Max,
You keep reading , you might want to download amsat's tracking software . The "bird" that I think will work for us is AO-51 , you might want to start tracking it . I live in MN so I'm thinking there will be a little delay.
Well, my reason for suggesting AMSAT was more for their experience with space launches and space-based communications.
You really don't need to hit a satellite for radio control. You could use a local repeater, or even packet/aprs to get the signal out.
As for the moon itself, there is an active segment of amateur radio doing Earth-Moon-Earth communications, where the rf signal is reflected back from the moon. These guys (in general) can probably give a lot of info that would be more directly relevant than AMSAT might.
As for using amateur radio, to operate a station, you need to be duly licensed. A Technician class license should suffice.
Kevin,
I check into every suggestion that is passed to me , I've been on amsat's list server since you suggested them ,I learned more in a couple days reading what they have going on than anybody could read out of a book in 5 years. I don't know what direction this is going for sure ,but man it's fun.
What's the target payload weight for the rocket?
I think weight is everything when it comes to space exploration.
Less weight means easier braking when it comes to crunch on the moon surface.
The team with the lightest payload will most likely win the prize.
All electronics components need to be smd types and pcbs as small as possible.
Since the Propeller and SX is not rad-hardened, we need to design in lead shielding.
The smaller PCBs will allow a smaller and lighter shielding lead box.
If you guys are really serious, all pcb modules must be designed specifically for the lunar project to save weight and size.
Using a standard module like PING))) will not make the cut, this is not going to be a toy robot.
Ingenious use of the watchdog or a cog as a watchdog will make or break the project.
I do have a lot of experiences with presumably fail-proof watchdogs due to our incessant tests of the SX in a noisy-sparking environment.
William,
For my part , I think I can get rover operational here on earth at under 100 lbs . How much weight is going to be added by making it "space operational" is a big question. I was reading up on the Van Allen radiation belt the other night and could not find a good answer on making the propeller and sx , radiation hard . The article said that it would be to expensive to sheild electronics that where not already rad hard, what that meant I'm not sure.
·You got the job, I like the way you play devils advocate.It' keeps me on my toes.
What that means is that the lead shielding would be too heavy to even hope to succeed if you try to use standard electronics boards in the market.
That's why I say, every PCB needs to be custom made and every component need to be smd to keep the shielding small.
Now if we use rad-hardened TTL devices, the boards would be too big and everything would be too heavy.
If we use the SX and a Propeller, we have a few advantages
1. They are small considering what they can do.
2. The payload will be as light as we know possible due to a small lead shield.
3. We can tap on the knowledge and experience of all the geniuses in this forum ( this is important )
We can shut down all electronics (except a simple auto restart timer) when going through the Van Allen Belt.
We may also need to restart all electronics every 30 minutes to be on the safe side.
Werner Von Braun once calculated that to add in lead shielding to shield the astronauts from the Van Allen Belt for the Apollo project, the rocket has to be taller than the Empire State Building.
We only have one chance, and everything has to work perfectly the 1st time.
·Not to change the subject, but I would like to get a letter of intent filed with the Xprize people next week . Once that's filed we have 90 days to come up with our $10,000 fee .That will be our first big test· , also we need a team name and a name for "rover" . I've included a copy of the letter of intent.
Brian Beckius said...
For my part , I think I can get rover operational here on earth at under 100 lbs . How much weight is going to be added by making it "space operational" is a big question. I was reading up on the Van Allen radiation belt the other night and could not find a good answer on making the propeller and sx , radiation hard . The article said that it would be to expensive to sheild electronics that where not already rad hard, what that meant I'm not sure.
Brian,
I think 100 pounds is already an order of magnitude larger than you want.· Based on the estimate that the total weight of the rocket will be 10 times the payload weight, this would make the total weight 1000 pounds.· This would require $30 million to launch it into low earth orbit with a Pegasus.· I think the payload should be 10 pounds or less.
You should also consider splitting the payload into two parts -- one part is the rover and the other part is a base station.· The base station could handle the communications with earth, while the rover would have a low power radio connection to the base station.· The base station could be a charging station as well, with relatively large solar panels.· The rover could be extremely small like the size of a small RC car.· It might only weight a couple of pounds.· The only electronics it needs would be a low power radio transceiver and a camera.
Dave,
I'm working on down sizing my rover . I don't know if it's the version we want to go with ,but at least it will give us a test bed for now . Also I'm thinking we should have a moter on each wheel in case a moter fails . I'm not to keen on steering with the drive wheels , if one fails it will just go around in a circle.
· I think the size of the transmittor/reciever for the rover needs to be determined befor the project can be sized. Also, while I agree to some extent about the base station/rover idea, the base station should be as close to a packing crate as possible. Otherwise, the rover should be autonomous, unless that poses difficulties in tracking the antenna.·A problem with shielding is if you shield enough to protect against the Van Allen Belt, you moderate cosmic rays and make them more damaging. So radiation hardened electronics would seem the way to go. I know Fairchild (are they still in business?) used to make an all·bipolar microprocessor, my guess was the main motivation for that was radiation hardness.
· I suppose another factor in the total weight of the project is the on-board camera. If you get really nice pictures, you could probably make more money putting out the Lunar Coffee Table Book than be winning the X-prize.
pharseid said...
A problem with shielding is if you shield enough to protect against the Van Allen Belt, you moderate cosmic rays and make them more damaging.
Phar,
Can you provide citation for this statement?
Brian,
Ask Parallax if they want to sponsor the initial $10,000 so we can name the team the "Propeller Team" or something.....
Can the rubber tires take the heat on the lunar surface?
I agree with having a separate Base Station lander. It is a good idea.
Dave Hein said...
I think the payload should be 10 pounds or less.
Dave,
Are you saying the rover, the lander, low pressure rocket engine, fuel, solar panel, antenna and electronics all summed up
has to weigh less than 10 pounds?
I think the braking fuel may already weigh more than 10 pounds.
· It's going to take some digging to find the original source on the moderation of cosmic rays by sheilding, since I'm pretty sure I read it in Gerard O'neil's High Frontier books in the 70's. The point in that book was if you shield against solar flares, you would moderate cosmic rays that are constantly present and it would constitute a threat to the crew, so his permanently manned space stations would require additional shielding, which in his design was provided by a 6 foot layer of lunar rock. (For those unfamiliar with his work, he advocated building power sattelites out of lunar materials.) I have since heard the principal mentioned as one of the difficulties in a manned mission to Mars. But I don't really know the effect on electronics.
pharseid said...
A problem with shielding is if you shield enough to protect against the Van Allen Belt, you moderate cosmic rays and make them more damaging.
Phar,
Can you provide citation for this statement?
Brian,
Ask Parallax if they want to sponsor the initial $10,000 so we can name the team the "Propeller Team" or something.....
Can the rubber tires take the heat on the lunar surface?
I agree with having a separate Base Station lander. It is a good idea.
William , ·I'm going to wait to cross the parallax bridge untill we know if we can take a propeller ( We'll all have to wear propeller hats at the liftoff).
No,the rubber tires will have to go. I'm thinking we will end up with a hub tire combo made out of some light weight metal. (I'm going to do some digging and see what carbon fiber can take).
The base station sounds good , but how far away from it can we get ?
·· Just did a web search and my first interesting hit was a 8051-compatible radiation-hardened chip. They go for around $80/ea. in quantities of 100, but have no idea what the cost would be for quantity 1. I also got hits on a radiation-hardened SPARC chip, which would be nice if you find you need a lot of horsepower, and the Real Time Express, which I think is a descendent of Charles Moore's chip for direct execution of Forth, which was interesting to me, having done a little Forth programming. Also a whole bunch of radiation-hardened·support chips. So it's all out there, although again, getting this stuff in low quantities could be a problem. Everything seems to be rated for 300 krads, which I'm guessing is the military standard for radiation tolerance.
·· Carbon fiber itself can withstand very high temperatures and there are polymers that can withstand fairly high temperatures, but I would look at resistance of these polymers to UV radiation. I think there are epoxies with can withstand 450 degrees and more exotic polymers (polyamines or something like that) which can withstand 600 degrees. But I would just use metal wheels. For fiber-composite components which weren't subject to abrasion, we could coat with a thin layer of plating (we·coat non-conductors at the place I·work occasionally), so you might think about that for weight savings. I also wonder about the degradation of polymers from radiation.
I sold my pride and joy today to make sure that we could cover the entry fee if we had to. She was a 427 c.i.d. small block rodak (Chevy) all aluminum ,alcohol injected ,800 hp motor ,I hope you guys are happy. I have to believe a rocket motor sounds way better.
I've read of that being used. I'm wondering what the error rate would be on non-hardened electronics beyond the Van Allen Belt. The amount of shielding required for passing through the belt seems pretty minor, 1/8 inch of aluminum is the amount I've been reading, but would do little to shield from cosmic rays or solar flares. You could shut down the electronics for solar flares. So I think the important question would be what is the error rate caused by cosmic rays on non-hardened electronics? I notice one of the hardened micros was made to function with a magnetic RAM chip which would be resistant to bit errors that might become permanently embedded in FRAM or EEPROM. Maybe the best path is to initially write all software with the thought that it may have to run on a radiation-hardened micro (so C or 8051 assembly as far as I can see), and defer the choice of a micro at the moment. (Another thought was to buy 100 radiation-hardened micros and sell them to other entrants in the contest.)
Wow Brian, You truly believe in this project I see.
I think it's entirely possible, but we need some people who are very knowledgeable in specific fields. I guess it would be nice to see who we've got so far, and who we still need. I'm just a college student here, so I really don't have any credentials to speak of.
Whelzorn,
I quit school in 10th grade; I have the least credentials of anybody on this team. But I look at the moon everyday (well if it’s there)and say, I’m going there; don’t jeopardize your studies to help. But we need all the people we can get.
I disagree that 1/8 inch of aluminum is sufficient for the Van Allen belt. Don't underestimate it.
In 1988, the space shuttle flew to about 600 miles, well below the starting point of the belt at 1000 miles.
CNN reported that at 600 miles, the astronauts could see shooting stars with their eyes closed.
That means, the high energy particles penetrated the shuttle walls, penetrated their space suits, and penetrated their skulls before stimulating their retinas.
Anybody still thinks that humans has walked on the moon? I apologize to all patriotic Americans who wished it was true.
If we try to base our project on Apollo program's simple, so easy, 1st time success without simulation, we will meet with utter failure.
I think lead shielding is indispensable.
Brian,
For the v2 rover design, can we design in the shield and the cavity for the pcbs?
Also design in the antenna placement.
Thanks.
William Chan said...
I disagree that 1/8 inch of aluminum is sufficient for the Van Allen belt. Don't underestimate it.
In 1988, the space shuttle flew to about 600 miles, well below the starting point of the belt at 1000 miles.
CNN reported that at 600 miles, the astronauts could see shooting stars with their eyes closed.
That means, the high energy particles penetrated the shuttle walls, penetrated their space suits, and penetrated their skulls before stimulating their retinas.
Anybody still thinks that humans has walked on the moon? I apologize to all patriotic Americans who wished it was true.
If we try to base our project on Apollo program's simple, so easy, 1st time success without simulation, we will meet with utter failure.
I think lead shielding is indispensable.
Brian,
For the v2 rover design, can we design in the shield and the cavity for the pcbs?
Also design in the antenna placement.
Thanks.
William,
I have to disagree.....with your assessment of the early space program.· I don't disagree with the fact that there were many problems and very dangerous things happening·during the trip there and back.· That doesn't even include the landing on the moon. (I will not ever say we actually landed on the moon, but I do believe we have orbited it in close proximity.)
The fact of the matter......Russia was in a race with us to get to the moon. I'm sure they were smart enough to monitor the skies, space, and any other resource it took to see if we were going to do it first. I think if you dig deep enough in the records from Russia (although not easy to find) you will see there were more eyes looking at this than Americans.
Anyone can speculate as to the validity of a happening......like the finding and viewing of the Titanic. Go do the research on what is required to do such an event.....and the odds are actually overwhelming (quite astonishing actually).
Lets remember stranger things have happen, no matter the actual odds. We even have micro satellites orbing the earth.....how strange is that?
Let's not debate the accuracy of what the previous space program did, or did not do. Let's work on the event at hand.
NASA, not so many years ago put a few rovers on Mars. Surely we can put something simple on the moon. (I would never classify what we are doing with the Mars Rovers, they cost millions of dollars.)
I'm not a pessimist, nor an optimist, I'm a realist. It has been done (at least on Mars) I think we can do it on the moon.
I hope you are not challenging the Mar's Rovers landings as well. If you are, then I think you really need to reassess your thinking. I know people who actually worked on the program.
The Van Allen belt will be a challenge, but there are many more things that will be just as important.
James L
Post Edited (James Long) : 11/22/2007 6:25:33 AM GMT
I've told Brian....so I'll tell everyone else....I'm starting a PCB assembly service targeted at SMT.
There are problems associated with boards built for orbital and space flight. I'll have to do some research, but I could possibly assemble the boards for the project.
The boards (bare PCB's) are going to be expensive. They will have to be made by a PCB house that understands they are intended to go into outer space. No cheap run of the mill boards for this project. The care given to the boards will have to be first rate. They will have to be very clean and as perfectly made as possible.
The assembly (from what I know at this point) is pretty straight forward. The boards must never be touched by human hands. The residual oil's from our skin will disintegrate a PCB in space in a matter of days (something to do with no atmospheric pressure and no oxygen).
The assembly will be a major pain....but would be worth while for the project. Who better to assemble the boards than someone who is interested in the project.
I'll do some research on the assembly differences.
Comments
You keep reading , you might want to download amsat's tracking software . The "bird" that I think will work for us is AO-51 , you might want to start tracking it . I live in MN so I'm thinking there will be a little delay.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Whit+
"We keep moving forward, opening new doors, and doing new things, because we're curious and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths." - Walt Disney
You really don't need to hit a satellite for radio control. You could use a local repeater, or even packet/aprs to get the signal out.
As for the moon itself, there is an active segment of amateur radio doing Earth-Moon-Earth communications, where the rf signal is reflected back from the moon. These guys (in general) can probably give a lot of info that would be more directly relevant than AMSAT might.
As for using amateur radio, to operate a station, you need to be duly licensed. A Technician class license should suffice.
I check into every suggestion that is passed to me , I've been on amsat's list server since you suggested them ,I learned more in a couple days reading what they have going on than anybody could read out of a book in 5 years. I don't know what direction this is going for sure ,but man it's fun.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
I think weight is everything when it comes to space exploration.
Less weight means easier braking when it comes to crunch on the moon surface.
The team with the lightest payload will most likely win the prize.
All electronics components need to be smd types and pcbs as small as possible.
Since the Propeller and SX is not rad-hardened, we need to design in lead shielding.
The smaller PCBs will allow a smaller and lighter shielding lead box.
If you guys are really serious, all pcb modules must be designed specifically for the lunar project to save weight and size.
Using a standard module like PING))) will not make the cut, this is not going to be a toy robot.
Ingenious use of the watchdog or a cog as a watchdog will make or break the project.
I do have a lot of experiences with presumably fail-proof watchdogs due to our incessant tests of the SX in a noisy-sparking environment.
Brian,
Maybe I can act as a Physics Advisor to the team.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
www.fd.com.my
www.mercedes.com.my
Post Edited (william chan) : 11/21/2007 12:46:27 PM GMT
For my part , I think I can get rover operational here on earth at under 100 lbs . How much weight is going to be added by making it "space operational" is a big question. I was reading up on the Van Allen radiation belt the other night and could not find a good answer on making the propeller and sx , radiation hard . The article said that it would be to expensive to sheild electronics that where not already rad hard, what that meant I'm not sure.
·You got the job, I like the way you play devils advocate.It' keeps me on my toes.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
Post Edited (Brian Beckius) : 11/21/2007 12:59:37 PM GMT
That's why I say, every PCB needs to be custom made and every component need to be smd to keep the shielding small.
Now if we use rad-hardened TTL devices, the boards would be too big and everything would be too heavy.
If we use the SX and a Propeller, we have a few advantages
1. They are small considering what they can do.
2. The payload will be as light as we know possible due to a small lead shield.
3. We can tap on the knowledge and experience of all the geniuses in this forum ( this is important )
We can shut down all electronics (except a simple auto restart timer) when going through the Van Allen Belt.
We may also need to restart all electronics every 30 minutes to be on the safe side.
Werner Von Braun once calculated that to add in lead shielding to shield the astronauts from the Van Allen Belt for the Apollo project, the rocket has to be taller than the Empire State Building.
We only have one chance, and everything has to work perfectly the 1st time.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
www.fd.com.my
www.mercedes.com.my
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
I think 100 pounds is already an order of magnitude larger than you want.· Based on the estimate that the total weight of the rocket will be 10 times the payload weight, this would make the total weight 1000 pounds.· This would require $30 million to launch it into low earth orbit with a Pegasus.· I think the payload should be 10 pounds or less.
You should also consider splitting the payload into two parts -- one part is the rover and the other part is a base station.· The base station could handle the communications with earth, while the rover would have a low power radio connection to the base station.· The base station could be a charging station as well, with relatively large solar panels.· The rover could be extremely small like the size of a small RC car.· It might only weight a couple of pounds.· The only electronics it needs would be a low power radio transceiver and a camera.
Dave
I'm working on down sizing my rover . I don't know if it's the version we want to go with ,but at least it will give us a test bed for now . Also I'm thinking we should have a moter on each wheel in case a moter fails . I'm not to keen on steering with the drive wheels , if one fails it will just go around in a circle.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
· I suppose another factor in the total weight of the project is the on-board camera. If you get really nice pictures, you could probably make more money putting out the Lunar Coffee Table Book than be winning the X-prize.
-phar
Phar,
Can you provide citation for this statement?
Brian,
Ask Parallax if they want to sponsor the initial $10,000 so we can name the team the "Propeller Team" or something.....
Can the rubber tires take the heat on the lunar surface?
I agree with having a separate Base Station lander. It is a good idea.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
www.fd.com.my
www.mercedes.com.my
Dave,
Are you saying the rover, the lander, low pressure rocket engine, fuel, solar panel, antenna and electronics all summed up
has to weigh less than 10 pounds?
I think the braking fuel may already weigh more than 10 pounds.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
www.fd.com.my
www.mercedes.com.my
-phar
·I'm going to wait to cross the parallax bridge untill we know if we can take a propeller ( We'll all have to wear propeller hats at the liftoff).
No,the rubber tires will have to go. I'm thinking we will end up with a hub tire combo made out of some light weight metal. (I'm going to do some digging and see what carbon fiber can take).
The base station sounds good , but how far away from it can we get ?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
-phar
-phar
··
Will shuting down the electronics to go threw the rad belt work (like william suggest).
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
Post Edited (Brian Beckius) : 11/22/2007 4:40:48 AM GMT
-phar
I think it's entirely possible, but we need some people who are very knowledgeable in specific fields. I guess it would be nice to see who we've got so far, and who we still need. I'm just a college student here, so I really don't have any credentials to speak of.
I quit school in 10th grade; I have the least credentials of anybody on this team. But I look at the moon everyday (well if it’s there)and say, I’m going there; don’t jeopardize your studies to help. But we need all the people we can get.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
In 1988, the space shuttle flew to about 600 miles, well below the starting point of the belt at 1000 miles.
CNN reported that at 600 miles, the astronauts could see shooting stars with their eyes closed.
That means, the high energy particles penetrated the shuttle walls, penetrated their space suits, and penetrated their skulls before stimulating their retinas.
Anybody still thinks that humans has walked on the moon? I apologize to all patriotic Americans who wished it was true.
If we try to base our project on Apollo program's simple, so easy, 1st time success without simulation, we will meet with utter failure.
I think lead shielding is indispensable.
Brian,
For the v2 rover design, can we design in the shield and the cavity for the pcbs?
Also design in the antenna placement.
Thanks.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
www.fd.com.my
www.mercedes.com.my
Post Edited (william chan) : 11/22/2007 5:45:42 AM GMT
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
William,
I have to disagree.....with your assessment of the early space program.· I don't disagree with the fact that there were many problems and very dangerous things happening·during the trip there and back.· That doesn't even include the landing on the moon. (I will not ever say we actually landed on the moon, but I do believe we have orbited it in close proximity.)
The fact of the matter......Russia was in a race with us to get to the moon. I'm sure they were smart enough to monitor the skies, space, and any other resource it took to see if we were going to do it first. I think if you dig deep enough in the records from Russia (although not easy to find) you will see there were more eyes looking at this than Americans.
Anyone can speculate as to the validity of a happening......like the finding and viewing of the Titanic. Go do the research on what is required to do such an event.....and the odds are actually overwhelming (quite astonishing actually).
Lets remember stranger things have happen, no matter the actual odds. We even have micro satellites orbing the earth.....how strange is that?
Let's not debate the accuracy of what the previous space program did, or did not do. Let's work on the event at hand.
NASA, not so many years ago put a few rovers on Mars. Surely we can put something simple on the moon. (I would never classify what we are doing with the Mars Rovers, they cost millions of dollars.)
I'm not a pessimist, nor an optimist, I'm a realist. It has been done (at least on Mars) I think we can do it on the moon.
I hope you are not challenging the Mar's Rovers landings as well. If you are, then I think you really need to reassess your thinking. I know people who actually worked on the program.
The Van Allen belt will be a challenge, but there are many more things that will be just as important.
James L
Post Edited (James Long) : 11/22/2007 6:25:33 AM GMT
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
Post Edited (Brian Beckius) : 11/22/2007 6:43:59 AM GMT
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
I've told Brian....so I'll tell everyone else....I'm starting a PCB assembly service targeted at SMT.
There are problems associated with boards built for orbital and space flight. I'll have to do some research, but I could possibly assemble the boards for the project.
The boards (bare PCB's) are going to be expensive. They will have to be made by a PCB house that understands they are intended to go into outer space. No cheap run of the mill boards for this project. The care given to the boards will have to be first rate. They will have to be very clean and as perfectly made as possible.
The assembly (from what I know at this point) is pretty straight forward. The boards must never be touched by human hands. The residual oil's from our skin will disintegrate a PCB in space in a matter of days (something to do with no atmospheric pressure and no oxygen).
The assembly will be a major pain....but would be worth while for the project. Who better to assemble the boards than someone who is interested in the project.
I'll do some research on the assembly differences.
James L
any suggestions would be fine about now.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Thank's Brian
www.truckwiz.com
·"Imagination is more important than knowledge..." ·· Albert Einstein
http://www.diycalculator.com/subroutines.shtml· My favorite website ( Bet you can't guess why)
Being a ham I might be able to help with some of the radio stuff.
-Mike
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Visit my website @ www.kd7lax.com- Devoted to ham radio