On 25 Oct 2016 12:11:32 -0700, Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
wrote:
>http://gizmodo.com/software-error-implicated-in-crash-of-mars-lander-1788187542
>
>Researchers with the ExoMars mission are pointing to a potential computing
>challenge now will be to isolate and correct the error in hopes of preventing a
>repeat in 2020, when mission planners aim to land a much larger rover on the Red
>Planet.
>
>Late last week, NASA released a grim photograph showing what appears to be the
>crash site of the doomed Schiaparelli lander and its discarded parachute. The
>lander, if there was ever any doubt, is completely toast, a splotch of burnt and
>twisted metal on the Martian surface. So instead of proudly carting out a new
>rover, ExoMars planners with the ESA and the Russian space agency Roscosmos are
>now having to figure out what the hell went wrong.
>
>Unlike the doomed Beagle 2 mission that was lost in 2003, Schiaparelli
>descent. As reported in Nature News, an early look at the data points to a
>series of cascading software errors as the reason for the botched landing.
>
>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
>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
>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
>
>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
>replicate the software error using a simulation.
>
>If and when the glitch is detected, a fix will have to be designed, implemented,
>prominent part of the mission is scheduled for 2020. This first phase was meant
>as a kind of test-run in preparation for the landing of the larger Russian
Marvin has got to be getting more than a bit miffed at those puny
Earthlings who keep throwing stuff at his planet.
|
|