Impossibly over-complicated and bizarre landing process
Chances of safe landing... remote.
Chances of 2.5 billion dollars worth of hardware splattered in bits over the surface of Mars... very high.
(
notoolsovernight you're all luvvly an' 'orrible, Tue 31 Jul 2012, 22:43,
Reply)
It's complicated, but not over-complicated
This piece of kit is several orders of magnitude bigger and heavier than any other non-Earth unmanned landing in history.
Pathfinder was the size of a suitcase and landed inside an inflatable ball. Curiosity is the size of a car and weighs several tons.
Putting Neil and Buzz on the Moon was easier than this.
(
Lord Keeps meaning to procrastinate., Tue 31 Jul 2012, 22:59,
Reply)
But why does it have to hover?
Why do they have to winch it down from the hovering "skycrane"?
The whole thing fails the KISS maxim and instead looks suspiciously like something Gerry Anderson would have built.
(
evil_andy Stick stick stick stick sticky sticky stick stick, Wed 1 Aug 2012, 9:34,
Reply)
They explain all that in the video
they need to use rockets because the parachute can't slow it down enough. If they then just landed on rockets the thing would get covered in dust which could clog up its innards.
(
pixel_fucker is going to need a bigger brush, Wed 1 Aug 2012, 15:43,
Reply)
the landing mechanism is based on those grab claws you see in arcades
this time instead of picking up the prize you want they're trying to put it back down, what could possibly go wrong
(, Tue 31 Jul 2012, 23:45, Reply)