Why was it necessary to program InSight with an ability to land in dust storms?
up vote
35
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 conditions, why was it necessary to take the extra effort to program the capability to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and only initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
add a comment |
up vote
35
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 conditions, why was it necessary to take the extra effort to program the capability to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and only initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
add a comment |
up vote
35
down vote
favorite
up vote
35
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 conditions, why was it necessary to take the extra effort to program the capability to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and only initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
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 conditions, why was it necessary to take the extra effort to program the capability to land in dust storms?
Why not make use of dynamic weather monitoring and only initiate entry when the conditions are perfect?
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
mars nasa landing insight entry-descent-landing
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
edited Nov 28 at 22:13
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
asked Nov 26 at 17:15
karthikeyan
1,296923
1,296923
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
89
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
add a comment |
up vote
32
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
add a comment |
up vote
8
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
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
Nov 26 at 20:34
3
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
7
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
2
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
6
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
|
show 1 more comment
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
89
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
add a comment |
up vote
89
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
add a comment |
up vote
89
down vote
accepted
up vote
89
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
edited Nov 26 at 22:33
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
answered Nov 26 at 17:54
Jack
7,61513253
7,61513253
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
32
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
add a comment |
up vote
32
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
add a comment |
up vote
32
down vote
up vote
32
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
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 Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
answered Nov 26 at 17:53
Russell Borogove
80k2265350
80k2265350
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
8
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
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
Nov 26 at 20:34
3
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
7
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
2
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
6
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
8
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
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
Nov 26 at 20:34
3
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
7
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
2
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
6
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
8
down vote
up vote
8
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.
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
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 Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
answered Nov 26 at 17:58
Dr Sheldon
4,60411647
4,60411647
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
Nov 26 at 20:34
3
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
7
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
2
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
6
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
|
show 1 more 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
Nov 26 at 20:34
3
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
7
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
2
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
6
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
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
Nov 26 at 20:34
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
Nov 26 at 20:34
3
3
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
@WayneConrad: All 3 reasons contributed to the design change.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 26 at 20:36
7
7
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
+1 for the how, but it actually misses the question of why.
– DarkDust
Nov 26 at 20:59
2
2
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
@WayneConrad: The wind, not the dust itself.
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 27 at 14:09
6
6
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
No, that's not how wind works on flying objects. If there is potential wind shear during deployment, that could cause increased loads on the parachute. But high wind speeds alone will not. That's because, aerodynamically, the capsule is flying relative to the wind, not relative to the ground.
– Wayne Conrad
Nov 27 at 16:42
|
show 1 more comment
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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
