EPTMars Mission: Curiosity - Page 48
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep Nation bragging and the political debate out. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
|
Khul Sadukar
Australia1735 Posts
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/multimedia/gallery-indexEvents.html | ||
|
Tewks44
United States2032 Posts
On August 09 2012 17:00 Khul Sadukar wrote: Why is a closeup of the $1 bill on page 72 of the gallery? http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/multimedia/gallery-indexEvents.html from the website "This image displays the type of detail discernable with the telescopic camera of the Chemistry and Camera (ChemCam) instrument on the Mars Science Laboratory mission's Curiosity rover." so it's for demonstrative purposes only. EDIT: I don't know if this has been posted yet, but the sheer size of the curiosity rover is amazing. It's as large as the lunar vehicle NASA used during the moon landings. Here's a size comparison to get an idea. ![[image loading]](http://historicspacecraft.com/Diagrams/P/Planetary_Rovers_RK2011_600x350.jpg) | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On August 08 2012 21:57 m4inbrain wrote: Let me help you understand a posting which is written in your mothertongue and foreign to me. "I still think whatever we can learn from that rover and the mission is not worth the money it cost us, and it is money we could have used elsewhere." See how he used "we", and "us"? Hes not talking about spending 7 dollars in 8 years. Hes talking about the billions which for example would be better used (at least to me as a european) in american education. You're welcome. No need to be snippy  I understand perfectly well what he said. Let me help you understand my response - which might still be wrong, of course, but not for the reason you're suggesting. Suppose for a moment that a really poor country had launched Curiosity; that they'd devoted half their tax budget to it or more. Citizens would be rightly outraged: a huge chunk of their individual wealth, money they couldn't afford to spend frivolously, has been sunk into a scientific venture to Mars. That's a really bad decision; something to be justifiably cross about. If we can agree that the individual in the poor country would have more to be cross about than the American (and I'm pretty sure we can), then it's clear the absolute cost of Curiosity is not what's important. In particular, it's not sensible to talk about the Curiosity mission and <insert worthy cause here> as if they were the only items on the table; as if Curiosity is the reason the American education system isn't a couple of billion dollars better off. Everything else the government is spending on, all put together, is the reason the education system isn't more well-funded, right? Given that the correct context in which to consider the cost of Curiosity is the total wealth and government expenditure of the country, isn't it most apt for individual contributors to consider the cost to them in the same way: $7 of their personal wealth spread over 8 years? If you wouldn't be angered or offended by an individual (with responsibilities: a large family to support, bills to pay etc) spending under $1 a year on something like Curiosity (most of which he actually paid to his kids to do the work), why be offended when the government does it? | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5913 Posts
 | ||
|
POiNTx
Belgium309 Posts
| ||
|
Louis8k8
Canada285 Posts
I wish I had curiosity wired to a game controller right now in my hands. I want to poke every rock and that dark patch of ground in the distance there. That could be 845628778 miles away, I don't know the specs on their lens and how stretched it is. The cameras they use for race events in the olympics confuse the heck out of me when it comes to depth perception. I'll assume the same for curiosity's | ||
|
keyStorm
Canada316 Posts
On August 10 2012 05:16 Louis8k8 wrote: Now that's the photo (the HD panoramic coloured one) I've been waiting for. I can even see the features of each pebble nearby to Curiosity. I wish I had curiosity wired to a game controller right now in my hands. I want to poke every rock and that dark patch of ground in the distance there. That could be 845628778 miles away, I don't know the specs on their lens and how stretched it is. The cameras they use for race events in the olympics confuse the heck out of me when it comes to depth perception. I'll assume the same for curiosity's the rover have lots of power to move through the plains, just be patient :D | ||
|
brachester
Australia1786 Posts
On August 10 2012 11:14 keyStorm wrote: the rover have lots of power to move through the plains, just be patient :D It uses a nuclear battery that's enough to power it for 13-15 years. | ||
|
keyStorm
Canada316 Posts
On August 10 2012 11:28 brachester wrote: It uses a nuclear battery that's enough to power it for 13-15 years. it's been designed to last 2 years. is there any solar arrays on it? edit: all the better if it last for the next 15years! | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
| ||
|
Gofarman
Canada648 Posts
On August 10 2012 15:47 a176 wrote: id just like to point out that Opportunity it still running after 8 and a half years. Running and Operational are two different things. Opportunity gets a picture once and a while but is so extremely limited by power (dust settling on solar panels) that she is long done any breaking science. If I remember correctly Opportunity hasn't moved for over 2 years.None of that is to take away from the amazing feat of engineering and knowledge that JPL and NASA achieved with the twins though. As a note they made a point in one of the mornings new briefs (post landing) that the rovers are tested for 3x mission expectations (in Curiosity's case, 6 years of use) and not to failure. The conditions the rover will be exposed to is likely to be within the guidelines that the engineers have set so I do expect a long time for the rover to be sciencing (aslong as they keep Wolowitz out of the control room). | ||
|
Enox
Germany1667 Posts
this is so impressive. it doesnt even look like another planet. this could also be a desert somewhere on the earth :o | ||
|
brachester
Australia1786 Posts
On August 10 2012 17:07 Enox wrote: http://panoramas.dk/mars/greeley-haven.html this is so impressive. it doesnt even look like another planet. this could also be a desert somewhere on the earth :o shhh, those conspiracy theorist is still sleeping. | ||
|
Enox
Germany1667 Posts
 | ||
|
Perguvious
United States1783 Posts
On August 09 2012 22:23 Antisocialmunky wrote: I'm just happy they managed the landing sequence and that now I can say "THE MSL LIVES!" my first reaction reading OP too | ||
|
HotShizz
France710 Posts
| ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
|
Louis8k8
Canada285 Posts
On August 10 2012 17:07 Enox wrote: http://panoramas.dk/mars/greeley-haven.html this is so impressive. it doesnt even look like another planet. this could also be a desert somewhere on the earth :o And this is in the crater? Jeez that's a huge crater, I don't see the ridge. | ||
| ||
