LIVE! IM-2 Nova-C Lunar Landing...

LIVE! IM-2 Nova-C Lunar Landing...

Author
Discussion

dickymint

Original Poster:

26,876 posts

271 months

Thursday 6th March
quotequote all

Eric Mc

123,589 posts

278 months

Friday 7th March
quotequote all
Has it fallen over?

I keep saying that tall landers aren't a great idea.

Blackpuddin

18,025 posts

218 months

Friday 7th March
quotequote all
Presumably top-heaviness isn’t such a problem in low gravity environments? Not an expert obvs.

Soloman Dodd

419 posts

55 months

Friday 7th March
quotequote all
They are waiting to see it's orientation. It's got a functioning solar panel and comms.

Top heavy stuff still suffers from inertia, low gravity just makes it go wrong more slowly.

Eric Mc

123,589 posts

278 months

Friday 7th March
quotequote all
Blackpuddin said:
Presumably top-heaviness isn’t such a problem in low gravity environments? Not an expert obvs.
I would think that making a landing "stick" in a low gravity environment is MORE difficult I would suggest.

dickymint

Original Poster:

26,876 posts

271 months

Friday 7th March
quotequote all
Sadly........."dead in a crater on it's side" !!

skwdenyer

18,148 posts

253 months

Saturday 8th March
quotequote all
Soloman Dodd said:
Top heavy stuff still suffers from inertia, low gravity just makes it go wrong more slowly.
Low gravity also makes self-correction potentially easier. Given this is 2 for 2 failures from this outfit, finding mass budget for a self-righting arm would seem like one solution smile A fundamentally new architecture would be another. But whether these guys will get funding for another try isn’t clear right now…

Eric Mc

123,589 posts

278 months

Saturday 8th March
quotequote all
The Russians were very clever with their first landers - low centre of gravity and no legs at all.


hondajack85

506 posts

12 months

Sunday 9th March
quotequote all
Surely these contracted out by nasa moon missions are a con. A lot of money must be needed for testing everything works and correcting again and again.
We seem to have missions that sort of hit the moon. Then due to being upside down you dont have to prove anything works.
Cant even land where you want to. Just saying moon to the bodged up satnav gizmo is not enough. Imagine a future resupply or rescue mission.
Just being 10 miles away let alone the usual 100s of miles spells doom.
At least the press and media are less inclined to describe this stuff as a success now due to current fraught relations.
JFK should have said we do it not because its easy,but because its hard to see though our efforts to look better than anyone else.
lol