SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
NASA's next big Mars rover will include a helicopter designed to work in Mars's thin atmosphere:
When NASA launches its next rover to Mars, the vehicle will have a small helicopter along for the ride. NASA announced today that it will be sending a small autonomous flying chopper — aptly named the Mars Helicopter — with the upcoming Mars 2020 rover. The helicopter will attempt to fly through the Martian air to see if vehicles can even levitate on Mars, where the atmosphere is 100 times thinner than that of Earth.
The design for the Mars Helicopter has been in the works for the last four years at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, but the space agency had yet to decide if it was actually going to send the vehicle to Mars. NASA needed to determine if this technology was actually feasible and if the agency had enough money in its budget to include the copter, according to Spaceflight Now. Now it seems that the agency has decided that this copter idea could actually work.
One much better place in the solar system for a flying vehicle is Titan, which has lower surface gravity and a denser atmosphere than Earth.
Related: Titan Ripe for Drone Invasion
NASA New Frontiers Finalists: Comet 67P Sample Return and a Titan Drone
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:40PM (8 children)
Land Rovers, Helicopters, Yachts, all toys for billionaire playboy scum.
The poor will inherit the Earth after Elong Musky takes all the rich people with him when he leaves.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:57PM (7 children)
You've got it wrong. Poor folks can be an asset on Mars too:
Elon Musk: First humans who journey to Mars must 'be prepared to die' - 'It would be an incredible adventure' [theverge.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by frojack on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:27PM (6 children)
You'll die fairly soon after arrival, unless they have an ascent module (which nobody seems to be talking about).
Because you've got nothing much to eat.
You have to crap in your own pants and you can't wipe your own ass,
You can never itch your nose,
You barf once, you wear it for the rest of your (short) life.
Even if they send a shelter, you can only re-pressurize that so many times before you run out of air.
And you're not getting any oxygen from the martian atmosphere.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:35PM (5 children)
Oh wow gee nobody thought of growing food there. Or using a BFR to leave.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2151285-how-we-could-make-oxygen-on-mars-plus-fuel-to-get-home/ [newscientist.com]
http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/6342/20150514/humans-may-not-have-to-carry-oxygen-to-mars.htm [sciencetimes.com]
You could also use plants to produce more oxygen.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by tftp on Sunday May 13 2018, @09:04PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday May 13 2018, @09:27PM (2 children)
BFR could deliver the mass equivalent of the ISS to the surface of Mars in just 3 orbital-refueled trips.
ISS [wikipedia.org] mass = 419,455 kg
BFR [wikipedia.org] payload to Mars [wikipedia.org] with in-orbit refueling = 150,000 kg
Sending enough food there for an ISS-like crew to live for months, and sending what they need to set up a greenhouse and machinery to produce propellant for a return trip using BFR is entirely possible, and doesn't require decades of delay or good robotic technology.
Now I don't disagree that waiting a couple of decades and setting things up in advance with robots is a better idea. But I doubt that the initial forays into manned Mars exploration are going to (attempt to) produce a permanent colony. Even Musk doesn't have plans to pay for such an idea (at this point), he is just making the proposal and building the fully reusable and high-payload rocket he thinks will best facilitate colonization of Mars.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 14 2018, @06:18PM (1 child)
Even better, just bring the ISS to Mars when it's decomissioned.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday May 14 2018, @08:16PM
Recent NASA plans for Mars called for humans to orbit Mars rather than land on it, in the early 2030s. If that continues to be the case, maybe they can throw the ISS over there at the same time. But that doesn't track with the administration's current plans to transition use of the ISS to private companies.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Monday May 14 2018, @06:37PM
So true. You bring a potato. You poop on it, you water it. Eventually it makes food & air. Although the food is nothing but potatoes. Mars, possibly, will be known as the planet of french fries and vodka!
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:16PM (3 children)
They barely have the power budget to run the rover, wasting more power on a helicopter seems like just showing off.
It won't be able carry much payload beyond a very small camera.
Its charging is via solar power. From its fixed base.
Its not designed to even get out of sight, so by definition, its not needed.
It's designed at best to get 10 meters high.
.
Some will say, "Well you have to start somewhere". But this will never be useful technology on that planet. The Martian surface, is already at the Earth equivalent of 100,000 feet up. We can't even fly earth helicopters at that height with all the power at our disposal. Its a fundamentally flawed lift technology for mars.
The good news is it will probably be lost very early in the mission, and they can get back to the science they went there for.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:37PM
> But this will never be useful technology on that planet. The Martian surface, is already at the Earth equivalent of 100,000 feet up. We can't even fly earth helicopters at that height with all the power at our disposal. Its a fundamentally flawed lift technology for mars.
Mars also has the *advantage* of lower gravity. I haven't done the calculations so I don't know how much this offsets the loss in lift from the thin atmosphere, but it's not as simple as you say. Presumably, the scientists at the National *Aeronautics* and Space Administration did those calculations, and figured it should work.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Sunday May 13 2018, @09:27PM (1 child)
Like Captain Kirk before you, you've failed to realise the gravity of the situation.
Where's the logic in that? "A few hundred meters" may not be "out of sight," but you can certainly study things that are a few hundred meters away a lot better if you go over to them.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday May 14 2018, @07:00AM
William Shatner is never wrong and never fails
-- William Shatner
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford