Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 1/1/2006 5:43:27 PM EST
They have just spent 2 years on Mars and are still active. Each have covered over 7 miles. They were originally expected to survive only 3 months on Mars.

Now only if we could get this kind of mileage out other government programs.

Link Posted: 1/1/2006 5:51:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 5:54:04 PM EST by Johnny_Reno]
What's the MPH on 7 miles in two years?


Heh heh...that's an average of 2.1 feet per hour.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 5:53:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By Johnny_Reno:
What's the MPH on 7 miles in two years?



Slower than Jesse Ownes, after he was dead.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 5:56:07 PM EST
I was just thinking about them today... wondering if they were still ticking.

That 3 month guestimate was hogwash, IMHO. Probably came up with a super short timeframe, incase Nasa screwed something up again.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 5:56:55 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 5:57:18 PM EST by The_Macallan]

How much was that Mars Lander that impacted into the back of the planet because of a metric-conversion error?


Link Posted: 1/1/2006 5:57:04 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 5:57:15 PM EST by MonkTx]
I think it would be about 7.99086e-4 mph.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:01:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By 7:
I was just thinking about them today... wondering if they were still ticking.

That 3 month guestimate was hogwash, IMHO. Probably came up with a super short timeframe, incase Nasa screwed something up again.




Yep. +1
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:05:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:08:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
How much was that Mars Lander that impacted into the back of the planet because of a metric-conversion error?





Wrong place Macallan, but I gotta say it.........I love your sigline.....what a jackass........
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:10:53 PM EST

That 3 month guestimate was hogwash, IMHO. Probably came up with a super short timeframe, incase Nasa screwed something up again.


Either that or they intentionally shortened the expected lifespan so that now they have a huge victory. They said something about one of them being in a tornado or freak windstorm and the dust being cleaned off the solar panels. Never made sense to me. We have the money and technology to put a rover on frickin Mars but they can't put a fan or wiper blade on there. Come on.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:11:59 PM EST


They'll all be the death of us someday.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:13:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmyAirborne:

That 3 month guestimate was hogwash, IMHO. Probably came up with a super short timeframe, incase Nasa screwed something up again.


Either that or they intentionally shortened the expected lifespan so that now they have a huge victory. They said something about one of them being in a tornado or freak windstorm and the dust being cleaned off the solar panels. Never made sense to me. We have the money and technology to put a rover on frickin Mars but they can't put a fan or wiper blade on there. Come on.

You're kidding right?
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:14:24 PM EST

You're kidding right?


How so?
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:18:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmyAirborne:

You're kidding right?


How so?


Solar power, especially on Mars, isn't exactly a plentiful power source. If you add another electrical load, like a wiper motor, you'll end up hitting the point of diminishing returns much faster. Sure you may be able to last a little longer, assuming the dust doesn't smear, but the depth of the experimentation wouldn't be there as you would have to sacrifice experiments for the wipers.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:21:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By Johnny_Reno:
www.starfleetlibrary.com/tos/images/TOS03702.jpg

They'll all be the death of us someday.





It never ceases to amaze me the amount of photos some of you guys have stored.......
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:24:30 PM EST

Solar power, especially on Mars, isn't exactly a plentiful power source. If you add another electrical load, like a wiper motor, you'll end up hitting the point of diminishing returns much faster. Sure you may be able to last a little longer, assuming the dust doesn't smear, but the depth of the experimentation wouldn't be there as you would have to sacrifice experiments for the wipers.



Oh ok, I'm not that smart on solar power. It just seemd such a trivial little thing to have such a major impact on a multi-million dollar project. Heh, i guess thats why I'm not a rocket scientist.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:25:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By ArmyAirborne:

You're kidding right?


How so?


Solar power, especially on Mars, isn't exactly a plentiful power source. If you add another electrical load, like a wiper motor, you'll end up hitting the point of diminishing returns much faster. Sure you may be able to last a little longer, assuming the dust doesn't smear, but the depth of the experimentation wouldn't be there as you would have to sacrifice experiments for the wipers.





Every ounce given over to something besides an experiment is one more thing that will not get you anything and you are paying to get it there.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:29:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmyAirborne:

Solar power, especially on Mars, isn't exactly a plentiful power source. If you add another electrical load, like a wiper motor, you'll end up hitting the point of diminishing returns much faster. Sure you may be able to last a little longer, assuming the dust doesn't smear, but the depth of the experimentation wouldn't be there as you would have to sacrifice experiments for the wipers.



Oh ok, I'm not that smart on solar power. It just seemd such a trivial little thing to have such a major impact on a multi-million dollar project. Heh, i guess thats why I'm not a rocket scientist.


That's why they aimed the rovers for specific points. They made calculated guesses as to which locations would yield the most information given the probes they were building. They estimated how long it would take to get the information and they built the probe to match. Anything above and beyond those calculations is gravy. Also they don't know too much about the dust on Mars, so they had to take a SWAG at how much dust would build up and how quickly with an eye towards the worst case.

Think of the probes as the scientific equipment of a race car. It may not have many bells and whistles and creature comforts, but it is purpose built to do what it does well.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:33:24 PM EST
As pointed out weight is a serious factor or we would send something like a M1 over to roam the planet. But every gram counts when you going so far away and have to LAND.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:46:48 PM EST
That 3 month guestimate was hogwash, IMHO. Probably came up with a super short timeframe, incase Nasa screwed something up again



well, if they sent 1000 rovers (and they all survived landing), the average life would probably be 3 months.

I'm guessing the two up there now were not built on a Monday or Friday.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:48:59 PM EST
We need and ARFCOM colony on the moon.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:49:15 PM EST

Originally Posted By Jame_Retief:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By ArmyAirborne:

You're kidding right?


How so?


Solar power, especially on Mars, isn't exactly a plentiful power source. If you add another electrical load, like a wiper motor, you'll end up hitting the point of diminishing returns much faster. Sure you may be able to last a little longer, assuming the dust doesn't smear, but the depth of the experimentation wouldn't be there as you would have to sacrifice experiments for the wipers.





Every ounce given over to something besides an experiment is one more thing that will not get you anything and you are paying to get it there.



Sheesh, just put a roll of the stuff they use on race car cameras over the solar collectors. When it gets dirty, roll off the dirt and presto, clean solar panel. Maybe... Sounds good to me.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:53:09 PM EST
They are operating only because of the incredible talents of Maintenance Man Marvin Martian.


Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:54:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By Backstop:
They are operating only because of the incredible talents of Maintenance Man Marvin Martian.

membres.lycos.fr/starmars/marvin/snapshot(17).jpg


You make me very angry.

Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:59:15 PM EST
Here's a picture one of them sent back before it had it's problems right after it landed.



Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:59:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:

Originally Posted By Backstop:
They are operating only because of the incredible talents of Maintenance Man Marvin Martian.

membres.lycos.fr/starmars/marvin/snapshot(17).jpg


You make me very angry.




Keep talking to me like that, and I'll destroy the earth. I'm planning it now.

Link Posted: 1/1/2006 7:00:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By ARDOC:
They have just spent 2 years on Mars and are still active. Each have covered over 7 miles. They were originally expected to survive only 3 months on Mars.

Now only if we could get this kind of mileage out of other government programs American automobiles.


Top Top