jumper03 0 #1 March 10, 2006 turn on NASA tv to find out in 2 minutes.... Edit to add: NASA TV is running on about an hour delay so the orbiter has already done what's its going to do, it'll just be awhile to find out. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KindredSpirit 0 #2 March 10, 2006 I like nasa tv. "Kicking gravity's ass since 2003!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #3 March 10, 2006 Heh heh. You said insertion. you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #4 March 10, 2006 I don't know, but water was found. I posted about the water yesterday, but I'm sure you knew about it too.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #5 March 10, 2006 QuoteI don't know, but water was found. I posted about the water yesterday, but I'm sure you knew about it too. Different planet dude...Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #6 March 10, 2006 >Edit to add: NASA TV is running on about an hour delay so the >orbiter has already done what's its going to do, it'll just be awhile >to find out. I think the burn starts at 1:38pm PST. There is still the speed-of-light delay, which means we won't know what happened for 12 minutes depending on where Mars is relative to us right now. (Edited to add - it's 134 million miles from us, so 12 minutes.) BTW it's odd that they are using hydrazine engines instead of aerobraking or more advanced propulsion technology (like ion.) Hydrazine has a specific impulse of 240 seconds, tops. The vehicle was designed to aerobrake; you'd think they use aerobraking during capture where delta-V is most important. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #7 March 10, 2006 Quote>Edit to add: NASA TV is running on about an hour delay so the >orbiter has already done what's its going to do, it'll just be awhile >to find out. I think the burn starts at 1:38pm PST. There is still the speed-of-light delay, which means we won't know what happened for 4-20 minutes depending on where Mars is relative to us right now. BTW it's odd that they are using hydrazine engines instead of aerobraking or more advanced propulsion technology (like ion.) Hydrazine has a specific impulse of 240 seconds, tops. The vehicle was designed to aerobrake; you'd think they use aerobraking during capture where delta-V is most important. they will use aerobraking to fine tune the orbit. The hydrazine is to slow for gravity capture.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
arlo 0 #8 March 10, 2006 a little FYI: our friend Krystal (who died last year in a plane crash along with piers, egon, and bruno) was working on this MRO at KSC. in memory of her, NASA placed her name on the nose cone of this when it launched last year. Krys was a local jumper here in deland. a bunch of us are keeping track of this as she makes the orbit insertion. it's pretty cool. fly on, krys! we knew you'd make it. miss you tons... edited to add a couple pics of the nose cone. the second pic shows krys' little sister jaime and her best friend danielle (who is also a skydiver and NASA employee). her parents are in the background... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #9 March 10, 2006 Quotea little FYI: our friend Krystal (who died last year in a plane crash along with piers, egon, and bruno) was working on this MRO at KSC. in memory of her, NASA placed her name on the nose cone of this when it launched last year. Krys was a local jumper here in deland. a bunch of us are keeping track of this as she makes the orbit insertion. it's pretty cool. fly on, krys! we knew you'd make it. miss you tons... now that is very cool to know. Thank you. I hope krys watches over the satellite - this is an important one.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #10 March 10, 2006 >The hydrazine is to slow for gravity capture. Yeah, but that's a huge amount of fuel. Their delta-V for capture is about 1000 m/s (2200 miles/hr) and it requires most of the fuel the thing is carrying - around 2500 pounds. Ion engines have impulses around 3000 seconds, so you'd need less than 1/10 the fuel. Aerobraking is essentially free (and will be absolutely required if we ever want to send people there) - plus which the spacecraft is already designed for it. An aerobrake pass followed by a burn to ensure capture would take a lot less fuel even with hydrazine engines. I suspect they are being ultra-conservative due to all the problems encountered by Mars probes lately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #11 March 10, 2006 Quote Was insertion successful? OK, I thought this was going to be a follow-up to the "Nooner" thread. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #12 March 10, 2006 QuoteBTW it's odd that they are using hydrazine engines instead of aerobraking or more advanced propulsion technology (like ion.) Hydrazine has a specific impulse of 240 seconds, tops. The vehicle was designed to aerobrake; you'd think they use aerobraking during capture where delta-V is most important. Yeah, like...duh!"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #13 March 10, 2006 Quote>The hydrazine is to slow for gravity capture. Yeah, but that's a huge amount of fuel. Their delta-V for capture is about 1000 m/s (2200 miles/hr) and it requires most of the fuel the thing is carrying - around 2500 pounds. Ion engines have impulses around 3000 seconds, so you'd need less than 1/10 the fuel. Aerobraking is essentially free (and will be absolutely required if we ever want to send people there) - plus which the spacecraft is already designed for it. An aerobrake pass followed by a burn to ensure capture would take a lot less fuel even with hydrazine engines. I suspect they are being ultra-conservative due to all the problems encountered by Mars probes lately. you talking over my head now. I know very little about the engineering behind it - I just want the damn data so we can pick a good landing site. yeah - we're what? 2 for 4 lately on getting probes to Mars? Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #14 March 10, 2006 Quote due to all the problems encountered by Mars probes lately. Frickin alien abductions can really suck. Haven't those Martians ever heard of KY jelly??? Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #15 March 10, 2006 > I just want the damn data so we can pick a good landing site. Oh, I think we have them already. We've got good contour maps from the Mars Global Surveyor, and detailed pictures from a half dozen landers (including the latest rovers, which have covered over 8 miles of terrain since they have landed.) There's really nothing stopping us from going there, other than money and commitement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #16 March 10, 2006 Unsuccessful. Mars was drunk and passed out."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #17 March 10, 2006 Do we know enough about the Martian atmosphere to use aerobraking? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #18 March 10, 2006 >Do we know enough about the Martian atmosphere to use aerobraking? Sure! This mission _is_ using aerobraking, as have all the other probes that have landed on Mars. They're just not using it for orbit capture, which is odd since that's the most fuel-intensive manuever after the craft leaves earth orbit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #19 March 10, 2006 Quote>Do we know enough about the Martian atmosphere to use aerobraking? Sure! This mission _is_ using aerobraking, as have all the other probes that have landed on Mars. They're just not using it for orbit capture, which is odd since that's the most fuel-intensive manuever after the craft leaves earth orbit. and each time they dip into the atmosphere, we get more and more data that we can exploit Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #20 March 10, 2006 MADE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MRO is in orbit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hot damn - 3 for 5 now Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,411 #21 March 10, 2006 QuoteI don't know, but water was found. I posted about the water yesterday, but I'm sure you knew about it too. You mean "water ice", right? "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #22 March 11, 2006 I love your avatar. The Dude abides, man. you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdrejhon 8 #23 March 11, 2006 Quote>Do we know enough about the Martian atmosphere to use aerobraking? Sure! This mission _is_ using aerobraking, as have all the other probes that have landed on Mars. They're just not using it for orbit capture, which is odd since that's the most fuel-intensive manuever after the craft leaves earth orbit.One correction. Viking 1 and Viking 2 did not use aerobraking, to the best of my knowledge. However, all the other NASA landers did use aerobraking capture. Mars Global Surveyor, Mars Express, Mars Odyssey, all of which are still operating today. (The other two currently operating Mars missions are the Spirit and Opportunity rovers). There are now 6 active (alive) spacecraft on or around Mars! (Correct me if I am wrong) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdrejhon 8 #24 March 11, 2006 QuoteHot damn - 3 for 5 now Don't forget the successful Viking landers and orbiters, and the failed Mars Observer. NASA's statistics look better when we include those. (6 out of 8, or 8 out of 10 depending on interpretition as to whether the Viking Orbiter and Viking Lander are separate missions or not, because two pairs of orbiter/lander launched connected, and separated when arriving at Mars - Viking 1 Orbiter, Viking 1 Lander, Viking 2 Orbiter, Viking 2 Lander - all from the mid 70's). The three major failed NASA Mars missions, would be the Mars Observer and Mars Polar Lander, as well as Mars Climate Orbiter. In addition, there's the question of whether the Deep Space 2 impact-landers (mission failure) should be included in this statistic. These were landers attached to one of the successful orbiter missions. Russa's success rate for Mars, on the other hand, are quite dismal historically in comparision to NASA when you breakdown Mars mission successes between the two countries. (The above statistics exclude European missions, of course, such as the failed Beagle 2 lander or the successful Mars Express orbiter) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
