The harpoons didn't actually fire.

At around 8:45 a.m. PST, ESA said the lander’s harpoons did not fire, meaning that Philae is not anchored to the comet. Without being firmly attached to the ground, the worry is that the lander may fall off. ESA is now looking at options to refire the harpoons. -wired

ESA twitter msg
https://twitter.com/esaoperations/status/532575061543485440

Top Games I remember (in no specific order)

Galaga
Defender
Stargate (Defender)
Tac Scan
Tempest
Tron
Pac Man
Missile Command
Dig Dug
Joust
Journey (yes, based after the Band)
Centipede
Pengo
Gauntlet
Lunar Lander

If they did, they're be a Guinness sponsorship on the side of their lander and their Ishtronauts would have bats or clubs as part of their gear

But selenites would develop acute sensitivity to acoustic vibrations transmitted through the regolith. Good luck bunny hopping back to the safety of you lander, Lander Calrissian.

>> ^chingalera:

Tubby little bastard..Used to seeing rockets all slim n sexy-Looks like some lozenge taking-off and landing.
Remember the Lunar Lander arcade game all you old geeks? Dropped many a 4-bits on that one!


Loved that game. Here's an updated version.
http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/lunar-lander

Tubby little bastard..Used to seeing rockets all slim n sexy-Looks like some lozenge taking-off and landing.

Remember the Lunar Lander arcade game all you old geeks? Dropped many a 4-bits on that one!

>> ^lurgee:

many quarters lost playing that game. >> ^Krupo:
Anybody else have a flashback to playing Lander while watching this?



That's exactly what I was thinking when I saw this. Damn that game was hard!

http://youtu.be/L-GBq2X1wpg

>> ^skinnydaddy1:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^charliem:
Pretty sure John Carmack (of Doom fame) was one of the lead software engineers on this project.

Your thinking of Armadillo Aerospace, which lost out slightly to this company, Masten Space Systems, in the NASA and Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge X Prize in 2009 for the level 2 test. Armadillo Aerospace won the level one test, but the second level was a million bucks to the $350k of the first.

Was this the company that got several tries for the contest were Armadillo Aerospace only got one?


Armadillo Aerospace's vehicle could of made another attempt, but they decided against it because of a burned through engine nozzle, and rolled the vehicle at takeoff that caused other damage. Rockets ain't easy!

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^charliem:
Pretty sure John Carmack (of Doom fame) was one of the lead software engineers on this project.

Your thinking of Armadillo Aerospace, which lost out slightly to this company, Masten Space Systems, in the NASA and Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge X Prize in 2009 for the level 2 test. Armadillo Aerospace won the level one test, but the second level was a million bucks to the $350k of the first.


Was this the company that got several tries for the contest were Armadillo Aerospace only got one?

Mission control will play like the Lunar Lander game.

many quarters lost playing that game. >> ^Krupo:

Anybody else have a flashback to playing Lander while watching this?

Anybody else have a flashback to playing Lander while watching this?

>> ^charliem:

Pretty sure John Carmack (of Doom fame) was one of the lead software engineers on this project.


Your thinking of Armadillo Aerospace, which lost out slightly to this company, Masten Space Systems, in the NASA and Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge X Prize in 2009 for the level 2 test. Armadillo Aerospace won the level one test, but the second level was a million bucks to the $350k of the first.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Yep, that's what I'm suggesting. Though I guess by the way you've framed your questions you think I'm insane. The success rate of the balloon method is not bad. And getting two rovers down from a single launch is also something that's been successful. I don't think it's that unreasonable to consider that two rovers like Spirit and Opportunity could carry complementary gear, meet up and connect.

You're right that we don't send landers to Mars very often - that's why it's important to build on successful technologies with a proven track record of success to maximise our chances.

Thanks for the link - I've reviewed a lot of this stuff too though I appreciate more information even if it is delivered with a heavy dose of condescension.

Egos and personalities involved in science? Why would I ever think that - everything we do or say or write comes from a completely rational base right?

>> ^Fletch:

@dag

Why wouldn't you try and improve on that method instead of going with a completely, untested extremely complicated new method? I suspect personalities and nerd egos are involved.