Why was it necessary to program InSight with an ability to land in dust storms?
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
If the entire event of EDL(Entry- Descent - Landing) is going to take only 7 minutes and if the command to begin could be signalled based on ground weather condition, why to take the extra effort to program abilities to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
If the entire event of EDL(Entry- Descent - Landing) is going to take only 7 minutes and if the command to begin could be signalled based on ground weather condition, why to take the extra effort to program abilities to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
If the entire event of EDL(Entry- Descent - Landing) is going to take only 7 minutes and if the command to begin could be signalled based on ground weather condition, why to take the extra effort to program abilities to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
If the entire event of EDL(Entry- Descent - Landing) is going to take only 7 minutes and if the command to begin could be signalled based on ground weather condition, why to take the extra effort to program abilities to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
asked 11 hours ago
karthikeyan
1,044518
1,044518
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
26
down vote
accepted
Because it's at the end of a 6 month cruise and there's no turning back.
InSight will not enter closed orbit around Mars - its trajectory is hyperbolic so either it misses Mars entirely or it enters the atmosphere.
There were six planned course corrections during the cruise phase, the final one of which - TCM 6 - occurred on the day of the landing. This was to precisely target the landing site and would have made very little difference to the entry time - certainly not enough to wait out a dust storm.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
InSight doesn't enter Martian orbit before EDL; it plows straight into Mars' atmosphere from interplanetary space. Thus, the time of landing is pretty much un-alterable after its final midcourse correction maneuvers; it cannot wait for perfect weather conditions to land.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
To deal with dust storms, two of the changes between Phoenix and InSight are mechanical in nature:
InSight uses a thicker heat shield, partly to handle the possibility of being sandblasted by a dust storm.
InSight’s parachute suspension lines use stronger material.
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight/timeline/landing/entry-descent-landing/
The landing site needs to be both flat and level, and reconnaissance helped to choose the optimal site. Nonetheless, there still could be boulders or small hills that should be avoided. Therefore, there are cameras and radar that help the computer decide the best place for landing, and thrust appropriately. These cameras and radar can be blinded by dust storms.
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
1
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
2
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
26
down vote
accepted
Because it's at the end of a 6 month cruise and there's no turning back.
InSight will not enter closed orbit around Mars - its trajectory is hyperbolic so either it misses Mars entirely or it enters the atmosphere.
There were six planned course corrections during the cruise phase, the final one of which - TCM 6 - occurred on the day of the landing. This was to precisely target the landing site and would have made very little difference to the entry time - certainly not enough to wait out a dust storm.
add a comment |
up vote
26
down vote
accepted
Because it's at the end of a 6 month cruise and there's no turning back.
InSight will not enter closed orbit around Mars - its trajectory is hyperbolic so either it misses Mars entirely or it enters the atmosphere.
There were six planned course corrections during the cruise phase, the final one of which - TCM 6 - occurred on the day of the landing. This was to precisely target the landing site and would have made very little difference to the entry time - certainly not enough to wait out a dust storm.
add a comment |
up vote
26
down vote
accepted
up vote
26
down vote
accepted
Because it's at the end of a 6 month cruise and there's no turning back.
InSight will not enter closed orbit around Mars - its trajectory is hyperbolic so either it misses Mars entirely or it enters the atmosphere.
There were six planned course corrections during the cruise phase, the final one of which - TCM 6 - occurred on the day of the landing. This was to precisely target the landing site and would have made very little difference to the entry time - certainly not enough to wait out a dust storm.
Because it's at the end of a 6 month cruise and there's no turning back.
InSight will not enter closed orbit around Mars - its trajectory is hyperbolic so either it misses Mars entirely or it enters the atmosphere.
There were six planned course corrections during the cruise phase, the final one of which - TCM 6 - occurred on the day of the landing. This was to precisely target the landing site and would have made very little difference to the entry time - certainly not enough to wait out a dust storm.
edited 6 hours ago
answered 11 hours ago
Jack
6,78013051
6,78013051
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
InSight doesn't enter Martian orbit before EDL; it plows straight into Mars' atmosphere from interplanetary space. Thus, the time of landing is pretty much un-alterable after its final midcourse correction maneuvers; it cannot wait for perfect weather conditions to land.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
InSight doesn't enter Martian orbit before EDL; it plows straight into Mars' atmosphere from interplanetary space. Thus, the time of landing is pretty much un-alterable after its final midcourse correction maneuvers; it cannot wait for perfect weather conditions to land.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
InSight doesn't enter Martian orbit before EDL; it plows straight into Mars' atmosphere from interplanetary space. Thus, the time of landing is pretty much un-alterable after its final midcourse correction maneuvers; it cannot wait for perfect weather conditions to land.
InSight doesn't enter Martian orbit before EDL; it plows straight into Mars' atmosphere from interplanetary space. Thus, the time of landing is pretty much un-alterable after its final midcourse correction maneuvers; it cannot wait for perfect weather conditions to land.
answered 11 hours ago
Russell Borogove
77.5k2250336
77.5k2250336
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
To deal with dust storms, two of the changes between Phoenix and InSight are mechanical in nature:
InSight uses a thicker heat shield, partly to handle the possibility of being sandblasted by a dust storm.
InSight’s parachute suspension lines use stronger material.
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight/timeline/landing/entry-descent-landing/
The landing site needs to be both flat and level, and reconnaissance helped to choose the optimal site. Nonetheless, there still could be boulders or small hills that should be avoided. Therefore, there are cameras and radar that help the computer decide the best place for landing, and thrust appropriately. These cameras and radar can be blinded by dust storms.
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
1
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
2
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
To deal with dust storms, two of the changes between Phoenix and InSight are mechanical in nature:
InSight uses a thicker heat shield, partly to handle the possibility of being sandblasted by a dust storm.
InSight’s parachute suspension lines use stronger material.
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight/timeline/landing/entry-descent-landing/
The landing site needs to be both flat and level, and reconnaissance helped to choose the optimal site. Nonetheless, there still could be boulders or small hills that should be avoided. Therefore, there are cameras and radar that help the computer decide the best place for landing, and thrust appropriately. These cameras and radar can be blinded by dust storms.
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
1
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
2
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
To deal with dust storms, two of the changes between Phoenix and InSight are mechanical in nature:
InSight uses a thicker heat shield, partly to handle the possibility of being sandblasted by a dust storm.
InSight’s parachute suspension lines use stronger material.
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight/timeline/landing/entry-descent-landing/
The landing site needs to be both flat and level, and reconnaissance helped to choose the optimal site. Nonetheless, there still could be boulders or small hills that should be avoided. Therefore, there are cameras and radar that help the computer decide the best place for landing, and thrust appropriately. These cameras and radar can be blinded by dust storms.
To deal with dust storms, two of the changes between Phoenix and InSight are mechanical in nature:
InSight uses a thicker heat shield, partly to handle the possibility of being sandblasted by a dust storm.
InSight’s parachute suspension lines use stronger material.
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight/timeline/landing/entry-descent-landing/
The landing site needs to be both flat and level, and reconnaissance helped to choose the optimal site. Nonetheless, there still could be boulders or small hills that should be avoided. Therefore, there are cameras and radar that help the computer decide the best place for landing, and thrust appropriately. These cameras and radar can be blinded by dust storms.
answered 11 hours ago
Dr Sheldon
3,1031339
3,1031339
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
1
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
2
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
1
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
2
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
Are the suspension lines stronger than Phoenix's because of possible dust storms, or because Insight is a little heavier, and its parachute was deployed at mach 1.8 instead of mach 1.7?
– Wayne Conrad
8 hours ago
1
1
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
8 hours ago
2
2
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f32301%2fwhy-was-it-necessary-to-program-insight-with-an-ability-to-land-in-dust-storms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown