Curiosity Mars Mission

[DeletedUser]

In about a week's time NASA's Curiosity mission will attempt to land on Mars.
Having just watched a documentary on this, - http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01llnb2/Horizon_20122013_Mission_to_Mars/ although I hope I'm wrong, I can't imagine it will succeed where so many previous (and simpler) missions have come to grief.
Here's a shorter link :- http://www.space.com/10379-big-step-mars.html

I'd like to hear what other people think its chances are. It would make a nice change to have a thread where folks can express their opinions and in a week or so be proved righrt or wrong, instead of the endless, open-ended, irresolvable debates that we're used to.

Also, is it worth the money? $2.5 billion buys a lot of school texts or food for hungry Africans. Personally, I feel it would be better to be poor but informed than rich and ignorant, but maybe others have a different take on this.

Anyway, this is a challenge to all you know-alls. Will it work or not? Put those reputations on the line.

 

[DeletedUser31397]

I'd say chances are 50: 50. It takes about 150- 300 days to get to the mars. That isn't a lot with good amount of food and water but consider that none of us know what really is in the Universe. Something could easily go wrong there.

I also think that it is a waste of money really. I mean, it is a great discovery but as you mentioned, that money could be used to feed so much hungry children and people all over the world. But that's something what you and me would do. Not the politicians.

Anyway I think it could work, but it takes one year to go there and get back to the Earth, many bad things can happen by then.

 

[DeletedUser16008]

Im all for space exploration, the more the better imo ill give it 80% success on landing but only 50% returning.

As for the money, less on weapons etc and you can feed, educate and clothe the whole world and still explore space with change to spare.

 

[DeletedUser]

Umm, Black Appache, it would probably help if you read the op and then watch the vids before posting. The mission is already set to land on Mars in two weeks.

Anyway... I anticipate it will be a successful landing, but also anticipate there will be technical difficulties with manuever control and some of the sampling mechanisms.

As to what I think about space exploration in general, We already learned a helluva lot and our technologies of today are largely the result of efforts to attain Earth orbit, attain lunar orbit, land on the moon, attain Mars orbit, land on Mars, and explore the outer planets. Perhaps everyone has forgotten about the hundreds of satellites presently orbiting the Earth. You think those satellites are merely overblown Jiffy Pop cannisters?

Scientific explorations pushes scientists and engineers to their limits, thus providing crucial data on many avenues and fields of scientific discovery.

And yes, as Victor noted, we spend a helluva lot more money stockpiling, and then boneyarding, military hardware. The trillions of dollars spent annually on weapons and military would find far greater use feeding, housing, and educating.

 

[DeletedUser31397]

Umm, Black Appache, it would probably help if you read the op and then watch the vids before posting. The mission is already set to land on Mars in two weeks.

Anyway... I anticipate it will be a successful landing, but also anticipate there will be technical difficulties with manuever control and some of the sampling mechanisms.

As to what I think about space exploration in general, We already learned a helluva lot and our technologies of today are largely the result of efforts to attain Earth orbit, attain lunar orbit, land on the moon, attain Mars orbit, land on Mars, and explore the outer planets. Perhaps everyone has forgotten about the hundreds of satellites presently orbiting the Earth. You think those satellites are merely overblown Jiffy Pop cannisters?

Scientific explorations pushes scientists and engineers to their limits, thus providing crucial data on many avenues and fields of scientific discovery.

And yes, as Victor noted, we spend a helluva lot more money stockpiling, and then boneyarding, military hardware. The trillions of dollars spent annually on weapons and military would find far greater use feeding, housing, and educating.

Currently BBC iPlayer TV programmes are available to play in the UK only-- it shows me this message and I can't watch it, but I did read it somewhere else not too long ago and it said that it requires 150- 300 days but the more fuel you use the faster you will get to there. I guess that's where most of the money went.

And about weapons, USA will always need those, beacuse of wars. Look at what's happening in Iran for example, all that has happened there indicates a new war between USA, Israel against Iran. If you read about it, you know that it is a war of huge measures, and there will maybe be using nuclear weapons. We don't know what can happen.

 

[DeletedUser]

Currently BBC iPlayer TV programmes are available to play in the UK only--

I figured there might be regional blocks on BBC content. That's why I added the other link too. Also, at nearly an hour's length, you would have to be really interested to watch the whole thing.

 

[DeletedUser31931]

About your post Apache. Albert Einstein once said (and I quote) "I do not know what weapons WW3 will be fought with, but WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones."

 

[DeletedUser31397]

I figured there might be regional blocks on BBC content. That's why I added the other link too. Also, at nearly an hour's length, you would have to be really interested to watch the whole thing.

Yeah I watched that second video on the link you posted. It lasts 3 minutes and it's an animation of showing on the mars?

About your post Apache. Albert Einstein once said (and I quote) "I do not know what weapons WW3 will be fought with, but WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones."

Yeah, he also said

: As long as there are men, there will be wars. Genius mind can't predict the future tho.

 

[DeletedUser15641]

Also, is it worth the money? $2.5 billion buys a lot of school texts or food for hungry Africans. Personally, I feel it would be better to be poor but informed than rich and ignorant, but maybe others have a different take on this.

Its a waste of time and money....

That's what I think.

But not completely now they just know that the Atmosphere is a bit different than the one at our Earth ..

 

[DeletedUser]

lol, umm they knew the atmosphere was different decades ago.

Appache, how long it takes to get there is irrelevant, Curiosity is already there and should be landing soon. That's what the discussion was; whether it would make a successful landing and follow up with surface sampling. All previous landing attempts encountered compications or failed altogether.

 

[DeletedUser]

Well, not quite all failed. The Mars Rover has been sending back lots of pictures over the years.
The British sent over a meccano-and-string vehicle on the back of an ESA launch some years back called Beagle. As I recall, it was supposed to land in a sort of bubble-wrap beachball to protect it from harm. It was ingenious, audacious and cheap. It was also a failure.
If evidence of life were found on Mars, it would be bye-bye Genesis (not the rock group). For the chance of that alone it's probably worth the money.

 

[DeletedUser31397]

lol, umm they knew the atmosphere was different decades ago.

Appache, how long it takes to get there is irrelevant, Curiosity is already there and should be landing soon. That's what the discussion was; whether it would make a successful landing and follow up with surface sampling. All previous landing attempts encountered compications or failed altogether.

It isn't really irrevelant. My point was that many things can happen and go wrong in that time (2 weeks to get there and to come back) Excuse my english, I use wrong expressions sometimes.

-BA-

 

[DeletedUser15057]

The sheer scale of technology and precision required just to get the thing to land without being smashed up on impact is mind boggling.

It would be tough enough to try this remotely here on earth!!.
So I give the chances of successfully landing without significant incident or damage as about 2%.
Chances to land but have major technical damage as about 10%.
Chances that the probe doesn't land or work 80%.

If they can get any data/feedback from the mission it will be a significant achievement, and as they indicated another step closer to understanding how life has developed universally.

 

[DeletedUser]

hehe, you do realize they gave worse odds to a computer working... and look where we are.

While there are many factors involved there have likewise been much research and effort into this. It's not a bunch of punks in their backyard making a bottle-rocket, these are some of the brightest minds in aerospace technology. Ah well...

 

[DeletedUser31397]

It should land in 0 days, 13 hours, 56 minutes and I heard we should be avaivable to see it landing on live video. Can't wait.

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm delighted to report that my prediction was wrong. HS was nearest the mark, followed by Victor. But Victor's prediction of a 50% chance of return seems a little optimistic since it's only designed to be a one-way trip.

 

[DeletedUser]

Where's my kewpie doll?

http://www.ustream.tv/nasajpl

 

[DeletedUser16008]

I'm delighted to report that my prediction was wrong. HS was nearest the mark, followed by Victor. But Victor's prediction of a 50% chance of return seems a little optimistic since it's only designed to be a one-way trip.

While Curiosity rover appears to have landed intact, its exact condition is still to be ascertained.

NASA plans to put the one-ton, six-wheeled, nuclear-powered rover and its sophisticated instruments through several weeks of engineering checks before starting its two-year surface mission in earnest.

Curiosity is designed to spend the next two years exploring, maybe I should have been more clear with the words return findings

I still give it 50% given its still far too early to tell if everything is intact as yet.

 

[DeletedUser]

Im all for space exploration, the more the better imo ill give it 80% success on landing but only 50% returning.

While Curiosity rover appears to have landed intact, its exact condition is still to be ascertained. ... I still give it 50% given its still far too early to tell if everything is intact as yet.

Aww too bad, I beat ya to it.

I anticipate it will be a successful landing, but also anticipate there will be technical difficulties with manuever control and some of the sampling mechanisms.

My kewpie doll, mine mine!

 

[DeletedUser]

Going to mars? Look after the people on Earth first my friends.