[HN Gopher] Due to blade damage, Mars Helicopter Ingenuity will ...
___________________________________________________________________
Due to blade damage, Mars Helicopter Ingenuity will not fly again
Author : foobarbecue
Score : 210 points
Date : 2024-01-25 19:58 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nasa.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nasa.gov)
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| 72 flights is a lot for an experimental craft, on Mars, running
| Linux.
| gokhan wrote:
| With off-the-shelf components.
| gokhan wrote:
| Damage to the blade tip is apparent in the shadow. But I would
| try one more flight just to see how it fares in such conditions,
| if it can be corrected in software etc.
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| Budget-wise, it's not worth trying anything else. There is a
| lot of prop damage here:
|
| https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/e1-pia26243-...
| dfcab wrote:
| Had the same thought but then wondered if the damage would
| cause vibration which would then lead to other issues.
| rtkwe wrote:
| To fly Ingenuity has to spin it's propellers very quickly due
| to the lower atmospheric density compared to Earth and that's a
| large chunk taken out of the blade. We can already guess
| what'll happen without testing it and it'll be some variation
| of the craft shaking itself to pieces and throwing debris all
| over that chunk of Mars. Better to just let it sit than toss
| all sorts of trash across the surface that could hit the rover.
| bluGill wrote:
| They can easily mimic the damage on earth. While there is more
| gravity, we can adjust atmosphere and measure lift, vibration
| and whatever. Probably modern engineering tools can do this all
| in software, but cutting the blade off a drone on earth is
| easy. Only if we are convinced by on earth simulation that we
| can still fly this should we attempt it. Otherwise attempting
| flight this risks doing more damage to something else. (the
| rover is too far away, so I guess not much - but that also
| means we can't observe what happens and adjust based on the
| rovers sensors)
| JshWright wrote:
| They can also account for gravity by pulling up on it with a
| tether (in a large vacuum chamber simulating the Martian
| atmosphere). That's how they tested the design originally.
| 0134340 wrote:
| That is just genius. NASA is wasting all this money on
| engineers when they could just ask HN.
| bigbillheck wrote:
| Designed for five, lasted 72, not too shabby.
| subterrane wrote:
| I dunno, feels like they overshot it. They should talk to the
| engineers that made my washing machine. That thing was designed
| to outlast the warranty and, I'll be damned, they nailed it.
| rtkwe wrote:
| Extraplanetary missions are almost always many times longer
| than initially designed because the initial mission is largely
| limited by the budget which includes the price of the people
| here on Earth and the time available on the Deep Space Network.
| Building a rover robust enough to last way longer than the
| basic mission is a blip in the budget when you include that and
| the launch costs so they keep being run until they're surpassed
| by another mission, they run out of some consumable (on
| Curiosity for example there's a limited number of times they
| can run some of the internal equipment), or they're out of new
| things to find to justify the cost of going on.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| With the rovers its pretty much a given that they'll out last
| the initially stated 90 day mission. They're much more
| expensive and carefully crafted for the task.
|
| Ingenuity is special because it's commercial off-the-shelf
| parts put together on a low-ish budget. It (as well as
| various other aspects of Perseverance) has shown that Mars
| can be tolerable for off the shelf hardware, rather than
| needing bespoke million dollar projects for everything.
| nickthegreek wrote:
| RIP little guy. This project was worth it for the marketing they
| got out it alone. I've seen so many stories about it since its
| launch. I hope it resonated with today's youth and gets them
| interested in space exploration.
| purpleblue wrote:
| Can they just do one more #YOLO flight at a high speed and high
| altitude as possible and see what happens? Seems more useful and
| fun than just leaving it to rot.
| HPsquared wrote:
| Probably don't want any flying debris hitting the rover.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| It's nearly a kilometer from the rover, should be fine.
|
| But I agree that it's better to leave it, download the
| remaining images and data from memory, maybe leave the
| software running as an experiment in non-rad-hardened
| computers on the surface, and eventually put it in a museum,
| than risk it crashing in spectacular fashion.
| lorstic wrote:
| The tips of the rotors approach the speed of sound. Around
| Mach 0.95.
|
| I'm sure someone can do the math on the maximum debris
| field, but I think it'll be larger than you're thinking.
| rtkwe wrote:
| It won't make it off the ground. Ingenuity has to spin it's
| rotors about 10 times faster than it does here on Earth. With
| that big of a chunk missing there's no way it can fly it'd tear
| itself to pieces during the spin up.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _more useful and fun than just leaving it to rot_
|
| Ginny has an independent solar panel/battery set-up. Perhaps it
| could be rigged as a lone stationary sensor?
| tempestn wrote:
| I wonder if it could even use its rotors to periodically blow
| away dust on the panels?
| PretzelPirate wrote:
| They should auction it off. For pickup only, of course.
|
| I'd like to own the first helicopter on Mars.
| givemeethekeys wrote:
| It's going to be on display at the Visitor Center when your
| grandkids visit.
| adastra22 wrote:
| You joke, but Russia did that with their moon rover.
| mkl wrote:
| In 1993, to Richard Garriott, for just $68,000:
| https://www.space.com/8073-privately-owned-soviet-moon-
| rover...
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Richard Garriot aka Lord British who made the Ultima series
| of videogames?
| lmz wrote:
| Yes. Also a space tourist.
| caseysoftware wrote:
| That's an amazing idea.
|
| Not only could they have fun with that stage but it'd be a fun
| race to see who could get it for them. Then have a big show
| when it's brought back to Earth and delivered to the owner.
|
| I could see SpaceX and FedEx team up for some amusing PR on
| that one.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| FedEx you say?
|
| https://tenor.com/view/expanse-the-expanse-fedex-
| gif-1316756...
| netsharc wrote:
| Huh, a bit like NFTs (or not at all?), the bragging rights that
| you have ownership of something on Mars is probably worth some
| change, especially if you're a billionaire.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| A bit like giant stone money: https://www.npr.org/sections/mo
| ney/2011/02/15/131934618/the-...
| hotpotamus wrote:
| Hasselblad liked to advertise that there were a couple free
| ones on the moon, you just had to pick them up. To save weight
| for more sample returns, the Apollo astronauts did the logical
| thing and kept the film, but chucked the cameras out on the
| moon.
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| They chucked a lot of stuff--anything intended for surface
| use went out the airlock. The cost per pound to bring
| something back from the moon was higher than the cost per
| pound of basically anything they brought.
| dgacmu wrote:
| Better investment than an NFT, at least.
| intrasight wrote:
| As long as only public museums are allowed to participate
| oliwary wrote:
| Show HN: This website is served from a helicopter on Mars
| WJW wrote:
| Imagine the latency though.
| daemonologist wrote:
| Imagine the egress fees (actually I imagine ingress would
| be more expensive than we're used to too).
| m463 wrote:
| 42 minute delay or interplanetary hug of death?
| omgmajk wrote:
| Three years and over 70 flights. That is pure wonder! RIP little
| guy, you did well.
| fredthedeadhead wrote:
| Are images of the damage available to the public?
|
| "Imagery revealing damage to the rotor blade arrived several days
| later."
|
| https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/after-three-years-on-mars-nasa...
| dfcab wrote:
| There is a picture of the helicopter that has arrows in your
| link, click next and you will see the tip of the blade in a
| shadow. :(
| Redoubts wrote:
| https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/pia26243-ingenuity-spots-
| the...
| fredthedeadhead wrote:
| Thanks, I missed that!
|
| It looks like it landed on quite an incline, almost 45
| degrees.
| NoZebra120vClip wrote:
| It takes a few hours to Photoshop over the bite-marks and claw-
| gouges.
| hall0ween wrote:
| lol nice
| imglorp wrote:
| Everything about the mission provided valuable data: especially
| that damaged blade. Failure modes are useful. Next, it might be
| useful to try flying anyway.
|
| If not, they still have running cameras, sensors and computer,
| until Perseverance moves out of range.
| ragebol wrote:
| The rotors will be unbalanced (even if the other side also
| broke off, chances of the same amount breaking of are as
| remote as the thing itself), so it will vibrate and probably
| tip over if it spins too hard
| Whatarethese wrote:
| Wasn't it only supposed to fly just a few time but it blew that
| number out of the water. Great job NASA engineers!
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| Rest in Peace little dude
|
| https://xkcd.com/695/
| o11c wrote:
| And of course the happy version:
|
| http://xkcdsw.com/3968
| brabel wrote:
| Thank you so much. The sad version was, somehow, actually
| upsetting.
| bsder wrote:
| "Hotel" by Boichi:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/DdLCU
| christiangenco wrote:
| I'm pretty sure none of my terrestrial drones have lasted more
| than a few dozen flights--72 across the solar system is
| impressive engineering!
| synapsomorphy wrote:
| I just interned at the NASA office (at Ames) that designed large
| chunks of and did a lot of flight planning / analysis for
| Ingenuity. It had some really awesome people behind it and its
| success inspired a number of new Mars rotorcraft missions
| (rotorcraft will be an integral part of Mars Sample Return).
| Flight is going to be a huge part of future solar system
| exploration efforts and Ingenuity paved the way.
|
| o7
| contact9879 wrote:
| Isn't Mars Sample Return pretty much dead at this point?
| synapsomorphy wrote:
| I contributed to the helicopter design for it so I'm biased
| but I think it'll happen eventually even if the funding isn't
| approved this administration/year/decade. The already-stashed
| samples will be up there basically forever, and we'll
| probably want samples from a few different areas anyways, so
| it makes sense to go grab them.
| dcsommer wrote:
| Mars has weather, unlike the moon. Will the samples really
| still be there a decade or two from now?
| onepointsixC wrote:
| The samples are meant to survive the vacuum of space but
| can't handle some weather? That seems unlikely.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| How erosive is the vacuum of space meant to be?
| timschmidt wrote:
| You mean that place that smells of burnt metal and is
| full of hard radiation? Surface of Mars is definitely
| more hospitable.
| wharvle wrote:
| Mars' famous dust storms aren't so good at causing
| damage, because the air's really, really thin, so they
| can't pick up heavy particles even with high wind speeds.
| A serious problem if you need to keep grit out of fine
| machinery or electronics, not so much if you're worried
| about erosion (I mean, yeah, eventually it'd be a
| problem, but it's slow-motion compared to the erosion of
| something exposed to sand storms on Earth)
|
| I guess it could eventually get buried, but I'd expect
| that to also be a slow process on most parts of the
| planet, for similar reasons. The only forces seriously
| driving weathering on the planet are radiation and wind--
| the radiation's pretty bad but not a problem for metal +
| some rocks that were already on the surface, at least
| over a span of a couple decades, and the wind just can't
| deliver much force because the atmosphere's so very thin
| (that's also why it's fairly difficult to fly on Mars).
| krisoft wrote:
| We are talking about 6 inch long titanium tubes. What do
| you imagine the weather doing to them in a few decades?
| synapsomorphy wrote:
| Yes, they will. The weather on Mars can't do much to
| metal tubes. They probably won't be buried either (the
| area they're in doesn't get much net deposition, you can
| tell from how rocky it is), but if that does happen, each
| sample's position and the terrain around them is very
| precisely mapped so it would be extremely unlikely that
| any get completely lost.
|
| https://mars.nasa.gov/news/9337/nasas-perseverance-rover-
| com...
| qwertox wrote:
| > o7
|
| I never came across this emoticon, but with what you wrote, its
| meaning became clear immediately. It's perfect.
| farnsworth wrote:
| Same, I thought I was terminally online but I've never seen
| this before.
| klyrs wrote:
| Looks like a swimmer to me... what do you see?
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| It's a salute. :)
| jconnop wrote:
| The 'o' is a head and the '7' is an arm giving a salute.
| shocks wrote:
| A salute
| nosrepa wrote:
| It's a salute.
| jprd wrote:
| > o7
|
| Someone saluting
| LASR wrote:
| For some reason, this kind of news always makes me sad. Like
| emotionally.
|
| Probably because of this https://xkcd.com/695/
|
| NASA has done an effective job at connecting with regular people.
| Goes to show, how even something as small as naming something
| differently makes a big shift in the mindset.
| Buttons840 wrote:
| I sometimes personify things too--impossible to throw away old
| stuffed animals. I just tell myself these objects fulfilled
| their purpose, and that makes them happy.
| Leszek wrote:
| I've always preferred this alternative rewrite:
| https://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/spirit_rewrite_unknown_author.png
| h2odragon wrote:
| Great run.
|
| They're gonna have trouble justifying buying the extended
| warranty next time.
| blisterpeanuts wrote:
| From the article: The Perseverance rover is
| currently too far away to attempt to image the helicopter at its
| final airfield.
|
| I wonder if the rover couldn't proceed to the location of the
| helicopter and get some high res images for diagnostic purposes.
| I'm sure they considered that option so maybe the rover's
| schedule is just too busy to accommodate such a mission.
|
| Anyway, R.I.P. Ingenuity and kudos to Nasa for another excellent
| piece of tech that lasted on another planet for years longer than
| originally planned.
| laverya wrote:
| Also the rover is really, really slow - a few hundred meters on
| a good day.
| zokier wrote:
| Rover time and mission resources are definitely limited and a
| concern, but apparently the location of the copter is also
| really inconvenient to access. Its sitting down in a valley
| middle of big sand ripple field. So its not clear if the rover
| could reach there even if they wanted to.
|
| That being said, not all hope is lost. While closeups are
| unlikely, the rover is driving in that general direction so
| there is (very slight) possibility to catch the copter in some
| lucky drive-by pic from a distance.
| seatac76 wrote:
| Sad to hear but kudos for an absolute feat of engineering.
| ragebol wrote:
| So, it still landed, upright no less, with a piece of the rotor
| blade missing? I'd guess that when a piece of rotor comes off
| during flight, the imbalance would make landing impossible. Very
| curious to what happened, but probably we'll never know exactly.
| tempestn wrote:
| My guess would be that the rotor struck the ground during
| landing.
| Kerb_ wrote:
| If I'm interpreting the picture correctly, it does look like
| there is a gouge on the ground in the pic showing the shadow
| arthurcolle wrote:
| How did the prop tip get damaged like that? Did it crash into
| something?
| junon wrote:
| Most likely.
|
| > Communication with Ingenuity was lost again at the end of the
| 72nd flight on January 18, 2024. JPL regained contact on
| January 20.
|
| Not an expert here but I assume the loss of contact was caused
| by some crash or something.
| donquichotte wrote:
| For anyone interested in the structure of the software that ran
| Ingenuity (and some hardware design aspects, such as the use of
| commercial off-the-shelve parts), there is an awesome and
| critically underwatched video of Timothy Canham explaining
| everything:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQu9m4MG5Gc&t=7s
| MicolashKyoka wrote:
| amazing work by the team at nasa.
|
| we'll get there and repair it so it does fly again in a few years
| :')
| bredren wrote:
| Was the singular focus on the Wright Brothers' contributions to
| flight and ingenuity a fair one?
|
| I had thought there was some shift in the Wright Brothers'
| attribution to flight in general.
|
| It seemed like better recognition of the contributions by Samuel
| Langley and Glenn Curtiss' to flight technology were along with
| acknowledgement of the WB's own efforts to boost their legacy
| might have checked a decision to keep pouring on the WB-were-the-
| ones narrative.
| schiffern wrote:
| In other news, some reliability engineer at NASA somewhere is
| very happy to have a new data point.
|
| "Oh, so _that 's_ where....."
| AlbertCory wrote:
| The helicopter is one of the coolest things NASA's ever done. 72
| flights. Wow. Great job, folks.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-01-25 23:00 UTC)