How the Curiosity Mars Rover Will Land and Navigate

[novaman1967]

Why is there no videos of testing the Mars landing engines??

[Quarkhammer]

where are the solar panels? or does it run on diesel...

[difficultsyllables]

They could've sent a team of astronauts and actually did something worth the money. This rover isn't anymore useful than any other rover

[GuideMeSilly]

"Houston, Curiosity has landed."

"Roger. Now what do you guys wanna do?"

"......I guess go check out that rock over there?"

"Roger. Then what?"

"Ummmmm....god I don't know there's not much there is there :\"

[MarsMoonEuropa]

Technology!

Seen the test run on Earth.

Should work. Go NASA!!!

[mrteemumilto]

There is no proof online that this landing mechanism works. There are only a couple of animations of it.

[Huantans]

@mrteemumilto this is the first time the skycrane is used. proof? tech is not like math where a solution could be found. But if you read stuffs, retrorocket is nothing new. before they put it at the landing base, now they hand it on top. the only difference is the wiring mechanism to lower the rover down and cut the cable. But this extra complication is offset by not having a ramp and cramp the whole system in a small space of the aeroshell.

[mrteemumilto]

@Huantans Why didn't they test run in Earth atmosphere, even partially?

[MarsMoonEuropa]

@mrteemumilto lol the proof will be seen in August.

Cant wait!

[MadMullet81]

What an ambitious landing method! Wonder if NASA will pull it off, or will the curse of the red planet strike again...

[jbermudez2006]

I BELIEVE TECHNOLOGY WILL GET SO CRAZY IN THE FUTURE THAT EARTH IT SELF WILL BE A SPACE MACHINE CONTROLLED BY HUMANS.......MOVEMENT TEMPERATURE......IN PERSPECTIVE WHEN THE SUN GETS BIGGER HUMANS WILL MOVE EARTH AWAY FROM IT..............EARTH WILL BE A SPACE MACHINE TRAVELLING AT WILL BASED ON LOCATION WITH SOME CRAZY SENSORS........

[LancairPropJet]

Could we make the landing anymore exciting? this is great stuff. I can't wait till she get's there.

[tiagobaracho]

NASA is the most extraordinary thing we have... In hour lives, we hardly get the big picture of the human kind and the earth because we live too fast. 80 -90 year is nothing when you are speaking about earth and universe. NASA does the extremely important thing that only in the far away future can be realized.. NASA in all its missing develops technology that can make on day we deflect an asteroid that would destroy earth or even more, we can move out of the earth to live in space.

[tiagobaracho]

It may sound unbelievable but it WILL happen someday. earth is not forever... neither the universe.... we already have so much technology and knowledge... Imagine 5.000 or 10.000 year ahead what kind of technology we will have ?... I would love to see that !

When our earth begin to be inhospitable for sure we, the human kind, will be living in space.. We now already have a international space station.. think ahead 50.000 year what we gonna have in space ?

[abradras]

@tiagobaracho we have such a technology that its possible that in 10 years we might chase each other with sticks and rocks :-D

[jbermudez2006]

@tiagobaracho totally agree, now imagine in 1 million years from now.........what would be the headlines of those time in space travel???? crazy I hope re-encarnation is true and I get a 2nd life in the future.................

[tiagobaracho]

@jbermudez2006 it is amazing...i would give it all to live forever and be able to see that.... and can you imagine that someday the human kind will be face real extinction and we all will be fighting against that ? it can be a meteor or sun going supernova, or universe expansion freezing everything.....

And all the barriers that exist like light speed.... are we going to be able to use like worm holes ?... thats something we, me and you will never know ! how sad is that ??

[jbermudez2006]

@tiagobaracho yes I did know that's why I said technology will be so advanced that it will detect super nova years before it explodes and earth will move away from danger zone in my believe earth will have movement like a space machine driven by humans...............humans will control seasons, temperature, density, humidity etc etc and use other planets for resources................

[Liamddc]

So how does it get back to earth?

[3732334]

@Liamddc it wont go back to earth it will just stay there forever

[killacherrybomb]

I believe they used the rockets to land the final rover is to blow away a layer of dust on the ground and reveal anything that is below it. It would be a smart idea and it would be easier for the rover to study it. Who agrees?

[Boss5414]

Now I know why Nasa requires so much money, they're building a god damn Goldberg machine just to land it!

[Sylderon]

@Boss5414

Well, how else do you expect it to make the landing intact? Use a giant pogo stick? Or they could use a giant multi-chamber airbag like the previous rovers.

[hapi3rd]

Wonder what happens to the sky crane after it has released the rover & flown away: Hope it could have flown away & landed at a nearby known location on mars, so that later mars landings could re-use or recycle it.

[Spencerianism]

Great landing sequence!

[alkimst13]

That's a lot of stuff going on for a landing, but NASA pulled of the bouncy ball thing, so this'll probably work too. I'm thinking that russia would be happy with just a direct impact landing on Mars - IF IT CAN EVER GET THERE!!! "Look, in the sky! It's a Meteor crashing to earth!" Nope, it's just Phobos-Grunt. Good job comrades, good job!!! That's funny, i don't care who you are.

[manmeetvirdi]

Great great engineering ! Bravo !

[pacloro]

its so slooooowww

[NumbnutzTV]

so uhm the landing seems quite hard don't know why they made it that way but w/e guess it won't be a problem with today's computers.But uhm will the rover send a package back or we will only get data back to earth?

[rickythechicken]

i hate that i have to wait 8 months until it lands

[yandykun]

@rickythechicken august is just right there.

[ezgftt]

I thought Mars barely had an atmoshere, this vid paints a rosy picture of it surely?

[bambamboom2]

Then it hits a rock and tips over on its side

[Ariomaniac]

Until I can actually observe an actual test of a jet sky crane, as depicted here in this video, lowering some type of load here on earth, I cannot believe this will work.

If the NASA engineers have not tested an actual sky crane here on earth than this whole project is pure theory and science fiction with such a low chance of success that it is simply throwing taxpayers' money down the drain.

[UndeadPizzaGuy]

@Ariomaniac It's been tested dozens of times by helicopter. The crane is not what you should be worrying about, it's the rockets. However - all Mars landers must use rockets at some point, even the airbag landers had to use rockets during the final seconds of descent. If the rockets fail, any other probe would have failed. It has nothing to do with the sky crane. Please don't be so ignorant as to suppose NASA wouldn't test the landing system for one of their flagship missions.

[whitelancer64]

@Ariomaniac the military have used sky cranes to drop off cargo for years

[ALFTUBE50]

too complicate landing.....mmmmm.....anything can happend.....

[ntipouan]

xkcd.com/695/

[F2ID78gh]

very neat!

[jonbirks]

So does the lander fly off and land? Or does it just crash as far away as possible from Curiosity?

[DefLeppardFann]

@jonbirks I believe it's not even as far away as possible - Just a crash at a safe distance.

[whitelancer64]

@jonbirks it is intended to fly off and crash.

[TheDesertedRanger]

why not 2011

[RICKY1726]

Wait until Howard Wolowits puts his hands on this one.lol

[Maartenn100]

Only 20 kilometers on the surface of Mars?

[goku2038]

omfg can i go too??

[codykonior]

@AustralianLeprechaun It's powered by plutonium-238. It can power it for 14 years, and if it was released in the atmosphere here during a crash it would be equivalent to a year's background radiation - so, not bad.

[AustralianLeprechaun]

What powers it?

[leeroynaggins]

@AustralianLeprechaun

An angel...

[refa42]

@ugod987

You're commenting BS in every freaking Curiosity video. You don't like NASA or Curiosity landing site? - rough. Curiosity carries instrumentation produced around the world. It is much bigger and heavier than other rovers, that's why they can't use balls for landing. Nuclear power lasts at least 1 martian year (687 days on earth). Primitive sites aren't that primitive, when you're doing actual science. Understanding all that is not rocket science. Autonomously landing on other planet is.

[ugod987]

nasa sucks nuclear power rover only last 1 year. huh craters what about cydonia structures. Nasa always lands on primitive sites the wrong sites Onboard audio huh. waste of money. cydonia face on mars glass tunnels pyramids should be confirmed. We already know there is water on mars do something new . Funding should be cut for punishment. Nasa is 30 years behind schedule.

[UndeadPizzaGuy]

@ugod987 The power source will actually last 14 years, the one year is merely the rovers life expectancy. Keep in mind that the Sojourner rover lasted much longer than expected, and the MER rovers lasted 6 years longer than expected. As for the landing site I can't help you. As for cutting funding - people like you are the reason NASA has not put a man on mars yet.

[cerlestes]

@UndeadPizzaGuy Actually that 14 years lifetime of the radionuclid battery is it's most minimum lifetime. It'll produce enough energy to operate the robot for at least 30-40 years, if nothing goes wrong. :) Let's hope for the best!

[EarthTablet]

Why cant they fit it with a more powerful engine?

[xGothimox]

@EarthTablet

an engine that only needs to put out 1 or 2 horse power will last a lot longer than some 400 horse power v8 engine or some shit.

[EarthTablet]

@xGothimox is there gravity on Mars? if the engine was 400bhp would it fly off?

[DerCowboyHater]

Thumbs Up for Star Wars :'p

[cscdigitalgraphics]

Science advances. Great work NASA.

[toozoon]

Nuclear Power FTW!!

[DarkSmith91]

Good Luck Howard Wolowitz! Don't crash this one.

[light101]

0:22

Battlestar Galactica flashback, anyone?

[woofdawgg69]

How is it powered? Solar?

[utilmind]

@woofdawgg69 no, thermoelectricity with plutonium as a fuel

[thajinjaninja]

@woofdawgg69 i dont think they would make that mistake again. Remember the last one getting sand on it, nearly killing all its power?

[whitelancer64]

@thajinjaninja it wasn't a mistake, actually. they knew that Mars dirt would get on the solar panels. what WAS a surprise was that the Mars winds cleaned off the solar panels from time to time xD

[LancairPropJet]

Hmmmm. This Mars Science Laboratory looks surprisingly like the Jupiter 2. A little too much. Yes the Jupiter 2. You smart people at NASA thought we'd forgotten about the good old Jupiter 2. Well guess again egg-heads. Sure they added parachute and the rover thing but they even copied the size and precise location of the thrusters! NASA can't keep relying on Hollywood as a crutch. Shame NASA... shame.

[INMATE2468]

3.2 BILLION dollars for just 20 km !!!  Wtf!!!

[Impervious200]

@INMATE2468 Go to costofwar . com

[anywayokay]

what is the rovers power source. I dont see solar panels. ?

[TheCornfedPig]

@anywayokay Its a P-36 Space Modulator!

[nightcore258]

>:D

[nightcore258]

!mars :)!

[SacredSocietyAP]

I went to mars once back in the Navy...We stayed in port for 3 days fuckin' whores and getting stupid drunk...oh wait..that was France.

[darkgrb]

I am no space engineer, I just note that we have many steps here and even if one fails, the rover may not make it..

Couldn't we use airbags? So far, they have not failed, see Pathfinder, Spirit and Opportunity.

[theagg]

@darkgrb Curiosity is too heavy to use the airbag landing proceedure. (It's about 5 times the mass of the Spirit and Oppurtunity rovers.)

[darkgrb]

@theagg Thanks for your reply!

[1Lunarautumn]

@darkgrb @darkgrb The way I understand it, this rover is too Heavy for the Air bag system.

[SpliNterCellFan697]

Mars can't be that far.

[jlehane3]

h t t p ://t. co/u h u p Z 5o q Life on Mars People,animals,fossils,10 ft Faces carved crater cliffs.I designed Mars rovers 1987.They have known life on Mars since 1976. j pl123 (hat) inbox (not) com go to my photo bucket (not) com acct J l e h an e3 (connect blank spaces)

[MrMrgta4000]

1:09 7 meters per second .. that's not slow at all !

[pthombeaux]

@MrMrgta4000 He said, "a speed of about point seven five meters per second..."

[TheFilmMaker7000]

Love it!

[silentcompany]

This is by far the most ambitious mission yet.

[UnclePimmem]

Seems like a complicated landing sequence. I can see replacing/eliminating at least one step to reduce potential problems.

[BernieRamone351]

yes , but how is the rover getting to mars?

has lockheed built something to get it there?

[baillou2]

@BernieRamone351 It will launch aboard an Atlas V 541 which is operated by ULA (United launch Alliance).

[PixlNinja]

Will it blend ?

[oomblikkies]

Has NASA decided where to land Curiosity on Mars?

[sourmanofcoal]

THIS ROVER HAS PLUTONIUM POWERING IT

[FPRobber]

Holy crap, the landing part looks awesome. Especially the sky crane. It looks like alien technology from some scifi movie. :D

[The1stPoster]

20 km in 2 years..? How slow is this piece of shit going lol jk, But please tell me it can at the very least record high quality video footage

[andreyutul]

@The1stPoster If u would search some Wikipedia you would see it got HD cameras.

[TheProdieus]

1-the landing looks like a great idea.....but why not use the same one that has already worked twice?

2- I can see it now......the rover is going to take a picture of one of the previous rovers tracks or something and everyone is gonna think that's proof of life.

3- will this rover have video capabilities......or will it be still pictures?

[andreyutul]

@TheProdieus 1.Because Curiosity is a lot bigger , and a lot heavier to use the same style of landing :D

2. It will land very far away from the Twins.

3. Even the old rovers have Video Capabilities , and this will have a better video capability , recording 720p.

[KingGoddard]

If its so easy to land these rovers on mars why not just put people there?

[Boy75402]

@KingGoddard

1) It's not easy to land rovers on Mars.

2) Humans need food, enough to last for about a year for the planets to get near enough to return to Earth.

3) A large enough spacecraft would be enormous, and so would the amount of fuel needed to get it to Mars.

4) Radiation hazards to human life isn't well understood.

5) cost.

[HNMpepper]

@Boy75402

Although I think Zubrin is a bit desperate, read Case for Mars by Robert 'Bob' Zubrin and your think differently.

[Boy75402]

@HNMpepper

I'm familiar enough with the challenges of landing on Mars to not be so permeable to Zubrin's ideas. Zubrin isn't the most credible of people, imho. Especially with his latest spill about VASIMR.

[lesthatful]

probe with wheels where each wheel is independent and able to give the track with super lightweight and durable material and a second front to the back of the dashboard as wide as scarpar

[lesthatful]

poor idea to do so could send a small vessel in which it is enough fuel to return, and it is hidden so that the rover equipment from the samples could return to earth you know mars silent steel core attraction is weaker so the hardware does not need as much energy back at the detachment from the earth and to reach Mars is possible, and I think a better solution

[Sevival]

btw they can spent their money better on medical research instead of this or war..

[andreyutul]

@Sevival Are u completely insane? Don't you see what these rovers are doing? They can expand our lifes on other planets.Why would you research it on War?

[Sevival]

@andreyutul No you got me wrong, they shouldn't waste money on this OR war

Yes this may be useful for science,but these nonsense is not our first priority

It only helps humanity in VERY long term,for now let's focus on keeping people alive and well and provide work for everyone

[Amunnubz]

@Sevival You want to know who invented the MRI?

It wasn't a medical researcher. It was a physicist who wanted to understand properties of atoms.

Not everything comes from where it's expected. The technology used to make these rovers can and will be used to make other technology on Earth better. This has been proven time and again, especially by the Apollo program.

So no. They can't spend their money "better", but they can certainly spend it worse by putting it all in one place.

[as11188888]

@Sevival What 500 million dollars (how much they spent already)? That's pocket change to the medical research field and a couple pennies and nickels to spendings on War. I want my tax dollars at work doing something that can change the way we think of life; not some war we will never win.

[Sevival]

@as11188888 INSTEAD of war.& Btw now that i think of it, I support this idea more than months ago.

This will indead make a progress in our way of life.

As they discover & gain more & more knowledge of mars, we are more prepared to go and maybe built bases & stuff on other planets

[Sevival]

no way this gonna work

[roidroid]

1:44

They see me Rovin'

They hatin'

[CognitiveNetwork]

@roidroid LOL... these two comments are so epic.

[CognitiveNetwork]

20km in 2 years, that's 1141mm per hour. Like Michio Kaku said, like a retarded cockroach.

[ytmoog]

@CognitiveNetwork

The purpose is to do an intense geological survey not win a race.

[SuperKenny720]

Nice landing 4 billion for 15 miles What!!!! why not just fly a solar plane around that had a small copper that came down and did test.

[nedbread1]

lol at all of you geniuses that have better designs for the mars rover but unluckily havent been hired by nasa yet

[TexPhoto]

Good Lord. Why make landing that complicated? What's wrong with just landing on a parachute?

[meteor4163]

@TexPhoto The will use a parachute. And it will do nothing more that slowing the rover down from ~1000Mph to sub-sonic speed due to the martian atmosphere being extremely thin.

[turner850]

I can go to radioshack and get a $30 RC car that will work just as fine.

[MrHurricaneFloyd]

@turner850

Can you get it on Mars and control it from Earth for 7 years for another $30?

[turner850]

don't we already have one in mars

[you2tube22]

@turner850 Yepp, but it´s smaler. Opportunity is still active: marsrover.nasa.gov/home/index.­html

[postjam]

this thing is gonna crash royally.

[TheFluffyDuck]

Thats so not going to work.

So many things to go wrong that cant be tested.

[SkreetGil]

It's cool and all, however, now there is our garbage on the planet. Isn't there anyway for us to build something all encompassing? Why so many parts?

And can't we have these parts somehow find each other in anticipation of cleaning up our garbage.

Like the rather large problem we are trying to solve now, with our space garbage around our planet.

[elpicos8091]

Aren't there already two rovers in mars? what's the point of this one?

[janjust]

lol, this mission will be such a fail haha I can see it already... storm, wind...bam....mission fail...

[littlejager]

are wheels that can be turned to face any direction better than omni wheels? seems like a lot of extra mechnics that can malfunction.... But then again you lose other things when using omni-wheels

[MrHurricaneFloyd]

@littlejager

An omni-wheel that could tackle the type of terrain Curiosity will be going through would have to be quite large.

[Winsucker]

That is exactly how my first "curiosity" mission went.

[plasticpals1]

Hollywood special effects artists couldn't dream this up... it's too cool!

[Neodudeman]

What happens if it enters in a storm?

[FSK1138]

i hope it can answer the question --" is there life on mars" --

[Mackingster]

Got to see a mock-up of this rover when it was at the Museum of Flight. Neat robot. 

[jeriellsworth]

This seems convoluted. Seems like the proven big ball method would be a safer route..

[RoboTekno]

Do you mean mach 2 on earth or mach 2 on mars? Cool video :) Also, what is its power source?

[mutexnet]

The landing portion looks a bit Rube Goldberg, but this is great stuff. Thanks for posting.

[Rebelgium]

What are the differencesbetween the current two rovers on Mars and Curiosity?