It was such a great moment, I was watching “Capricorn One” with my daughter, maybe 12 at the time. A chill came over us and the room as she figured out that .gov was going to clean up the mess and kill all the witnesses. I love that she figured it out. Run, OJ, run.
Missed this one, but better late than never, I guess.
Indeed, how did they charge the batteries? I guess the picture is merely an "artist's rendition", but I assume it's "anatomically correct". And I guess the rectangle with the antenna visible above it, is a solar panel. It's a little 'better' than the "Luna Landa" - at least, it looks professionally Heath Robinsoned - but really?
That solar panel is tiny, and its position is absurd. No doubt, it's just another gullibility test. I mean, it's going to be extremely difficult to generate sufficient lift in that vacuous atmosphere anyway, but what about the aerodynamics - of a solar panel obstructing the gas flow?
Not to mention the very limited solar input, far less than 1kW/m2 or so available on Earth. And, Solar Panels also don't like to work in (very) cold conditions.
Then there's all the other issues. The antenna signal must pass up the dual rotor shafts somehow. I guess concentric hollow shafts, but the solar panel output also has to pass inside the mast. All unnecessarily complicated and impractical, and no doubt, heavy. Why not mount solar panels on the legs, so they fold to vertical in flight? Coff. And what's with the "odd" foot? To emphasis the three club feet? They would easily get caught between rocks and debris, but anyone fancy golfing on Mars? Should get plenty of 'air'.
Next, there's the totally non-aerodynamic shape of the "body" - a flat-topped square box.
Let's not question the knee joints on the legs. A bird is far better designed. The legs (and their knees) should be completely underneath and as far out of the high-speed gas flow as possible. Pigs are vastly more streamlined, and certainly, fly better.
As for the horns on the lower rotor. WTF? Baby Baphomet?
You probably have heard of ThunderF00t. He has a youtube channel where he LOVES to take down Musk with Telsa and SpaceX. He uses science and basic logic to shine a light on what is not viable, or blatantly lies designed to lure investors.
That much I think we all agree on.
For the helicopter, he had a few videos which he provided before it made it to Mars. If I recall, he was iffy, but plausible on it.
Heat is interesting in space. Any space craft will gradually warm up to the point of being hostile for life unless it can be vented. This is done in two ways. Infrared or water expelled in a state change. Infrared radiation requires a lot of surface area, and water is heavy. The Apollo lunar spacesuits would have needed far more water than they could ostensibly carry to keep cool.
Along these lines, Apollo 13 the movie showed the astronauts as freezing on their way back from the moon. In fact, they would have had the opposite problem. The craft would not have been able to vent heat from its internal atmosphere.
The batteries on the helicopter can be protected by either Aerogel or by nitrogen... which act as a thermal blanket. Although Mars has an atmosphere, it would be possible to keep the batteries warm so long as they were being charged on a regular basis, which of course also generates heat.
If Aerogel could be used to wrap EV batteries, that would help nicely in the wintertime. But, in the summertime, they would need a cooling system. Its kind of a ... youre damned either way... sort of scenario.
It can't on Earth. See Thunderf00t's video on that. Metal will "weld" in the dark of space. Its why robotics tend to fail there. I don't know if that would occur at -60.
But if the batteries can stay even just a little warm with solar and nitrogen blanketing, and the light atmosphere overcome with a very high blade RPM... it intuitively seems to be in the realm of "possible". I think it needed to charge for three days just to fly for a couple minutes.
Hubble is in low earth orbit, with 70's era technology. Lenses, mirrors, gyroscopes, solar panels, and radio data communications. Its apparent we can get equipment to low earth orbit. Images hold together, and are complex enough that we would be able to easily detect issues with computer generated graphics from the 80s.... if thats what was done.
We know there are things like GPS and weapons platforms up there... so, why not other systems?
I never really understood why you felt that part was faked, when it is well within the limits of physics. I completely understand the issues with manned space travel, but processors, digital cameras, wheels and radio signals should have no issue operating for years... provided they are properly protected from radiation and cold.
It was such a great moment, I was watching “Capricorn One” with my daughter, maybe 12 at the time. A chill came over us and the room as she figured out that .gov was going to clean up the mess and kill all the witnesses. I love that she figured it out. Run, OJ, run.
Missed this one, but better late than never, I guess.
Indeed, how did they charge the batteries? I guess the picture is merely an "artist's rendition", but I assume it's "anatomically correct". And I guess the rectangle with the antenna visible above it, is a solar panel. It's a little 'better' than the "Luna Landa" - at least, it looks professionally Heath Robinsoned - but really?
That solar panel is tiny, and its position is absurd. No doubt, it's just another gullibility test. I mean, it's going to be extremely difficult to generate sufficient lift in that vacuous atmosphere anyway, but what about the aerodynamics - of a solar panel obstructing the gas flow?
Not to mention the very limited solar input, far less than 1kW/m2 or so available on Earth. And, Solar Panels also don't like to work in (very) cold conditions.
Then there's all the other issues. The antenna signal must pass up the dual rotor shafts somehow. I guess concentric hollow shafts, but the solar panel output also has to pass inside the mast. All unnecessarily complicated and impractical, and no doubt, heavy. Why not mount solar panels on the legs, so they fold to vertical in flight? Coff. And what's with the "odd" foot? To emphasis the three club feet? They would easily get caught between rocks and debris, but anyone fancy golfing on Mars? Should get plenty of 'air'.
Next, there's the totally non-aerodynamic shape of the "body" - a flat-topped square box.
Let's not question the knee joints on the legs. A bird is far better designed. The legs (and their knees) should be completely underneath and as far out of the high-speed gas flow as possible. Pigs are vastly more streamlined, and certainly, fly better.
As for the horns on the lower rotor. WTF? Baby Baphomet?
If you should meet the Indian probe, do not shake its robotic hand.
You probably have heard of ThunderF00t. He has a youtube channel where he LOVES to take down Musk with Telsa and SpaceX. He uses science and basic logic to shine a light on what is not viable, or blatantly lies designed to lure investors.
That much I think we all agree on.
For the helicopter, he had a few videos which he provided before it made it to Mars. If I recall, he was iffy, but plausible on it.
https://www.youtube.com/@Thunderf00t/search?query=helicopter
Heat is interesting in space. Any space craft will gradually warm up to the point of being hostile for life unless it can be vented. This is done in two ways. Infrared or water expelled in a state change. Infrared radiation requires a lot of surface area, and water is heavy. The Apollo lunar spacesuits would have needed far more water than they could ostensibly carry to keep cool.
Along these lines, Apollo 13 the movie showed the astronauts as freezing on their way back from the moon. In fact, they would have had the opposite problem. The craft would not have been able to vent heat from its internal atmosphere.
The batteries on the helicopter can be protected by either Aerogel or by nitrogen... which act as a thermal blanket. Although Mars has an atmosphere, it would be possible to keep the batteries warm so long as they were being charged on a regular basis, which of course also generates heat.
If Aerogel could be used to wrap EV batteries, that would help nicely in the wintertime. But, in the summertime, they would need a cooling system. Its kind of a ... youre damned either way... sort of scenario.
Right. Im ready for the burning.
I doubt it could even fly on Earth... never mind the -60C zero atmosphere on Mars
It can't on Earth. See Thunderf00t's video on that. Metal will "weld" in the dark of space. Its why robotics tend to fail there. I don't know if that would occur at -60.
But if the batteries can stay even just a little warm with solar and nitrogen blanketing, and the light atmosphere overcome with a very high blade RPM... it intuitively seems to be in the realm of "possible". I think it needed to charge for three days just to fly for a couple minutes.
I also do not think Hubble exists... it's all fake
Hubble is in low earth orbit, with 70's era technology. Lenses, mirrors, gyroscopes, solar panels, and radio data communications. Its apparent we can get equipment to low earth orbit. Images hold together, and are complex enough that we would be able to easily detect issues with computer generated graphics from the 80s.... if thats what was done.
We know there are things like GPS and weapons platforms up there... so, why not other systems?
I never really understood why you felt that part was faked, when it is well within the limits of physics. I completely understand the issues with manned space travel, but processors, digital cameras, wheels and radio signals should have no issue operating for years... provided they are properly protected from radiation and cold.
it would have to be protected from debris as well. how do they handle that?