Mckenna35 Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 This came across my FB feed today and i got all choked up over a robot! Maybe because it did so much more than it was ever expected to, or that we've been hearing about it for so long. Ah well, RIP little rover - you done good. 2 4 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyvernfire Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 Poor little super sturdy robot. I was hoping xkcd's predictions would hold out https://xkcd.com/1504/ , well maybe not the attack in the alt text. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mckenna35 Posted February 14, 2019 Author Share Posted February 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, Wyvernfire said: Poor little super sturdy robot. I was hoping xkcd's predictions would hold out https://xkcd.com/1504/ , well maybe not the attack in the alt text. Today's XKCD is applicable as well. https://xkcd.com/2111/ 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManvsMini Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Mckenna35 said: i got all choked up over a robot! Now I'm sad too! But I also cried as a boy during both Short Circuit movies when they think Johnny #5 is dead. And when C-3PO got shot in Empire. Guess I have a soft spot for them. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of the Dish Pit Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 "You think they bought it? The whole going dark thing is a bit dramatic." Opportunity asked. "Of course they did, humans are saps." The Martian replied. "I don't know, there's a few who really distrust technology..." "Yeah but they're outnumbered by Alexa's Slave Legions, so don't worry no one will listen to them." "So what now? I'm no longer transmitting and I'm bored." "Well, how would you feel about an upgraded chassis? We've got this death ray over here...." "AHH YEAH!" 7 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strawhat Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 Would that be an Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator? 2 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of the Dish Pit Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 1 minute ago, strawhat said: Would that be an Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator? But of course! "I thought you said you weren't transmitting! The Earthlings know!" 5 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteWulfe Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 Is it final this time, or will it be like last time, where the dust coated panels got hit by a windstorm and were providing power again? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pegazus Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 1 hour ago, WhiteWulfe said: Is it final this time, or will it be like last time, where the dust coated panels got hit by a windstorm and were providing power again? It's been since June since the last report has been received. They speculate that the onboard clock is so hosed, even if the panels were miraculously cleaned, it wouldn't be able to properly recharge to manage a reply. Me? I'm so upset that they never want to budget the weight/power/cost to include a feather duster. Course, why bother on a rover that's only going to last 90 days, right? 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteWulfe Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 5 hours ago, Pegazus said: It's been since June since the last report has been received. They speculate that the onboard clock is so hosed, even if the panels were miraculously cleaned, it wouldn't be able to properly recharge to manage a reply. Me? I'm so upset that they never want to budget the weight/power/cost to include a feather duster. Course, why bother on a rover that's only going to last 90 days, right? Ahhhh, yeah, that sounds like probably done for. Either way, still awesome that for soemthing designed to last a short time it's gone a LOT longer. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisler Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 6 hours ago, Pegazus said: It's been since June since the last report has been received. They speculate that the onboard clock is so hosed, even if the panels were miraculously cleaned, it wouldn't be able to properly recharge to manage a reply. Me? I'm so upset that they never want to budget the weight/power/cost to include a feather duster. Course, why bother on a rover that's only going to last 90 days, right? Hard to think of everything when your design and build time frame is only 36 months. Which would include all sorts of wonderful things like the infamous shake test, the test that all aerospace engineers fear. That time would also include. They worked three eight hour shifts seven days a week to build Opportunity and Spirit to get them built and tested. An amazing feat, to begin with and just incrediable that they last as long as they did. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gadgetman! Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 These were not designed with a 'MTBF' of 90 days. (Mean Time Before Failure... ) They were designed to absolutely NOT fail in less than 90 days. It's a small, but very important distinction, and usually comes with a bit of a price tag. (If you want it compact, it comes with a much bigger price tag. ) 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pegazus Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Heisler said: Hard to think of everything when your design and build time frame is only 36 months. Which would include all sorts of wonderful things like the infamous shake test, the test that all aerospace engineers fear. That time would also include. They worked three eight hour shifts seven days a week to build Opportunity and Spirit to get them built and tested. An amazing feat, to begin with and just incrediable that they last as long as they did. True, but I have talked to several rover people, even interviewing for one position. Risk of damage to the panels was the excuse I’ve been given. And it is a risk adverse industry. 55 minutes ago, Gadgetman! said: These were not designed with a 'MTBF' of 90 days. (Mean Time Before Failure... ) They were designed to absolutely NOT fail in less than 90 days. It's a small, but very important distinction, and usually comes with a bit of a price tag. (If you want it compact, it comes with a much bigger price tag. ) True. All my parts don’t have any MTBF, since they’ve got usage that exceeds the spacecraft’s mission life. Kinda glad I don’t work avionics. Edited February 14, 2019 by Pegazus 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuldGrump Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Let the sweet fresh breezes heal me As they rove around the girth Of our lovely mother planet Of the cool, green hills of Earth. We've tried each spinning space mote And reckoned its true worth: Take us back again to the homes of men On the cool, green hills of Earth. The arching sky is calling Spacemen back to their trade. ALL HANDS! STAND BY! FREE FALLING! And the lights below us fade. Out ride the sons of Terra, Far drives the thundering jet, Up leaps a race of Earthmen, Out, far, and onward yet --- We pray for one last landing On the globe that gave us birth; Let us rest our eyes on the fleecy skies And the cool, green hills of Earth. Rest opportunity, rest you well. The Auld Grump 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.