ExoMars parachutes just about good enough to land rover safely on the Red Planet
- Reference: 1639486805
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/12/14/esa_parachutes_worked/
- Source link:
The mission has been beset by delays. A launch over the [2]July-August window was scrubbed as mission managers faced up to problems including [3]torn parachutes . In earlier tests, drops from a helicopter appeared to go well, but a release from a high-altitude balloon did not. As one might imagine, the parachute is a critical bit of hardware, the failure of which could result in the rover being smashed to pieces on impact.
There are two main parachutes used to slow the descent module as it barrels through the Martian atmosphere. A 15m-wide first stage, which opens at supersonic speeds, followed by a 35m-wide second stage, deployed at subsonic speeds, are used to reduce velocity.
[4]
Click to enlarge (pic: ESA)
The 35m-wide parachute will be the largest ever to fly on Mars, according to ESA.
Following unsuccessful drop tests in 2019 and 2020, the team persuaded the first-stage parachute to behave itself in a high-altitude test in June 2021. The second parachute suffered minor damage after the unexpected detachment of the pilot chute. There was still deceleration but, as former ESA Director General Jan Wörner explained when announcing the delay in 2020, the team needed to be as near to 100 per cent sure as possible that everything would go well on the big day.
[5]ESA's Mars Express picks up plaintive bleeps of China's Zhurong rover, adding much-needed comms redundancy
[6]It's fake ooze, don't fall for fake ooze: Alien fossils found on Mars might just be simple chemistry, uni pair warn
[7]Boffins say Martian colonists could pee in buckets, give blood if they want shelter
[8]Perseverance rover drilled a rock on Mars and probably snaffled a core sample
The latest set of tests, performed in Oregon on 21 November and 3 December, have worked as expected. Thierry Blancquaert, ESA ExoMars programme team leader, said: "Both parachutes deployed and flew beautifully. We have demonstrated we have two parachutes to fly to Mars."
That said, things weren't perfect. A handful of tiny tears 1-2cm in size and some friction searing were noted, but Blancquaert remained bullish, saying: "We can certainly fly as-is without any concern, but adjustments are still possible, and we will carefully scrutinize the results of the next tests early next year."
[9]
And more tests are indeed planned ahead of the shipment of hardware to Baikonur, Kazakhstan in late March and early April. Launch is currently scheduled for the end of September 2022. Landing on Mars, in the Oxia Planum region, is planned for 10 June 2023. ®
Get our [10]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Exploration/ExoMars/Double_drop_test_success_for_ExoMars_parachutes
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2020/03/12/exomars_rover_delay/
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2019/08/13/exomars_2020_parachute_woes/
[4] https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/12/14/esa_exomars_parachute.jpg
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/02/esa_zhurong/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/18/martian_fossil_mistakes/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/14/martian_blood_brick_plan/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/03/perserverance_rover_succesful_rock_drilling/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YbjNtwiqtT6zYRDPqmRx4wAAABE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[10] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Ob H2G2
We've not designed rovers that can contemplate the rushing noise and their own existence before wondering if that big round thing will be friends?
Re: Ob H2G2
Reminded me of this. Still makes me stupidly sad. Stupid anthropomorphisation.
https://xkcd.com/695/
Re: Ob H2G2
Or the rover could be distracted at the critical time and total fail to hit the ground.
time schedule seems difficult
Shipping (ie fully tested, assembled and packed for mounting) in March/April yet they are still talking about more testing and possibly making improvements ... that is really pushing the time envelope.
"the unexpected detachment of the pilot chute"
Translation: Failed.
Meh - that chute had done its job. Detachment wasn't planned, but isn't necessarily a critical issue or a failure.
This is where science gets stupid. NASA have now had what - 3 successful landers using the sky crane method. It begs the question why they dont standardise on that for the next N missions. I get the instrument packages are constantly changing and improving - but why cant they use a standard lander and rover package with just incremental upgrades?
This appears to be another area begging for the SpaceX treatment. Semi-Mass production from the get go - under the assumption that dozens or hundreds of landers and rovers would be needed. ESA and the UK dont have a great record when going it alone.
I agree with this but national pride, etc. come into play here and gets in the way. It seems like they want to basically reinvent the wheel.
I can see the point though. You don't want just one system from one supplier. Taken to the extreme, the Russians got to space first so why didn't everyone else just give up and buy rides on their hardware?
Without NASA doing the first sky-crane landing, would ESA be trying to develop their own in-house skills and experience or would they still be going with smaller rovers and the bouncy balls solution?
Rosalind Franklin ExoMars
More about it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KUb5hBrYhE
A reminder that...
It's never the speed that kills you but the sudden stop at the end.
things weren't perfect
Ahhh, chute, it wasn't perfect.
Ob H2G2
As one might imagine, the parachute is a critical bit of hardware, the failure of which could result in the rover being smashed to pieces on impact. Or, as the rover might put it, 'oh no, not again.'