A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

It took NASA...four years to design a drone.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 18th 18, 02:09 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending $20 for every $1 the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't that what Space-X is all about?

SpaceX is doing a decent job making established technology (in some cases decades old) more available than previously.

There is nothing in what the company has done to date that suggests Space X could more quickly or at less expense design a drone that has any better chance to operate in an environment which we on Earth have limited knowledge than NASA.
  #12  
Old May 19th 18, 05:09 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Ninapenda Jibini
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

RichA wrote in
:

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 02:57:15 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 1:48:16 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44090509


It is possible the guys working on it also had other duties.

Note that there were likely not as many people working on the
project as would be working at a drone manufacturer designing
their next product.

And this drone had to be super reliable, and it had to work in
the atmosphere of Mars, which, as the article noted, is a *lot*
less dense than that of Earth. (The article said 100x; I
thought it was more than that.)

John Savard


So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending $20
for every $1 the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't that
what Space-X is all about?

If you $20 drone doesn't work, you climb a tree to retrieve it, or
spend another $20. If your $100 million drone doesn't work, you ask
Congress for another $100 million, and they laugh at you.

Dumbass.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
  #13  
Old May 19th 18, 09:23 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Martin Brown[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 189
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On 17/05/2018 20:26, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2018 10:37:52 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 11:59:29 PM UTC-6, Chris.B wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 08:57:15 UTC+2, Quadibloc wrote:
On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 1:48:16 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44090509


It is possible the guys working on it also had other duties.


Note that there were likely not as many people working on the project as would
be working at a drone manufacturer designing their next product.


And this drone had to be super reliable, and it had to work in the atmosphere of
Mars, which, as the article noted, is a *lot* less dense than that of Earth.
(The article said 100x; I thought it was more than that.)


Mars' atmospheric pressure is 6% of Earth's.


I just checked. 0.6% of Earth's, I'm afraid.


That's true for pressure, although the density is more relevant to the
performance of wings (moving or fixed). The atmospheric density at the
surface of Mars averages 1.6% that of Earth's. That's about the same
as the density at a height of 30 km on Earth. That's right in the area
that the highest winged aircraft have flown.


And well above the normal helicopter flight ceiling.

I guess given a drone on the Earth with say 0.1 diameter rotors then one
on Mars would need rotors spinning at the same rate but about 8x larger
and weighing the same to generate the same net lift as on Earth.

I expect the engineering challenges of making something that will work
OK in such a thin atmosphere more than explains their delays. You would
have to test it in a rather large vacuum chamber too (or up at 30km).

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #14  
Old May 19th 18, 03:33 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On Sat, 19 May 2018 09:23:54 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

I guess given a drone on the Earth with say 0.1 diameter rotors then one
on Mars would need rotors spinning at the same rate but about 8x larger
and weighing the same to generate the same net lift as on Earth.


Per the news release, it's a twin blade helicopter with 3000 RPM
rotors and a total mass of just 1800 g.

I expect the engineering challenges of making something that will work
OK in such a thin atmosphere more than explains their delays.


"Delay" is probably not the correct word here (and I doubt that's
quite what you meant). Obviously, a project like this needs a lot of
design time. And there's also the factor of considering the entire
mission plan. A commercial drone maker needs to condense the R&D part
of their program as much as possible in order to maximize their sales
potential. A NASA research program has different focuses, and they are
going to build their development schedule around the timeline of the
mission. Since this project is intended as a secondary, non-critical
component of a 2020 mission, I'm sure their work was timed
accordingly.
  #15  
Old May 20th 18, 02:58 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
RichA[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On Thursday, 17 May 2018 10:02:33 UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2018 01:01:19 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 02:57:15 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 1:48:16 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44090509

It is possible the guys working on it also had other duties.

Note that there were likely not as many people working on the project as would
be working at a drone manufacturer designing their next product.

And this drone had to be super reliable, and it had to work in the atmosphere of
Mars, which, as the article noted, is a *lot* less dense than that of Earth.
(The article said 100x; I thought it was more than that.)

John Savard


So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending $20 for every $1 the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't that what Space-X is all about?


SpaceX is about engineering, not science. There is a lot of
fundamental new aeronautical science involved in designing any
lift-based aircraft that operates in an atmosphere 1/60 as dense as
Earth's. That's the sort of expertise NASA has, and conventional
makers of aircraft or drones do not. We do not generally contract out
fundamental scientific development.


What is so fundamental about it? Planes fly high enough so atmosphere is thin and have done so for decades.
  #16  
Old May 20th 18, 03:00 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
RichA[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On Saturday, 19 May 2018 00:09:24 UTC-4, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
RichA wrote in
:

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 02:57:15 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 1:48:16 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44090509

It is possible the guys working on it also had other duties.

Note that there were likely not as many people working on the
project as would be working at a drone manufacturer designing
their next product.

And this drone had to be super reliable, and it had to work in
the atmosphere of Mars, which, as the article noted, is a *lot*
less dense than that of Earth. (The article said 100x; I
thought it was more than that.)

John Savard


So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending $20
for every $1 the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't that
what Space-X is all about?

If you $20 drone doesn't work, you climb a tree to retrieve it, or
spend another $20. If your $100 million drone doesn't work, you ask
Congress for another $100 million, and they laugh at you.

Dumbass.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.


Yes, only the wonderful, wonderful STATE is capable...which is why Boeing is wiping the floor with Airbus...
  #17  
Old May 20th 18, 04:53 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On Sat, 19 May 2018 18:58:48 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

SpaceX is about engineering, not science. There is a lot of
fundamental new aeronautical science involved in designing any
lift-based aircraft that operates in an atmosphere 1/60 as dense as
Earth's. That's the sort of expertise NASA has, and conventional
makers of aircraft or drones do not. We do not generally contract out
fundamental scientific development.


What is so fundamental about it? Planes fly high enough so atmosphere is thin and have done so for decades.


Planes at that altitude (100,000 feet) are rare, experimental, and
rocket powered. No helicopter has ever come close to that.
  #18  
Old May 20th 18, 07:03 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Ninapenda Jibini
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

RichA wrote in
:

On Saturday, 19 May 2018 00:09:24 UTC-4, Ninapenda Jibini
wrote:
RichA wrote in
:

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 02:57:15 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 1:48:16 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44090509

It is possible the guys working on it also had other duties.

Note that there were likely not as many people working on
the project as would be working at a drone manufacturer
designing their next product.

And this drone had to be super reliable, and it had to work
in the atmosphere of Mars, which, as the article noted, is a
*lot* less dense than that of Earth. (The article said 100x;
I thought it was more than that.)

John Savard

So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending
$20 for every $1 the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't
that what Space-X is all about?

If you $20 drone doesn't work, you climb a tree to retrieve it,
or spend another $20. If your $100 million drone doesn't work,
you ask Congress for another $100 million, and they laugh at
you.

Dumbass.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.


Yes, only the wonderful, wonderful STATE is capable...which is
why Boeing is wiping the floor with Airbus...

Still as retarded as ever, eh, retard?

Yes, you are.

Nice straw man you're masturbating all over, though.

Dumbass.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
  #19  
Old May 20th 18, 04:53 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On Thursday, May 17, 2018 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:

So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending $20 for every $1
the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't that what Space-X is all about?


1) A commercial drone manufacturer might fail to understand the terms of the
contract, and supply a drone that wouldn't work on Mars.

2) There are commercial drone manufacturers in the United States?

I don't think this is like Parker Pen, and the pressurized ballpoint.

John Savard
  #20  
Old May 22nd 18, 03:33 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
RichA[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default It took NASA...four years to design a drone.

On Sunday, 20 May 2018 02:03:48 UTC-4, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
RichA wrote in
:

On Saturday, 19 May 2018 00:09:24 UTC-4, Ninapenda Jibini
wrote:
RichA wrote in
:

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 02:57:15 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 1:48:16 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44090509

It is possible the guys working on it also had other duties.

Note that there were likely not as many people working on
the project as would be working at a drone manufacturer
designing their next product.

And this drone had to be super reliable, and it had to work
in the atmosphere of Mars, which, as the article noted, is a
*lot* less dense than that of Earth. (The article said 100x;
I thought it was more than that.)

John Savard

So why not contract a drone mfg instead of (likely) spending
$20 for every $1 the experienced manufacturer would? Isn't
that what Space-X is all about?

If you $20 drone doesn't work, you climb a tree to retrieve it,
or spend another $20. If your $100 million drone doesn't work,
you ask Congress for another $100 million, and they laugh at
you.

Dumbass.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.


Yes, only the wonderful, wonderful STATE is capable...which is
why Boeing is wiping the floor with Airbus...

Still as retarded as ever, eh, retard?

Yes, you are.

Nice straw man you're masturbating all over, though.

Dumbass.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.


Whose sock are you?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ballistic Delivery Drone William Mook[_2_] Policy 3 May 14th 16 11:29 PM
NASA says 20 years to mars NBC news tonight, space X 10 years Sylvia Else Policy 4 February 13th 16 02:54 PM
D-21 drone booster... Apollo LES motor? Pat Flannery History 6 June 22nd 08 03:28 PM
D21 recon drone in storage at Davis Monthan R Neutron History 19 October 13th 03 06:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.