|
Author
|
Topic: [Discuss] Astrobotic Peregrine Mission One
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 12-08-2022 01:30 PM
   
Please use this topic to discuss Astrobotic's Peregrine Mission One to the moon. |
Headshot
Member Posts: 1273
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-08-2022 01:34 PM
Is the target landing area for the Peregrine lunar lander still Lacus Mortis, or has it been changed? |
Headshot
Member Posts: 1273
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-09-2022 10:46 AM
As of Dec. 6th, apparently the Gruithuisen Domes region is also under consideration. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 02-03-2023 09:13 AM
On Thursday (Feb. 2), NASA confirmed the new target landing site as a mare outside of the Gruithuisen Domes on the northeast border of Oceanus Procellarum, or Ocean of Storms. |
SkyMan1958
Member Posts: 1343
From: CA.
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 02-03-2023 05:35 PM
It seems to me that NASA has a pretty plastic interpretation of the Ocean of Storms. Apollo 12 landed on the Ocean of Storms roughly SSW of Copernicus in an area more or less adjoining Mare Cognitum. Looking at a map it appears the Gruithuisen Domes are more or less at the Western border of Mare Imbrium.I'm just guessing here, but maybe the Ocean of Storms was created by a large precursor asteroid/comet that hit the Moon, and then the subsidiary Mares, such as Imbrium, were created by later impacting asteroids/comets that created their own compression outer ridges that divided the Ocean of Storms into assorted Mares. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-28-2023 03:49 PM
From Astrobotic (via X): Yesterday (Oct. 26), we took the very last photograph of Peregrine in our clean room before it was prepped for an early morning shipment to Florida!Our team is proud to see our Peregrine leave the nest - now we're ready to see it journey to the Moon! Stay tuned to see how to watch the first step of that journey: launch aboard United Launch Alliance's Vulcan rocket on Dec. 24, 2023.  
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 11-16-2023 11:47 AM
NASA photo release (credit: NASA/Isaac Watson) Astrobotic Lunar Lander NASA Meatball InstallTeams with Astrobotic install the NASA meatball decal on Astrobotic's Peregrine lunar lander on Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2023, at the Astrotech Space Operations Facility near the agency's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Peregrine will launch onboard a United Launch Alliance Vulcan rocket targeted for no earlier than Dec. 24, 2023, from Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. The lander will carry a suite of NASA payloads to the Moon as part of the agency's CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) initiative and Artemis program.  
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-08-2024 08:47 AM
After what was reported a successful start to Peregrine's launch to the moon, a problem has occurred: Unfortunately, an anomaly then occurred, which prevented Astrobotic from achieving a stable sun-pointing orientation. The team is responding in real time as the situation unfolds and will be providing updates as more data is obtained and analyzed. |
issman1
Member Posts: 1117
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-08-2024 01:55 PM
I was thoroughly impressed by the successful maiden launch of ULA Vulcan.But not so much by having such a valuable Moon-bound payload on board. One can only speculate whether unknown stress factors with Vulcan's untried first stage combination, of liquid fuelled methane engines and solid fuelled side boosters, may have caused any fatal damage to Peregrine. A high risk but low cost ride indeed for Astrobotic. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-08-2024 02:50 PM
That is why they test payloads before they are integrated with the rocket to ensure they can withstand stresses far beyond what the launch vehicle can produce (not to mention electromagnetic and audible levels).By all accounts thus far, Vulcan-Centaur flew a near flawless ascent. (Also, it goes to mention that NASA was prepared to accept a failure, even multiple failures by its CLPS partners because even a string of lost vehicles would cost the agency less than if it had to develop and fly the landers themselves. In that sense, this was not a NASA flagship mission.) |
Headshot
Member Posts: 1273
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 01-08-2024 03:21 PM
So what happens next? Does Astrobotic refly this mission at their own expense or is NASA (and U.S. taxpayers) out whatever they paid Astrobotic? Meanwhile, the lunar research is not getting done. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-08-2024 03:50 PM
NASA issued this brief statement by Joel Kearns, deputy associate administrator for exploration at NASA’s Science Mission Directorate: Each success and setback are opportunities to learn and grow. We will use this lesson to propel our efforts to advance science, exploration, and commercial development of the Moon. In earlier press briefings, NASA representatives said that none of the science being flown on these first CLPS mission is "new" or critical to Artemis going forward. Rather, they are payloads of opportunity and whether they are reflown will depend on reviews still be conducted. |
GACspaceguy
Member Posts: 3016
From: Guyton, GA
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 01-08-2024 06:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
...stresses far beyond what the launch vehicle can produce.
I would think it would have a significant load factor in aviation it is called factor of safety (typically 4X). I would wait and see what they come up with before any "theories" are discussed. Always disappointing when the full mission may not be realized but the main focus was the launch vehicle and, as Robert stated, a great flight! |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-09-2024 01:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
...whether they are reflown will depend on reviews still be conducted.
Per a NASA release: Copies of four of the NASA payloads aboard Peregrine [Mission One] are expected to fly on future flights including the Laser Retroreflector Array, Near-Infrared Volatile Spectrometer System, Neutron Spectrometer System, and Linear Energy Transfer Spectrometer. The Peregrine Ion-Trap Mass Spectrometer is not currently on a future CLPS flight. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 51656
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-09-2024 07:46 PM
quote:
Originally posted by issman1:
...may have caused any fatal damage to Peregrine.
From Astrobotic's latest update: ULA's Vulcan rocket inserted Peregrine into the planned translunar trajectory without issue. There is no indication that the propulsion anomaly occurred as a result of the launch. The company's current theory about the propulsion anomaly is that a valve between the helium pressurant and the oxidizer failed to reseal after actuation during initialization. |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3660
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 01-10-2024 06:04 AM
I think it was unfortunate (but hardly surprising) that the media (at least on this side of the pond) are treating this as a "failed Moon-mission" rather than a successful maiden-flight for Vulcan-Centaur. In the fairly extensive news coverage I heard hardly a word about the new launch vehicle. It was almost all about the "first U.S. mission to the Moon's surface since Apollo 17." |
Headshot
Member Posts: 1273
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 01-10-2024 11:03 AM
I guess that is because the general public believes that there are dozens upon dozens of launch vehicles and a new one is not exciting. That is unless it is huge, like SpaceX Super Heavy, or odd looking, like NASA's SLS. Otherwise, to the casual observer, they can't tell them apart.Moon LANDING missions are different, there have not been that many in recent times. Those that are recent, have been made by countries that have not released many images, and precious little video. I believe that people would turn into a webcam featuring live video from the lunar surface, even though nothing is happening. Predicting public interest is a crap game. |
Jim Behling
Member Posts: 1859
From: Cape Canaveral, FL
Registered: Mar 2010
|
posted 01-10-2024 12:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by GACspaceguy:
...factor of safety (typically 4X).
1.25 or 1.4 for spaceflight. quote:
Originally posted by Headshot:
So what happens next?
They don't get their future milestone payment for the mission. Just like SpaceX did not get all the milestone payments for CRS-7. Reflight is not part of the contract.The taxpayer would be out of more money if it was a standard contracted mission. |
advertisement