Moon landing 2013 (Chang'e 3)

[Tiberion]

that you did NOTHING over the last 40 years

Rather than reply to you rather harshly, I'm going to give you a chance to rethink that statement and perhaps phrase it better.

[DerekL1963]

I felt the configuration was a little odd with the rover being on top and having to be hoisted down, but I did not come to any conclusions. It makes perfect sense that this is a test for further manned development though. It explains why the thing is shaped the way it is

Um... Why would you think something that pretty much every other rover save one has done is 'a little odd'? Rovers normally live on top of their lander stage.

[Tiberion]

Um... Why would you think something that pretty much every other rover save one has done is 'a little odd'? Rovers normally live on top of their lander stage.

The weird part is probably the rotating lift thing that brought it down to the ground rather than some sort of long extending ramp. It seemed... precarious in the 3d animation they released, but it obviously worked. Certainly not any zanier than Curiosity and the skycrane on Mars.

[Tommygun]

That's what I thought about the fork lift part as well, it seemed a bit risky.

If they used this as part of a sample return mission, would it be able to land an upper stage big enough to be able to return to Earth?

If you start adding stages below it and above it you are making it a lot more complex than it needs to be.

It seems like you would be better off designing a bigger one based on what work well on this lander.

Edited December 17, 2013 by Tommygun

[Camacha]

Um... Why would you think something that pretty much every other rover save one has done is 'a little odd'? Rovers normally live on top of their lander stage.

Yeah, and those landers stages have typically totally different proportions when it comes to width and height. They are usually a lot flatter and allow the rover to drive down. The fact that it is low also helps with stability while landing.

It would also make sense to have the rover already loaded onto the platform that will deliver it to the ground. Now the thing was stuck on top and it had to drive itself on the lift, creating potential problems. It is not an extremely risky move, but doing something like this is eliminating all unnecessary risks. MSL only did what it did because the easier options would not work with that weight.

If you are going to make a purpose built rover lander, this is not what most people would end up with. As an adaptation of something that was meant for another goal it makes sense though.

[Kryten]

c) Based on images of the spacecraft in clean rooms, it seems roughly smaller than the Apollo LM. Which means, if you create an ASCENT STAGE for it, then it would seem okay for a one-man can.

Nope, too small. They do plan to use the design for a sort of robotic miniature Apollo architecture on Chang'e 5, but returned mass is something like 2kg.

[Nibb31]

The lander stage is a common design that will be used for future Chang'e rover and sample return missions. This mirrors the Russian Luna program, where all the probe landers used the same Fregat-based landing stage. They just swapped the payloads depending on whether it was a fixed probe, a rover, or a sample return module. It simply makes sense to use a common design when you've got one that works.

The layout and general design might be scaled up for a manned mission, but as is, it's way too small. Scaling it up means that they would need a bigger rocket to launch it.

[maccollo]

Has there been any updates or any pictures yet?

I sort of expected something to come through a few days after the rover deployed, but maybe I've just been spoiled by how NASA handles this their robotic missions?

[Cesrate]

Has there been any updates or any pictures yet?

I sort of expected something to come through a few days after the rover deployed, but maybe I've just been spoiled by how NASA handles this their robotic missions?

They are having rest at the noon of moon, for about 7 days.

[czokletmuss]

Moon panorama made by the lander (low quality unfortunately):

[zitronen]

Quick translation: stitched from 60 images, with 3 pictures per pan angle, at 0, -15, and -30 deg, to cover objects close to and far from the rover. Landing site is pretty flat, except there is a impact crater close by, which the lander successfully avoided automatically.

Ah interesting, at the end of the video they mention (in Chinese) that it is currently in "hibernation" to avoid lunar "noon" which has temperatures above 100C.

[Camacha]

They are having rest at the noon of moon, for about 7 days.

Do you know why?

[nhnifong]

When American publicly funded scientific research produces results, it has to be made available to the public right?

I would assume the reason china did not release their panorama is that they have no such law.

[Nibb31]

Do you know why?

To avoid overheating. Thermal cycles are extremely important.

[czokletmuss]

More images!

Yutu driving away

Chang'e 3 Lander

[czokletmuss]

More images:

[Meithan]

Yutu driving away

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=33511.0;attach=563559;image

This one's just FANTASTIC.

[Themohawkninja]

Gee, last tome I heard about China's space program, it involved rocket after rocket blowing up on the launchpad, with one case killing 500 or so people.

Now all of a sudden they have plans to build a space station, and have landed a rover on the Moon? Where did this come from?

[Nibb31]

Gee, last tome I heard about China's space program, it involved rocket after rocket blowing up on the launchpad, with one case killing 500 or so people.

Now all of a sudden they have plans to build a space station, and have landed a rover on the Moon? Where did this come from?

Then you have been living under a rock for nearly 18 years. The Xichang disaster was in 1996.

You do know that China have manned access to space since 2003 and the Tiangong-1 space station has been flying since 2011, don't you?

Edited December 24, 2013 by Nibb31

[Kryten]

Fun fact; China matched the US in successful orbital launches in 2010, and exceeded their totals in '11 and '12.

[Tiberion]

Whats the context of the comparison? Just government launchers? Or any NASA/AirForce/NOAA payloads on a commercial rocket? or all commercial rockets?

[Themohawkninja]

Then you have been living under a rock for nearly 18 years. The Xichang disaster was in 1996.

You do know that China have manned access to space since 2003 and the Tiangong-1 space station has been flying since 2011, don't you?

I haven't really paid much attention to the Chinese space program to be honest. I knew that the first component of the station was in orbit, but I didn't know it got any farther than that.

[Kryten]

Whats the context of the comparison? Just government launchers? Or any NASA/AirForce/NOAA payloads on a commercial rocket? or all commercial rockets?

All launches considered to be under US or PRC jurisdiction. That'd include all launches from facilities within and/or owned by the US/PRC, commercial or government, but not government launches on foreign rockets. I don't think either government purchased any foreign launches in that (or quite possibly any) timeframe.

Edited December 24, 2013 by Kryten

[Tiberion]

Using http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/index.html as a source;

It looks like 2011 it was 15 - 15

2011: China: 19 - US: 18

2012: China: 19 - US: 12

(including failures, one for China in 2011 and one for the US in 2012)

From what I can add up for this year, it looks like it will be:

2013: China: 16 - US: 19 (would have been 20 had they not pushed Cygnus into January due to the ISS coolant issue)

So yeah, its pretty close to parity. Of course China is in the middle of an intensive space campaign whereas NASA finds itself without a people-launcher and offloads all Astronaut launches to Russia (and the Baikonur cosmodrome alone would beat each nation, since its so central to the ISS mission)

[Kryten]

TBH Chinese crewed launches aren't that much more common than US ones these days (next one is late 2015 at the earliest), so that's not it. It's more likely to be the Chinese deploying some pretty large satellite constellations (COMPASS, Tianlian, various civilian imaging sats) while the US is content to maintain existing ones.

Edited December 24, 2013 by Kryten