Posted on 10/25/2016 9:41:38 AM PDT by BenLurkin
By all accounts the descent started well, with the lander decelerating rapidly as it brushed up against the Martian atmosphere, eventually deploying its parachute as planned. But things began to go squirrely just prior to the five-minute mark of the planned six-minute descent.
For reasons that are still a mystery, the lander ejected both its heat shield and parachute way ahead of schedule. Schiaparelli then engaged its thrusters for a painfully brief three-second burst—a procedure that was supposed to last for 30 seconds once the lander was just a few feet off the ground. The lander’s onboard computer, it would appear, seems to have thought it was close to the surface. Indeed, Schiaparelli even took the time to switch on some of its instruments, including tools to record the planet’s weather and electrical field.
The sad reality is that Schiaparelli was still somewhere between 1.25 to 2.5 miles above the surface when this happened, falling at a rate of about 185 mph (300 km/h). It struck the ground with tremendous force, resulting in an explosion—and a brand new surface feature.
ESA’s head of solar and planetary missions, Andrea Accomazzo, suspects a flaw in Schiaparelli’s software, or a problem in integrating the data coming from different sensors. Some kind of glitch misinformed the lander about its position in time and space, causing it to execute landing procedures as if it were at a much lower altitude.
If confirmed, this would actually be good news, as software issues are much easier to correct than hardware problems. Researchers on the ExoMars team are confident in the integrity of Schiaparelli’s hardware, and they’re now hoping to replicate the software error using a simulation.
... ExoMars planners don’t have much time, as the second and most prominent part of the mission is scheduled for 2020
(Excerpt) Read more at gizmodo.com ...
The worst part is that it landed on the martian welcome party, and now the martians think we hate them and are planning a counter-attack.
Six Sigma woulda saved it. Like it saved DEC.
I thought it was Robert Palmer what "saved" DEC.
They should do all their testing with Kerbal Space Program
Come on, it’s a mistake anyone could make. There is only a one letter difference between starting the final sequence at 2 km above the ground, and starting the final sequence at 2 m above the ground.
This is unforgivable. Were there redundancy checks and voting? If not, why not?
Denial...
Schiaparelli – A crash landing with positive overtones for the future
While some will certainly doubt the truthfulness of the claim, the fact that Schiaparelli did not make a successful, soft landing on the surface of Mars is in no way a failure to meet the objectives of its mission.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/10/schiaparelli-landing-data-exomars-2020-rover/
too bad it wasn’t running VMS..
Kids out of college don’t know what VMS is. Sad.
Ah, yes. Robert. Had Ken thrown off the board. Broke DEC into pieces, sold them off. 130,000 people thrown out of work. Rode out of Maynard with $54M. Complete tapeworm. But he had a lot of help from DEC “managers.”
Ah, that dent in the planet will buff right out...
“That won’t happen in the next release.”
Meanwhile, a software engineer is pondering: “Was that integer or floating point?”
An expensive Lessons Learned.
Software error ... or hacked?
It was a bit and not a byte that caused the crash.
Or phaser fire from the Martians.
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.