Your video, How the next Mars Rover will land on Mars, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 19 Badge!

They might switch things up and send it to Venus. It could happen. Who will look stupid then, huh? HUH?>> ^therealblankman:

Redundant Mars Rover is Redundant.



Mars.

Mostly from Wikipedia:

The mass of Curiosity is five times that of the rovers Spirit and Opportunity. It will weigh almost 2000 lbs (900 kg for you devil-metric people), and be the size of a Mini Cooper. An airbag drop would have been questionable for even half its weight in two separate pieces. And then what happens if the two pieces land so far apart that they can't reach other, due to difficult terrain or simply a long distance between the two parts (they don't anticipate Curiosity traveling more than 12 miles in its two year mission)? Also, creating two pieces to run separately long enough until they could link perfectly with each other presents its own design challenges.

The Curiosity also has ten times the weight of scientific equipment compared to the previous rovers, hence its large size. They plan on doing way more with Curiosity than previous rovers. It will also travel greater distances, and be able to handle the terrain better than the previous, smaller rovers.

If you really want to get your geek on then here is an 18-page "overview" of the Mars Science Laboratory entry, descent, and landing system.>> ^dag:

This was my thought exactly. I hope they pull it off, but from a layman's perspective this seems ripe for failure. I mentioned this a while back in a Wired thread - and asked why they messed with the success of the balloon method. The answer was that the rover is too big and heavy for the balloons.
They should have made it smaller then - or do two balloon ball drops and have them link up after landing.
Great CGI though. promote
>> ^waynef100:
dang, thats a lot of potential failures right there. what was wrong with the balloon method?

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

This was my thought exactly. I hope they pull it off, but from a layman's perspective this seems ripe for failure. I mentioned this a while back in a Wired thread - and asked why they messed with the success of the balloon method. The answer was that the rover is too big and heavy for the balloons.

They should have made it smaller then - or do two balloon ball drops and have them link up after landing.

Great CGI though. *promote

>> ^waynef100:

dang, thats a lot of potential failures right there. what was wrong with the balloon method?

Redundant Mars Rover is Redundant.






Mars.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

The last five minutes are probably the best thoughts this man has sown in my head.
If humans can build Mars rovers, and we are only 2% more advanced than Chimpanzees.
What will a 2% advanced post-human society look like? [!?!?!?]


Agreed the last 5 minutes was probably the best, but what really got me is the "walking by the worm" thought. That there could of very well be the species 2% "above" us been here before and we're too stupid enough to recognize it. That got me thinking, woah.

The last five minutes are probably the best thoughts this man has sown in my head.

If humans can build Mars rovers, and we are only 2% more advanced than Chimpanzees.

What will a 2% advanced post-human society look like? [!?!?!?]

I think i just got served by a Mars rover

Anyone else see the space shuttle and feel depressed about our pathetic reliance on chemical propulsion?

I feel that way every time I get in my car.

@Doc_M

Makes sense for stuff like this and other near-Earth expeditions, but I wager NASA has a hell of a time with transmissions between ground control and deep space probes and whatnot. It's easy to take for granted the massive infrastructure we have here on terra firma and the thousands of satellites above us at any given second. The little Mars rovers don't have such luxuries, and they are over 36,000,000 miles away.

This video has been declared a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by oxdottir.

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/The-journey-of-the-Mars-Rovers

linky winky
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-journey-of-the-Mars-Rovers

Conditions on The Moon are much different than conditions on Mars. It's much closer, allowing instant communication, it has no atmosphere, so no weather and storms and it's about half the size of Mars.

Since the rovers there won't be on scientific missions, but only on surface-carving patrols, the rovers would be much lighter and less power-hungry, and could be a lot cheaper than a Mars rover, allowing the sending of several robots simultaneously to draw different parts of the image.

Since the moon has no real atmosphere, sunlight would be much brighter in daylight hours, allowing for quicker solar panel recharging.

I'm against it, by the way. I don't really want to look at the moon and see a McDonalds logo.

lol.. imagine how little distance the mars rovers travelled. Then imagine what kind of sq miles are required to make something visible from Earth.. It will be a minimum of hundreds of years of robots driving around the moon (and never breaking or dealing with boulders/craters/etc)

Now a barrage of missles might do it...

I was thinking about the subject of national achievements the other day. One hundred years ago, people were for the most part not using internal combustion for transportation. In the fifty years hence, amazing advances took place. However, it seems at first glance to have tapered off since the late 60s.

My two cents: First off, we can thank the Cold War for the space race and our landing on the Moon. Second, Mars rovers anyone? That was a pretty fucking amazing feat! Third, IMO, most national (and global) achievements haven't been as outwardly observable as past achievements. For example: the internet. Personal computing. Nanotechnology. Miniaturization of every conceivable electronic device. They are all amazing achievements, but they aren't as sensational as a trip to the moon.