 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 21, 2016 - 2:50 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Metryq
(Member)
|
Balloons have already been considered for planetary exploration:
http://mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/missions/missiontypes/balloons/
Balloons are technologically simpler than UAVs, which is always a plus.
As Jehannum pointed out, atmosphere is needed. In the case of Mars, the surface pressure is so extremely rarified that airfoils would have to be immense.
UAVs probably use up a lot more power than ground rovers, too. Keep in mind that photovoltaic panels ("solar panels") lose effectiveness the farther one gets from the Sun. So that's a factor, too. RTGs (radioisotope thermoelectric generators) would be impossible to reconcile with lightweight UAVs.
I'm not sure what sort of navigation is used with ground rovers. Hobby UAVs ("drones") on Earth often rely on GPS for accurate navigation over a wide area. Such a facility would not be available on Mars, although I wouldn't be surprised if a system were installed for future exploration. One or two orbiting spacecraft are probably insufficient to track a fast-moving aircraft.
A UAV would be very limited in the science packages and sensors it could carry. Put simply, an orbiting spacecraft could get much better pictures, topography and other data over a wider area.
And so on. I'm sure there are many other considerations. While drones are a popular DARPA spin-off, they're not the best choice for frontier exploration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 21, 2016 - 8:04 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
spiderich
(Member)
|
Thanks for the reply.
< Balloons are technologically simpler than UAVs, which is always a plus. >
Interesting. What about miniature blimps/zeppelins? Or some sort of fusion of UAV & balloon?
< As Jehannum pointed out, atmosphere is needed. In the case of Mars, the surface pressure is so extremely rarified that airfoils would have to be immense. >
Darn, I hadn't considered that. I was just thinking of the lower gravity.
< UAVs probably use up a lot more power than ground rovers, too. Keep in mind that photovoltaic panels ("solar panels") lose effectiveness the farther one gets from the Sun. So that's a factor, too. >
What if the UAV had rechargeable batteries that could be recharged from the lander?
< I'm not sure what sort of navigation is used with ground rovers. Hobby UAVs ("drones") on Earth often rely on GPS for accurate navigation over a wide area. Such a facility would not be available on Mars, although I wouldn't be surprised if a system were installed for future exploration. >
Could navigation be done simply by line of sight? i.e. via the lander's own video camera(s)? What about scientists on earth using camera goggles to fly it? Or would the time delay make it too difficult? Or is that irrelevant? Could the lander cameras/sensors combined with the orbiter cameras/sensors assist with the navigation?
< A UAV would be very limited in the science packages and sensors it could carry. Put simply, an orbiting spacecraft could get much better pictures, topography and other data over a wider area. >
I'm thinking of small UAVs: shoebox size, or so. It (or a combination of UAVs) could access areas unavailable to a land rover (or satellite). They could primarily be used for video, or maybe they might be able to extract soil samples and return it to the lander for examination? Plus, the speed with which they could get "to & fro" could save a whole lot of time.
But I'm no scientist. ;-)
Richard G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
