Well done, NASA

[dsquire]

Check out the chute photo....in process
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/news/msl20120806b.html

Incredible.

It's also interesting to note that they missed their (moving) target impact zone by only two km after flying a distance of some 350 million miles.

Pffff, that's nothing. I once drove 1000 miles, and parked within 5mm of the kerb.

 

But the kerb was stationary. 

Cheers 

Don

[steamer]

Seems that chute photo was a real gem too!   If the photo was taken 1 second ahead or behind when it was actually taken...it would have missed the event all together!

This was also programed in the last 72 hours of the approach....to compensate for errors.

Dave

[Pete49]

but Adev going at night you won't be able to se where you are going and may miss it altogether.

Nice job NASA
Pete

[IanR]

I was surprised that a parachute would work, with an atmospheric density of something like 6 millibars at ground level. http://www.modelenginemaker.com/Smileys/default/LittleAngel.gif

[weldersmate]

Excuse me for being thick but what purpose has been served by going to Mars? A lot of talented people have worked on this project, I would have thought they could have found something here on earth to do before they bugger another planet up. Just my thoughts Keith.

[Ian S C]

There we are, powered by stirling engines!  Oops not quite (heard that on another forum), the power supply is a Thermoelectric generator, fueled with 4.8 kg of Plutonium-238, producing 2.4Kw per(earth)day  The Stirling Engine is for a trip to Saturn, must go and tell the bloke on the other forum.  Ian S C

[mklotz]

Excuse me for being thick but what purpose has been served by going to Mars? A lot of talented people have worked on this project, I would have thought they could have found something here on earth to do before they bugger another planet up. Just my thoughts Keith.

Perhaps you would like to  see them work on something important like hosting the olympics?  Nineteen billion dollars to do nothing more than increase the entropy of the universe.

[Troutsqueezer]

In reviewing "just a sample" of the federal budget during one year, the White House concluded that at least $90 billion was being burned on the altar of programs that were deemed either ineffective, marginally adequate, or operating under a flawed purpose or design.

Of course, we could always port some more money over to those folks at GSA for future conventions and parties.

Up to me, I'd quadruple the budget for NASA, or more.

[mklotz]

Please, nobody tell Keith about the Large Hadron Collider.  He'd  have a meltdown.

[arnoldb]

Gents, please don't get personal or provocative.

Regards, Arnold

[Raggle]

But, but, but ...    The money didn't disappear, it got dissipated among all the people who worked on the project.

The money didn't go to Mars. If you're in a period of austerity one of the best actions you can take is a large capital project which can be seen by all. In this JM Keynes was right if his followers have made the wrong assumption that every large move must be tax funded.

If there is a downside to this it is in the fact that those who benefited from the employment the project brought have spent their bounty on foreign made consumer goods instead of being able to support home industry.

But this is no place for economic argument.

Well done NASA!

Ray

[weldersmate]

I know theres a lot of money wasted on this earth that could be used to a better purpose. But no one has answered my question, what are we going to gain out of going to another planet. We can
't live there and we can't bring anything back in big enough quantity to benifit mankind. How things are going we won't be living on this one for much longer.  Keith.

[steamer]

Guys....

I'm not a mod and I'm not playing one....but its great if we all have a NICE debate.....those discussions are great!

Let's just all step gently.....

 

Dave

[AdeV]

Excuse me for being thick but what purpose has been served by going to Mars?

Space travel is absolutely essential to the survival of the species beyond the next 100 years or so. It is more important than almost anything else we can do.

Besides, your comment seems to imply that getting to mars is the mission; in fact, that's just the end of the beginning of the mission - now the real work, scientific work, begins. Even getting there has tried a number of new technologies and techniques. If we're ever to colonise another planet - and, lets face it, that's only the most important goal we can have as a species - then we need to be able to land spacecraft on said planets. Seems to  me NASA just proved that not only can they land a spaceship in such a way that it could be used again - but that they can do it from half a billion miles away. Despite my comments above, that's a damn impressive achievement.

I suppose the biggest problem with space exploration, and the technologies, medicines, etc. that it directly contributes, tend to take many years to come through, and most people (politicians especially) are unable to see past the end of their own noses.

...before they bugger another planet up.

A planet is an inert ball of rock and other substances. It's not possible to "bugger" it up. Even Planet Earth hasn't been "buggered up"  by us humans. It's been here for nearly 5bn years; I guarantee that if all humans disappeared now, within 1000 years or so (a fraction of an eyeblink in the lifespan of a planet) there'd be absolutely no evidence whatsoever that we'd ever been here at all.

I know theres a lot of money wasted on this earth that could be used to a better purpose. But no one has answered my question, what are we going to gain out of going to another planet. We can 't live there and we can't bring anything back in big enough quantity to benifit mankind. How things are going we won't be living on this one for much longer.  Keith.

OK, those weren't the questions you asked, but I'll have a go at answering them:

1) "what are we going to gain out of going to another planet."

A few years back, you could have asked "what are we going to gain by going into space". We now know there were thousands of benefits, from scientific advances, to medicines, to weather reporting, to earth-bound navigation, etc.  I'm not going to try to predict what the benefits of visiting Mars are, but I can safely predict that there WILL be significant benefits.

2) We can 't live there and we can't bring anything back in big enough quantity to benefit mankind.

Not this time, perhaps (except for knowledge - we can bring lots of that back). In future, it might be worth mining Mars for iron. Or finding an asteriod or comet and dragging it into earth orbit to mine it. There are more natural resources out there than the mind can comprehend. NASA just proved they can land a spaceship - and it's not much of a step to make it able to take off again. One day,  un-manned robot spaceships may well be bringing a steady stream of vital minerals and resources to planet Earth; and you could say it all started here...

As for not being able to live there? Again, not now; but how will we know if it's possible to terraform a planet without actually going there first? Earthlings need to start leaving earth, there's too damn many of us, and one well placed asteroid could wipe us all out tomorrow (forget global warming, asteriods are far more dangerous, and there's actual genuine incontrovertible proof of them).

3) How things are going we won't be living on this one for much longer.

All the more reason to get a bloody move on with the space programme, wouldn't you say?

[AdeV]

but Adev going at night you won't be able to se where you are going and may miss it altogether.

Nice job NASA
Pete

Silly, I'll be taking a torch with me of course!