New Update! Nasa to END IM-1 lunar lander mission after first Moon image released...

Подписаться 132 тыс.

Просмотров 56 тыс.

50% 1

New Update! Nasa to END IM-1 lunar lander mission after first Moon image released...
===
#greatspacex #elonmusk #spacex #nasa #starship #spacexstarship
==
Advertisers who want to place ads on our channel, please contact the email manager: smanager339@gmail.com
===
SpaceX Starship SN
Be the first to sponsor us Thank you.
www.patreon.com/GreatspaceX?f...
===
New Update! Nasa to END IM-1 lunar lander mission after first Moon image released...
Returning to the Moon after over 50 years is a significant milestone that the IM-1 mission has brought to the forefront of the US aerospace industry.
However, as history has shown, lunar exploration is far from straightforward. NASA recently disclosed that the NOVA-C Odysseus lunar lander has encountered unexpected challenges, casting uncertainty over its current status.
The question arises: why is the Odysseus lander facing issues? Can these challenges be overcome? And what implications will the IM-1 mission have on future lunar endeavors?
Join us as we delve into these questions on today's episode of Great SpaceX.
Most recently, Intuitive Machines gave us an update with two more images of the lunar surface when the lander vertical descended to its Malapert A landing site and approximately 35 seconds after pitching over during its approach to the landing site.
I thought this was a good sign after many problems over the past few days. But Intuitive Machines promptly announced on February 26 that they expect to communicate with the Odysseus lunar lander for only one more day, a much shorter timeline than previously expected.
In its press kit issued before the launch of the IM-1 mission, Intuitive Machines stated that it expected the lander to operate for about seven days “before the lunar night sets on the south pole of the Moon, rendering Odysseus inoperable.” At the February 23 briefing, Crain offered a “best-case scenario” of 9 to 10 days of operations after landing.
So why did the IM-1 mission fall into this situation?
----
We use images and content in accordance with the RU-vid Fair Use copyright guidelines: ru-vid.comen/about...
Any questions about copyright please send us via Gmail: colonbina25@gmail.com
To be resolved, thank you.

Наука

Опубликовано:

27 фев 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 534

@szabolcsjobbagy30 4 месяца назад

At 2:33 your animation is not correct, the engine should point towards the Moon's surface and the lander should be in an upright position during descending. It had a horizontal movement as well (cc. 3.2 km/h) besides the vertical movement, as you showed us, that's why it turned to its side after landing.

@nikhilnambiar7160 4 месяца назад

Chandrayan 3 completed all its experiment for what it was scheduled for and also did a hop manuvor a test experiment,it did two soft landing in single mission

@gar9429 4 месяца назад

YEA THAT CHINA IS GREAT ISNT IT? NOT!!!!!!

@LuciFeric137 4 месяца назад

Good thing these geniuses weren't around for Apollo. Mankind is devolving

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

And people like you prove that we are getting dumber as a country!

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

We seem to do ok with Mars, lets' try those, with appropriate adjustments for zero atmosphere of moon.

@donaldcarpenter5328 4 месяца назад

yup, devolving

@wally7856 4 месяца назад

What you are witnessing is the change in mentality of education. In the 60's - second place was the first loser. Today - everybody gets a trophy because they participated. This CEO goes on camera after every last bit of this mission was amateur hour and masturbatory pats his company on the back like they are hero's for trying. Not even a checklist, backup plan or an inventory board for a simple safety switch/pin. They can't even admit their numerous mistakes, absolutely pathetic.

@mikewalsh1402 4 месяца назад

Well, the Japanese SLIM landed upside down, JAXA is still communicating with it, so Odysseus didn’t do too bad.

@golgo13.54 4 месяца назад

JAXA's SLIM was to be landed in a horizontal position rather than in an upright position like IM-1. I think that's why ( no solar panels on opposite sides of engines) it is still possible to charge and communicate.

@patrickradcliffe3837 4 месяца назад

2:38 this is a HORRIBLE graphic. The lander was not tipped over before landing. You're misinterpreted what they data says. The lander was in the vertical position before landing. It was moving at 2kph in the horizontal plain to the moon and 10kph in the vertical plain perpendicular to the mom. As the landing foot that in lead position of the movement in horzontal plain toched down it caught and the lander tipped over.

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

THANK YOU! For some reason a lot of people also think it landed safely and tipped over because it’s too tall or something. Which just isn’t true. Thank you for clearing this up for a depressingly large amount of people.

@nikhilnambiar7160 4 месяца назад

Then it's not a soft landing. It failed

@sixpack634 4 месяца назад

could you imagine actually sending people there? ever?

@jim0311 4 месяца назад

We did...we will

@edlondon3717 4 месяца назад

@@jim0311 Absolutely, can't stop progress!

@jjavalon 4 месяца назад

They never ever sent people on the moon. Was a hoax.

@jjavalon 4 месяца назад

LOL 😂

@rogerdavis5053 4 месяца назад

But they never had a problem 50 years ago. Yeh right. Man has yet to leave low Earth orbit.

@user-yk9dq9bc9i 4 месяца назад

From Apollo program to now I know why they don't go back to the moon like the Apollo program it's because all the money and rare metals etc are being used for military and other projects look at NASA I bet lots of people don't know this NASA was run by Werner von Braun when he was alive since he he died NASA don't have no one like Werner von Braun running nasa

@SB-dg8hq 4 месяца назад

Because of the politics at the time of the Apollo missions when the American government realised that they didn't have the hardware or technology to go to the moon they faked it. However the Apollo rockets were able to put spy satellites in orbit, incidentally to get funding for the space shuttles one condition was that the cargo bay was big enough to hold a spy satellite. Understand this and everything else makes sense.

@nathr7375 4 месяца назад

And every country in the world who mainly dislike each have never called bullshit?................that would be one insane conspiracy to go to war etc but never call them out on that?

@chinchusilp2201 4 месяца назад

Not a soft landing at all. Hard landing, broken leg.

@TTURocketDoc 4 месяца назад

Wow, you completely misunderstood what they meant by it coming down with a lateral velocity. It wasn't sideways when it touched down, it was upright but with sideways velocity, it tipped over at touch down instead of sliding because a leg got caught.

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

👍👍👍

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

That happens to me all the time in Kerbal space program…

@TTURocketDoc 4 месяца назад

@@rustyshackleford234 I need to get that program, is it on steam?

@recoilrob324 4 месяца назад

I lost a lot of respect for IM when they put on the 'Happy Face' until after the stock market closed. Their stock went up with the 'success'....and I'm thinking some people owning that stock bailed on it before the reality of the failed mission was revealed the next week. Their excuse was 'lack of funding'.....but did that prevent a cover from being removed from a critical landing sensor before launch? Nope....that was pure human error and whomever should have been responsible for that would have made the same mistake even if they were paid more. What really burns my butt is that we went through this very same process back in the 1960's and every step was WELL and EXTENSIVELY documented....but how many of the current generation of 'engineers' working on these landings have bothered to read and learn from our predecessors? I'll wager NONE....they're too smart for that and are making all the same mistakes over again.

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Keep following and wait for next feats on Moon

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

Wow there’s spaceflight accomplishments and all you care about is the stocks of the company… I hope it does fall so you lose all your investments.

@recoilrob324 4 месяца назад

@@rustyshackleford234I have nothing invested in them....but it was obvious to anyone watching the landing that it didn't go well and being unable to communicate normally with it within a few minutes meant very bad things had happened. They were SO desperate for the cheering and hugging and getting the 'participation prize', and if you know anything about the stock market...you can't tell me that this wasn't intended to boost the stock prices...which it did. People are saying 'What about SpaceX blowing up rockets all the time and calling it progress'? The difference is that they're blowing up THEIR MONEY...where IM got paid to do a job for NASA and failed. If I experiment with something and it doesn't go well...that's on me, but if I take YOUR money to do a job...do you just accept that I failed and better luck next time. Really?

@saabpoppa 4 месяца назад

The scariest threat to landing helicopters is called "dynamic rollover" where a proper landing in terms of vertical velocity is ruined by lateral drift with one of the skids catching on the landing surface. Landing slope (12 degrees according to NASA) aggravates the risk. This plus a guaranteed boulder-strewn, uneven surface guarantees a tipover if there's any lateral drift. Back to the drawing board, I'm afraid.

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

It had vertical velocity while it was landing and one of its legs got caught, causing the whole thing to tip over. This will happen to any lander.

@platinumpig 4 месяца назад

Whenever they put lens caps on space equipment they should tie a big flag to it with "REMOVE BEFORE LAUNCH" on it. I bet that was not the only screwup they had.

@davidmacphee3549 4 месяца назад

Hi there Kevin. The Falcon 9 is so amazing! Cost is not what people think it is but I ask anyway. What is the approximate cost off this mission overall? A lot was gained for sure so it it is not a failure but still feels disappointing. I suspect it was not so expensive not like Apollo . "HELP! I've fallen and I can't get up" ! Where are you Madam ? "I'm on the Moon"!

@chanahyingchan5070 4 месяца назад

Failure is failure.

@Pro5.0 4 месяца назад

That feeling when you take off full throttle for flight without resetting the default P.I.D's in the software....

@freegw1 4 месяца назад

I’m no rocket scientist, but I could tell it wasn’t balanced. High CG and it tips over!

@DavidEsp1 4 месяца назад

Go back to physical safety indications and checklists. Like putting physical tags/ribbons on stuff that needs to be added/twiddled/removed before flight. Such elements therefore need to be designed for tag/ribbon -ability. So easy to accidentally tap wrong (or multiple) checklist items on most to-do apps (don't know what IM uses). No Confirmer prompt. Convenience over safety.

@stevenvitali7404 4 месяца назад

Funny how almost everything is improved over the years like cars,phones,tv e.c.t, but not space travel, just doesn’t make sense

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

SpaceX will change everything

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

It DID improve. You seem pretty misinformed about modern space travel.

@realsetanta70 4 месяца назад

Space is just about laundering $$$. No failure on that front.

@palladen1933 4 месяца назад

You gotta be kidding me how many of these machines have not landed properly tipped over and stopped working 😮 with all today's science you can't compete with the 1960's they didn't have any of today's computers, sorry guys all this time and money spent no pity for me 😮

@lusa3002 4 месяца назад

60's moon landing was fake.

@SB-dg8hq 4 месяца назад

Because of the politics at the time of the Apollo missions when the American government realised that they were not able to send men to the moon because they didn't have the hardware or technology they faked it. However because the Apollo rockets were able to put spy satellites into earth orbit they were repurposed for that task, incidentally one of the conditions for the funding for the space shuttles was that they could hold a spy satellite. All the Apollo crew were extremely patriotic and would go along with the hoax but would not talk about the subject afterwards because of the possibility of conflicting information. Well, that's just my theory, I can't prove any of it, but the theory fits the subject. BTW, look at the failure rate of the space shuttles, 2 out of 5 failed and that's just going into low earth orbit.

@t4mor4 4 месяца назад

I'm not sure how true this is, but I saw someone saying the reason the IM-1 laser range finders didn't work was because they still had a safety system in place which should have been removed before launch. If it is true then the only reason it failed was because of a human error, so with everything they learned from this launch IM-2 and IM-3 should be a breeze.

@biomechanique6874 4 месяца назад

A moon buggy with a recovery style crane jib would be quite a useful asset on the moon...

@stevemiller9608 4 месяца назад

Well what do you expect, they've never done it before.

@jjavalon 4 месяца назад

Correct. Agree.

@Sheppardsg1 4 месяца назад

maybe probe was confused what gender was it and it fliped :)

@davidbell7091 4 месяца назад

why is is so hard for these people to just say the truth.. it wrecked.

@SPak-rt2gb 4 месяца назад

It's final message was "I've Fallen And Can't Get up"

@DavidEsp1 4 месяца назад

In Knowledge Acquisition, there is documented knowledge (no matter the form of documentation or representation) - and then there is Tacit knowledge, the kind experts are unable to express (or realise needs expressing to newbies), and that disappears when they retire. Or when organization switches to a different product/service for half a century. In which case documents (and even space photos) get lost.

@olafbaeyens8955 4 месяца назад

During landing, what is down is pretty hard to determine. You cannot use gravity as a reference what is down because your engines are burning which means acceleration that messes up with what is down. Also the terrain does not help in figuring out what is down.

@SideWalkAstronomyNetherlands 4 месяца назад

Who designed the contraption? Ms. Olga Tumbleova???

@av_kovko 4 месяца назад

I wonder if it was possible to disarm your own laser altimeter at the Intuitive Machines factory before launch, if you can't make it in February, postpone the launch to March.

@raywhitehead730 4 месяца назад

There was an actual study/ paper fundedd by NASA, in the sixties, that detailed the appropriate design for a lander to land upright.

@AndrewKeifer 4 месяца назад

#1 thing on IM-2 to-do list: REMOVE LENS COVER OF LIDAR!!!

@LSF17 4 месяца назад

Why was there an outtake?

@tomhaggerty8063 4 месяца назад

Never A Straight Answer, NASA

@anthonyb.7360 4 месяца назад

😂

@JohnCummuta 4 месяца назад

Do you guys preview your videos before posting them? Your content is good, but it seems every video has 2+ audio editing gaffes, with obvious start-overs not being cleaned up.

@platinumpig 4 месяца назад

NO the lander was not at an angle, it was moving sideways at 3.2 km/h while it was descending at 10 km/h, that is what is known as "horizontal velocity".

@wally7856 4 месяца назад

Yes and very bad in low gravity environments. The sideways inertia is the same as on Earth but your righting force is your weight acting on your center of gravity which is 1/6th that of Earth. It is 6 times easier to tip over on the moon from horizontal velocity.

@victorkrawchuk9141 4 месяца назад

Do the descent engines on the IM-1 landers depend on a hover-slam-type technique to land, such as with Falcon 9 boosters? If so there wouldn't be much room for correction in the final few seconds before touchdown, and you'd have to be as experienced as SpaceX is in making such a technique work. This might be a situation where SpaceX has made propulsive rocket landings look so easy when they're not, that other companies are simply caught off-guard and can't duplicate the feat.

@isabellaleavines5918 4 месяца назад

Very interesting

@davidryonjennings 4 месяца назад

Saw this coming… why build a lunar lander that is taller than it is wide? SpaceX’ Starship is going to have the same problem. Unless they land it someplace extremely flat and level it’s going to be unstable. I’m sure we will eventually build flat and level landing pads, but until…

@ianjeffery3762 4 месяца назад

Surely it having a high centre of gravity and rough terrain was at the top of their "risks to mitigate" list???

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Yeah! Hopefully, they can do better in next mission

@JackPrestrud 4 месяца назад

The stated horizontal and vertical velocity components should be refering to the vehicle's center of gravity. Landing with some horizontal velocity does not tell us that the vehicle's axis was non-vertical. Intended to land at ~2 km/hr (about 1.2 mph). Vertical motion. Actually landed at ~10.4 km/hr (about 6.5 mph) moving 18 degrees off vertical. That's a lot more kinetic energy to be absorbed. I'm not sure we can call this a successfukl soft landing.

@andreschapero3615 4 месяца назад

They (IM) could have thought about all these fixes before approving this crazy adventure on NASA’s money.

@conniepr 4 месяца назад

I don't understand why they built one like this knowing it would tilt over without a way to upright it.

@tightwad 4 месяца назад

Can't they build a nerf ball like multi landable position craft? Why make them so fragile and non adaptable. It's a freakin house of glass

@RD-ij2sz 4 месяца назад

This is the first and the last and the only photo by this mission.

@dianewalker9154 4 месяца назад

Lesson learned, need lunar landings to have robotic appendages to land in rough uneven territory and ability to reorient itself into an upright position no matter how it lands.

@xMorogothx 4 месяца назад

Diversity hire is the problem 😊

@hemibreath 4 месяца назад

I’m NO expert but I don’t understand why Space-X can land on a moving ship multiple times and this thing can’t land on the (not moving) Moon 🤷‍♂️ Oops I Tripped !!

@hemibreath 4 месяца назад

Should make them round 😂

@olafbaeyens8955 4 месяца назад

Lower gravity, and terrain no one ever landed on full or rocks that is not flat.

@DurokSubaka 4 месяца назад

You can’t call the mission a success if the landing failed

@wally7856 4 месяца назад

The landing laser failed because the engineering team had no checklists, the landing camera failed because their backup code didn't include it, the spacecraft crashed, no science packages completed their tasks, it is now out of power and NASA is shutting it down. But forget all that, the CEO says everything is great and it is a huge success!!!

@that70sgamer 4 месяца назад

Good morning

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Have a nice day ☺️

@paulbrunton877 4 месяца назад

Won't be too long now Space X Dragon capsule will be heading to the moon and the crew will put the fallen spacecraft to vertical again, and get it working properly, Space X is the way forward for the Moon.

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

SpaceX🚀🚀🚀

@captaindunsell8568 4 месяца назад

I’m waiting for the rescue mission to be announced…

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

No. It’s going to be ended

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

It’s cheaper to just send another one that’s been upgraded later this year.

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

it's a future "museum piece" now, many of them are.

@blueskies792 4 месяца назад

You should have waited because many details about the landing are wrong. Eagle cam got its pics.

@retiredguyadventures6211 4 месяца назад

Faster, Better Cheaper! Hows that working out...

@StevenRedcay-gw5ci 4 месяца назад

? Why are Apollo,s Pic,s so clear and the pictures of this lander so blurry

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Let's wait for their explanation ☺️

@olafbaeyens8955 4 месяца назад

There are a few issues. The camera is not supposed to be point to the ground, so I think it is out of focus. Second so close to the ground the lunar light is too bright to it washes out the sensor. Third, very bad communication, they can only transmit very low quality pixelate images.

@maanviss3840 4 месяца назад

I hope they equip the lander with 'Robot hand' next time, so it can get up itself again .... 🤔

@wildwildItaly 4 месяца назад

Oh darn it, I thought it landed right, now I am reading it broke and fell on it's side😮

@obx6844 4 месяца назад

The IM-1 did a Brandon on the moon.

@johnkoay8097 4 месяца назад

Why NASA picked and inexperienced company to do this job? Should have just given it to spaceX.

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

they did, the launch vehicle was the falcon 9, but yes, I bet SpaceX could "whip up" a good cheap lander in a few months with some review of specs of all vehicles that did succeed landing on the moon, upright, beginning with the Surveyors of the 1960's.

@BornFreeFilms 4 месяца назад

So, we can

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Great suggestion 👍

@abacus749 4 месяца назад

Neil Armstrong told Patrick Moore youtube video that there are no Stars in the Vacuum of Space. Is the Moon Plasma lighting the Earth or the Sun?

@rusty6365 4 месяца назад

I wonder why it was so easy to livestream audio and video from the moon in 1969 compared to 2024...?...

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Great question. Keep discussing this on our channel ☺️

@realsetanta70 4 месяца назад

It' was fraud back then and it still is now. It's just harder to fake in the modern day. Look at that crappy camera in 2024!? The USSR had better pics in the 1960s.

@telebubba5527 4 месяца назад

It was never easy. But the whole spacecraft combination of Apollo was much bigger, heavier and sturdier than this lightweight contraption. It's the difference between a tanker and a dinghy. They did have an 'eagle cam' on board, that should have helped with the landing, but it failed to deploy. Apparently the technology is just not there yet. This is the first landing after 50 years, so they have to rediscover some things in the process.

@woodycrabtree5096 4 месяца назад

True@@realsetanta70

@woodycrabtree5096 4 месяца назад

true@@realsetanta70

@PS-47 4 месяца назад

you seem to be disingenuous in not mentioning that China landed on the far side of the moon in 2018 on their first attempt and successfully deployed their rover as well.

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

yes, congrats, where might we see some details on their mission findings so far, on you tube anywhere, would like to know the sites, would be interesting to see something, anything.

@donaldcarpenter5328 4 месяца назад

The Far Side in the EQUATOR is akin to what WE did in 1969-1973 . This is the SOUTH POLE! Hooray for INDIA which DID IT CORRECT!!!!

@davidrandell2224 4 месяца назад

Would very much like to know the measured surface gravity from the Chinese lander/ rover. Difficult to access, unless you have “connections.” The moon’s surface gravity varies from @1/6th earth’s “g” - near side- to @1/3rd on the far side. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy”, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics including the CAUSE of gravity.

@tayzer22 4 месяца назад

They have nothing to lose at this point so should use the puffers to try and stand it up.

@shannonalaminski2619 4 месяца назад

But the media and the government cried out that this was a great leap for all mankind. I'm a little disappointed.

@briankleinschmidt3664 4 месяца назад

It never turns out the way we plan. Set low expectations.

@billmarvin8951 4 месяца назад

When they are finished patting each other on the back maybe they will admit it crashed. When a helicopter or plane ends up on it's side when landing, that is called a "crash" landing.

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

true, but only one of the legs "RUD'd"! LOL

@abacus749 4 месяца назад

What is the moon?

@tonyalbertsson919 4 месяца назад

Let SpaceX do the lander and let NASA work as a sidekick with the science and what they want to explore ;)

@jfc213 4 месяца назад

does the man who made that make phone boxes in his spare time ha ha

@Rich-lb5ec 4 месяца назад

I think this recreation is not right, it's vertical and horizontal speed I do not dispute but its orientation would have still been in vertical plane, i think when it touched down its horizontal speed tipped it over also high vertical decent speed didn't help.

@wally7856 4 месяца назад

Yes and horizontal speed is very bad in low gravity environments. The sideways inertia is the same as on Earth but your righting force is your weight acting on your center of gravity which is 1/6th that of Earth. It is 6 times easier to tip over on the moon from horizontal velocity.

@scottNewworldphotography 4 месяца назад

Why not make them disk shape? They keep making them tall unstable what is just madness. just make drones so fit spaceX rockets We already all use drone technology working and flying with fighter jets they should do the same with 3/4 disk shape landeders still use legs but are less likely to fail. We have technology to pack more into smaller spaces.

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

This is interesting idea. I will find more about that

@darkfox77 4 месяца назад

Good. Obviously not balanced . 10komiesperhour.

@rgj987 4 месяца назад

It did look rather tall (unstable, high C of G) even for a landing on earth. The moon's gravity is 6 times weaker than on earth, thus so is the vertical force on its legs to bring it to upright. But the force required to stop a sideways movement on landing (i.e. the sideways momentum) is the same as on earth. So with a sideways movement component on landing it is 6 times more likely to topple over than on earth. In other words the vehicle's 'tallness look' should be 6 times higher when considering a topple due to horizontal movement. Well that's my two penny's worth anyway - from a sofa engineer 🤣🤣🤣

@dustmundo 4 месяца назад

That’s why you don’t go public with your company stock until you’ve demonstrated at least some operational success. And if there were people on this craft they would likely died. That’s not success.

@nathangilbert7152 4 месяца назад

How much money was wasted on that shit.

@lucasread1743 4 месяца назад

Way less than Apollo or Surveyor that’s for sure.

@madsimoninsky 4 месяца назад

its amazing how they landed on the moon in the 70s now their lucky if they land a remote vehicle makes you think

@donaldcarpenter5328 4 месяца назад

Big difference landing on the equator than the South Pole!

@parkerrabineau1232 4 месяца назад

It’s not a NASA lander

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

technically no, NASA has "built" nothing, ever, the landers of the Apollo moon program were built, for lots of money, given by NASA, by a private contractor, the Grumman aircraft company. Google it.

@kenday82 4 месяца назад

I wonder what the future astronauts are thinking as they watch this...

@medannylee1 4 месяца назад

Top Heavy.

@plankton199 4 месяца назад

Send Planet Express to prop up the lander.

@fearsomeforce2904 4 месяца назад

It's all very sus if you ask me

@abacus749 4 месяца назад

There are no stars in the vacuum of electromagnetic space and no poles, so what in simple lay mans' terms was the method of navigation?

@jz7692 4 месяца назад

Nope. On two out three objective you stated it failed. It failed on account not to stack all advantages from known experience, six successful landings by a geometric configuration consistent with low CG. If configuration opted to dismiss the above, what rate of success is it showing as feedback? I.E. it best to stack all technological advantages in favour towards stability upon a remote hostile & uneven environment.

@SirZeusor11 4 месяца назад

So....10 years of Kerbal, and they still can't stick a landing? Needs more struts!

@captaindunsell8568 4 месяца назад

Less top heavy … wider not taller …. The ratio of the base to height is wrong … wider pad or shorter package

@rustyshackleford234 4 месяца назад

@@captaindunsell8568 a landing leg getting caught on the ground while the lander had too much vertical velocity is what caused it to tip.

@KingArthusSs 4 месяца назад

At the end of the 60, people landed on the moon. Now we're not even able to land a probe on the moon. Even if it's just a private company, what a step backwards.

@lstavenhagen 4 месяца назад

Love the intro... "why is IM-1 having issues?" Because it crashed into the ground. "What does this mean for future IM-1 missions?" Well, just look at that thing. It's as tall as the Empire State building. Try a bigger landing gear? And/or chop off about 4 feet from the top of it? Also, might want to actually test it before you just fire it at the moon.

@eddieyeboah 4 месяца назад

Groupthink. Nobody wants to be fired for pointing out the obvious.

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

Thanks for your comment. We'll try harder so keep following and discussing on our channel ☺️

@rusty6365 4 месяца назад

"Spicy, cinematic landing" "last minute glitch" "primary navigation lasers fail" "have to turn cameras off to save computing power for landing hack with experimental LIDAR that was talked about before actual mission"

@robertchaffee5662 4 месяца назад

I hope they plan on going back and picking up their garbage!?

@Orozco_PNW 4 месяца назад

What a waste. They should collaborate with BattleBots and include hardware that can rotate the lander's orientation if it lands badly.

@ronschlorff7089 4 месяца назад

love that show, is it still on?

@prmath 4 месяца назад

Lesson learned….. the Final lander motion MUST be 100% Vertical when touching down …. NO HORIZONTAL movement what so ever‼️

@soapsuds5553 4 месяца назад

Maybe we aren't meant to return to the moon.

@abacus749 4 месяца назад

I think the design is ergonomically flawed. Also to be honest I don't believe it is possible.

@mariadelia7945 4 месяца назад

Embarrassing.

@rusty6365 4 месяца назад

Do a video on the moonikin radiation test mannequins that allegedly flew around the moon on artemis 1. I challenge u to do a video on those radiation test results. U won't find any data

@raywhitehead730 4 месяца назад

Couldn't NASA just have engineers design a lander that tips over, on purpose? With all the good parts facing up!

@kennethng8346 4 месяца назад

It has to fit inside the faring, and folding parts add complexity, time, and money. Its a risk. Space flight is hard.

@imaro2358 4 месяца назад

Fail? You go do it!

@Dragonych1976 4 месяца назад

Fail is new success!

@colonbina1 4 месяца назад

👍👍👍

@paulbrunton877 4 месяца назад

Sadly NASA has a bad reputation for pushing ahead without committing to talking to each other, remember Columbia shuttle disaster, and Challenger, hopefully Elon Musk and Space X will finish the job properly, especially with the fabulous work of Falcon 9s and Heavy, bringing back a booster by remote control is brilliant, and a high success rate, Dragon crews to the Moon will carry on with the Falcon boosters and beyond. 😊

@gerard4444 4 месяца назад

sounds like a mile ore Meter story..😂😂 i hoop the next 50 years, you make a better one 👍👍

@randalltaylor3700 4 месяца назад

Intuitive employees have a bright future at Boeing!!!!!!!

@pk70305 4 месяца назад

money well spent!

@woodycrabtree5096 4 месяца назад

LOL

@andreschapero3615 4 месяца назад

Get JPL to design a proper lander/rover. Enough of amateurs.

@lawrenceallen8096 4 месяца назад

Launched at $4.5 billion a mission? No thanks.

@TTURocketDoc 4 месяца назад

@@lawrenceallen8096Phoenix mars lander was 440 million, where are you getting your number?

@keepcalm7453 4 месяца назад

Transfer of know-how and tech cooperation would be better. Public sector alone wouldn't be able to bring about the kind of proliferation of tech endeavors required for a multifaceted space exploration. Length to width ratio was quite unfavourable for this craft to have stuck a foolproof landing, though they must have done their homework of running simulations over and over again to be this confident to go for the launch. At this length to width ratio, they could try to run simulations again by introducing a simple design change: by attaching rather longer landing legs at about 65-70℅ of length from top than shorter landing legs at the end without much affecting the maximum diameter of the vehicle; the former option will have more favourable positioning of the centre of mass and the centre of gravity; they could even make the landing legs foldable to maximise the use of fairing space of the launch vehicle. Some are alleging the failure on the velocity of the vehicle which is tilted from the normal to the moon's surface; properly bringing the vehicle to a hover must be a formidable challenge technologically; it shouldn't be as simple as it seems. But, there could be other factors apparently not as difficult but still challenging like simply the uneven lunar terrain, the difficulty of mapping lunar regolith depth in real-time to select a better landing spot within the landing range etc.

@lawrenceallen8096 4 месяца назад

@@TTURocketDoc The Phoenix mission cost $420 million. Of this total, $321 million was for spacecraft development, $86.2 million was for its launch, and $12.6 million was for its primary mission. Without using private space launch, i.e. SpaceX, what NASA launch vehicle can be used? What is that cost per launch?