that Mars has life. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/16/mars-life_n_1429380.html

This time around we've designed the experiments only to test for "the conditions that will support life" and not try to answer the other question.  Hmmmmmm. Why is that?




fossil said:


> Not exactly. Currently active in the fleet are 11 nuclear powered Aircraft Carriers and 71 nuclear powered Submarines, 14 of which are configured to launch the ballistic missiles to which you refer.


 
I'm not saying they're not cool, only trying to quantify how much money that we spend on a host of things.  2.5 billion dollars is not a lot of money to answer questions of this magnitude.    I'll give up chewing gum for a year to find out what's on another planet.


----------



## billb3 (Aug 10, 2012)

Curiosity's first kill


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Aug 15, 2012)

Check this out- 360 pan high res image from Rover. Dang

http://www.360pano.eu/show/?id=731


----------



## Jags (Aug 15, 2012)

When did we land in New Mexico?

Dang - that is cool.  Really cool.  I love how you can just pan the horizon or even check out rover (where is the nearest car wash, he is looking a bit dirty).


----------



## btuser (Aug 15, 2012)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Check this out- 360 pan high res image from Rover. Dang
> 
> http://www.360pano.eu/show/?id=731


 It's already dirty.  Who's going to wash that thing?


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Aug 15, 2012)

btuser said:


> It's already dirty. Who's going to wash that thing?


Soon as they wash it- you know it will rain anyway


----------



## Jags (Aug 15, 2012)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Soon as they wash it- you know it will rain anyway


Baahahaha - hey, wait......


----------



## fossil (Aug 15, 2012)

It's a hangar in Nevada.


----------



## begreen (Aug 15, 2012)

Where's the cup holder?


----------



## fossil (Aug 15, 2012)

Jags said:


> ...(where is the nearest car wash, he is looking a bit dirty).


 
Oh, don't worry...that dust & stuff won't stand a chance against Curiosity's break-neck acceleration up to 1.5 Inches/second.


----------



## Jags (Aug 15, 2012)

fossil said:


> Oh, don't worry...that dust & stuff won't stand a chance against Curiosity's break-neck acceleration up to 1.5 Inches/second.


 

Hmmpf - if this is what nuclear power gets us in a vehicle, I am not very impressed.


----------



## Delta-T (Aug 15, 2012)

Jags said:


> Hmmpf - if this is what nuclear power gets us in a vehicle, I am not very impressed.


 
it sounds way faster in metric....


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 15, 2012)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Check this out- 360 pan high res image from Rover. Dang
> 
> http://www.360pano.eu/show/?id=731



Wow.  That's all I can say!  Great link.  Have to look around for more.  Has it started moving yet?


----------



## btuser (Aug 15, 2012)

11.5 hours per mile, give or take depending on the traffic.


----------



## Jags (Aug 15, 2012)

btuser said:


> 11.5 hours per mile, give or take depending on the traffic.


 
You forgot to take into account "sight seeing" and "rest stops".


----------



## PapaDave (Aug 15, 2012)

velvetfoot, I think the plan is to run tests on various systems for a couple weeks before movement begins.
Then, watch out! If you stood still in front of it long enough, you'd get *almost* run over.


----------



## Jags (Aug 15, 2012)

So this is just something else to mislead me?:


----------



## fossil (Aug 15, 2012)

PapaDave said:


> velvetfoot, I think the plan is to run tests on various systems for a couple weeks before movement begins.
> Then, watch out! If you stood still in front of it long enough, you'd get *almost* run over.


 
Not exactly.  Computer memory limitations required that the "space travel" software be loaded for the launch, transit, and landing...now a whole other code set has to take its place to enable the rover's surface exploration funtions.  Go to the JPL link, and look at the article on the left under "Updates".  They're calling what needs to be done a "brain transplant".  

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/


----------



## PapaDave (Aug 15, 2012)

Didn't realize it would be a "brain transplant". Thought they were just doing some "updates" to the existing software.
I'll go get gooder informed.


----------



## btuser (Aug 15, 2012)

Jags said:


> You forgot to take into account "sight seeing" and "rest stops".


You're right. How many women on board?

Sounds like it's got two brains.  I'm guessing one side is there to make sure the other stops and asks for directions.


----------

