Posted on 11/12/2014 2:32:04 PM PST by BenLurkin
A European robot probe has made the first, historic landing on a comet, but its status remains uncertain after harpoons failed to anchor it to the surface.
Officials said the craft may have lifted off the comet after touchdown before returning to the surface.
Lander project manager Stephan Ulamec said: "Maybe we didn't just land once, we landed twice."
Further analysis is needed to fully understand the situation.
However, Dr Ulamec told the BBC that at last radio contact with the probe that he believed it to be in a stable configuration.
"This is the indication right now," he explained. "We really have to wait until tomorrow morning and then we will know a lot more."
The "first" landing on Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko was confirmed at about 1605 GMT.
There were cheers and hugs at the European Space Agency's mission control in Darmstadt, Germany, after the signal came through.
Early data started to come back from instruments, and one team could see that the lander, known as Philae, had sunk about 4cm (1.5 inches) into the surface, suggesting a relatively soft top layer.
But shortly after, engineers could see that the harpoons, designed to fasten the spacecraft to the 4km-wide (2.5 miles) ball of ice and dust, had not fired as planned..
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
So the comet could possibly “throw” the lander off of it?
Here’s a Science Fiction thriller for you...
Wouldn’t it be ironic if Philae caused *just* enough disturbance to push the comet into a collision course with Earth in, say, 30 years or so?
I thought the gravity was too weak to help if it bounced. Your explanation would make sense, but it runs counter to what I thought I heard on one of the explanatory videos. I can only see too possibilities. One is gravity. The other is that the robot could “bounce” into the path of the comet, or into the path of another part of the comet as it rotated.
It has "cold" thrusters, nitrogen gas jets, to keep it on the surface while it attempts to drill into the surface to anchor it through the landing pads.
On landing, the legs damp out most of the kinetic energy to reduce the chance of bouncing, and they can rotate, lift or tilt to return the lander to an upright position.The Rosetta Lander
Because of the comet's extremely low gravity, a landing gear will absorb the small forces occurring during landing while ice screws in the probe's feet and a harpoon system will lock the probe to the surface. At the same time a thruster on top of the lander will push it down to counteract the impulse of the harpoon imparted in the opposite direction.
****Does the EU not know about duct tape?***
How about Sack-Crete?
Unless you're going with the Tunguska dead comet theory. Or possibly Shoemaker-Levy 9?
The gravitational acceleration of the comet is very small, calculated to be about 1.5mm/sec^2, so it would not take much of a bounce to send it back into space. . . and a very long time to bring it back down just by a fall. Rosetta IS in a free-fall orbit around it.
I seriously suspect the failure of the harpoons and thrusters occurred because of electrical discharges from the comet disabled them by frying their electronics. The team did say there were other electronic anomalies associated with the landing.
Uh, nope. Try Great BLACK Comet.
There will be two harpoons to anchor it to the surface so that it can be reeled in like a fish on a line. There are also ice screws in each foot, which can be rotated to help to secure the spacecraft on the surface. The lander is also designed to stay upright on a slope of up to 30 degrees.From Rosetta FAQ
Well, we'll see how successful it was, probably tomorrow.
Leni
Nice piece of rock that God made.
And we’ll be getting an American look at Pluto in July, an American look at dwarf planet Ceres not long after and an American return to Jupiter in 2016.
You and I would weigh 2 grams on the comet.
So a sneeze would be more than escape velocity.
A theory is that the comet is more like a welder’s arc than a pressure cooker of gas. If so, anything conductive would fry.
I read the downforce thrust jet was bad ordered... if that is the case what force will oppose the firing of these “harpoons” downward? Does someone need to explain Newton’s first law here to these scientists?
Update Thursday am GMT: contact reestablished with the lander, now reported ‘stable’ and systems functioning. First image of surface from lander now available.
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.