Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NASA to decide soon whether flying drone will launch with Mars 2020 rover
Spaceflight Now ^ | 3/15/18 | Stephen Clark

Posted on 03/16/2018 8:16:05 AM PDT by LibWhacker

NASA to decide soon whether flying drone will launch with Mars 2020 rover

March 15, 2018 Stephen Clark

Artist’s illustration of the Mars helicopter drone that could travel to the red planet as soon as 2020. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Testing of a lightweight robotic helicopter designed to fly in the alien atmosphere of Mars has produced encouraging results in recent months, and NASA officials expect to decide soon whether the aerial drone will accompany the agency’s next rover to the red planet set for liftoff in 2020.

Engineers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory have worked on the helicopter design for several years, modifying principles used in drones that fly in Earth’s atmosphere for the more challenging conditions at Mars. The atmospheric pressure on Mars is less than 1 percent that of Earth, and the Martian gravity field is about three-eighths as strong as it is on Earth.

Jim Watzin, director of NASA’s robotic Mars exploration program at the agency’s headquarters, said last month that an engineering model of the helicopter has completed 86 minutes of flying time in a test chamber configured to simulate the Martian atmosphere.

“The system has been built, it’s been ground tested, and then we put it into a chamber that was backfilled at Mars atmosphere (conditions),” Watzin said Feb. 20 in a presentation to the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group, a panel of scientists that assists NASA in planning Mars missions. “Some parts were removed from the helicopter to compensate for the 1g (gravity) field to get the proper relationship of mass and acceleration at Mars, and we did controlled takeoffs, slewing, translations, hovers and controlled landings in the chamber. We’ve done that multiple times.”

The helicopter weighs about 4 pounds, or 1.8 kilograms, on Earth. An internal battery is capable of powering the drone for flights lasting between 90 seconds and 2 minutes — enough time to travel up to 1,000 feet, or 300 meters — and solar panels can recharge the battery for subsequent flights, Watzin said.

“Now we’re thinking whether or not it would make sense, and if there would be an opportunity to fly this at some point, potentially maybe even on Mars 2020 as a tech demo,” Watzin said. “But that decision hasn’t been made, and it will be taken later this spring.”

The drone has spinning rotors, avionics and sensors to fly autonomously on Mars, without real-time inputs from ground controllers on Earth.

NASA managers say the helicopter could give scientists better views of rough terrain, where it is unsafe to send a rover. The drone could also scout a rover’s planned drive path for obstacles.Artist’s concept of the Mars 2020 rover, a design based on the Curiosity rover currently exploring the red planet. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Jim Green, head of NASA’s planetary science division, said the space agency will examine the technical readiness of the helicopter and the cost of sending it to Mars in 2020.

“There are two aspects of it,” Green said Feb. 21. “One is the feasiblity of a technology demonstration such as what the helicopter concept is moving forward on, and the other part of it is an adequate budget to be able to execute it.

“It’s going through its reviews,” Green said. “So far, it’s doing well, but it has a couple more gates to go through before we’d actually confirm it and fly it.”

If approved for launch with the Mars 2020 rover, the drone would carry two cameras — one for navigation and one for higher-resolution color imagery. Mission planners want to ensure the helicopter will not harm the rover itself, so controllers would drive the Mars 2020 rover to a position far away from the drone, reducing the chance of a collision or dust impingement on scientific instruments.

“The concept of operations that we looked at for the helicopter involve the rover placing the helicopter on the surface, and then moving several hundred yards away to try to have a safe fly zone so that we can limit the possibility of recontact,” Watzin said.

Once the helicopter concept is demonstrated on Mars, future rovers — and potentially eventual astronaut crews — could use the technology on a more regular basis.

“Looking forward to an operational system, we don’t see anything in the architecture that is exceptionally life limiting,” Watzin said. “If we were to fly the helicopter as a tech demonstration on something like Mars 2020, we would envision a very small number of flights to prove the aerodynamic and handling characteristics, and the concept of operations, and that would be the end of the demonstration.”

NASA announced Wednesday that the Mars 2020 rover, which is set for liftoff in July 2020 on a United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket, has officially entered its assembly, test and launch operations phase. The milestone marks the start of final construction of the rover and the descent stage that will deliver it to the surface of Mars.A technician works on the descent stage for NASA’s Mars 2020 mission inside JPL’s Spacecraft Assembly Facility. Mars 2020 is slated to carry NASA’s next Mars rover to the Red Planet in July of 2020. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Based on the rover and sky crane lander design from NASA’s Curiosity mission, Mars 2020 will reach the red planet in February 2021. The rover carries instruments to study its geological environment after touchdown, a zoom-capable camera, sensors to look for organic compounds, and a radar to map the underground structure at the landing site.

Another instrument on the Mars 2020 rover will attempt to produce oxygen from carbon dioxide in the Martian atmosphere, a test to determine whether future astronauts could generate their own breathing air, water and rocket fuel from natural resources at the red planet.

Mars 2020 will also collect rock samples and store them inside sealed tubes for retrieval by a future mission that will return them to Earth.



TOPICS: Astronomy; Science
KEYWORDS: 2020; drone; mars; nasa; space
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last
To: Pontiac

A balloon tethered to the rover would make more sense. What is the purpose of the flyer but to get an aerial view of things.


21 posted on 03/16/2018 9:53:37 AM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeWarrior
1/2 of 1% air density as compared to earth’s atmosphere is pretty light. Not sure helium is even that light.

Atmospheric pressure is not as important as relative density. Mars' atmosphere is 96% CO2, which is much heavier than helium or hydrogen.

22 posted on 03/16/2018 11:06:14 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (Big governent is attractive to those who think that THEY will be in control of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

Last I checked, that “idiotic” sky crane successfully landed the largest ever rover on Mars.


23 posted on 03/16/2018 12:59:36 PM PDT by Dagnabitt (Point at the Q-Tards and Laugh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dagnabitt

yes, it worked- but it was far too complex, used far too many moving parts and motors and useless cables and fuel for all that.

Just because it worked does not make it a poor design.


24 posted on 03/16/2018 2:48:41 PM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

Give it up.


25 posted on 03/16/2018 3:50:47 PM PDT by Dagnabitt (Point at the Q-Tards and Laugh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeWarrior

As I recall Mars atmosphere is mostly O2 so hydrogen should work if you have a large enough envelope and a light enough membrane


26 posted on 03/16/2018 3:59:36 PM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.L)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dagnabitt

A ‘Rube Goldberg’ machine technically ‘works’ too.

Look at how Elon Musk landed those two boosters on earth.

They used a lot of moving parts whose weight was useless after landing, which limited useful payload.

What are you arguing about?

If they can hover, lower a payload by cable, and then disconnect the cable and accelerate away, then they could have just landed.

All those steps introduce potential issues and risks, and involves weight and effort NOT contributing to useful payload.


27 posted on 03/18/2018 11:10:07 AM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

You have it exactly backwards. By not landing everything, they saved the fuel, extra motors, etc it would take to land non-rover stuff.

What would you have them land? Some huge capsule? A large rigid-mount with overhead landing engines? Then some more mechanical parts to get out of the capsule or to jettison the landing rack? Mass, mass and more mass.


28 posted on 03/18/2018 2:59:58 PM PDT by Dagnabitt (Point at the Q-Tards and Laugh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Dagnabitt

They had to have the propulsion gear and fuel, so that part was going to be there anyway.

The part that was NOT necessary was the cab;e to lower it, all the motors and gear to lower it, and the extra fuel to hover and then accelerate away. They should have just landed.

When spaceflight costs are calculates in hundreds of thousands per pound, that was unnecessarily complex.

I am NOT saying it was not a great accomplishment, given the complexity - it was a great success. But, the costs for that success were higher than they needed to be because of the complexity.

The previous landing was a masterpiece of simplicity- they inflated balloons and bounced to a landing. I am not sure I agree with that one either, but the payload was light enough to be worth it.

Just look at how Elon Musk landed two huge and heavy boosters. NASA would never have been able to accomplish that. It was too simple and common sense, for a government program.


29 posted on 03/19/2018 10:06:14 AM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

The cable system also kept the rover and its instruments further below the landing rockets and their thrust, so the rover didn’t start its mission in a massive debris storm.

Around 3:55 in this animation with interviews:

https://www.space.com/16889-mars-rover-curiosity-sky-crane-landing.html


30 posted on 03/19/2018 2:06:21 PM PDT by Dagnabitt (Point at the Q-Tards and Laugh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dagnabitt

Those things added considerable weight, and so limited useful payload, and added considerable complexity.

I would have rejected that plan for a simpler solution.


31 posted on 03/20/2018 11:37:49 AM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

Send your resume to JPL. They obviously haven’t a clue.


32 posted on 03/20/2018 7:49:15 PM PDT by Dagnabitt (Point at the Q-Tards and Laugh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Dagnabitt

Do you always turn into a smarmy jerk when having a disagreement?

I disagree with this design. That’s all there is to it. I am an engineer and have often had disagreements on design decisions, and I have been right (nearly) every time.

I am fine if you like it, but i never questioned your IQ for it.


33 posted on 03/21/2018 6:11:00 AM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

Sorry about that, but what’s your alternative?

In a few words, what’s your simpler, lighter, non-skycrane design for landing the next rover, which will be of similar mass and presumably also shouldn’t land in a debris storm.


34 posted on 03/21/2018 11:22:56 PM PDT by Dagnabitt (Point at the Q-Tards and Laugh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson