Not a science experiment, it's a NASA technology demo, a lidar specifically designed for lunar landing navigation, flying on IM-1 as backup. Another unit of this lidar is the primary landing sensor on Astrobotic Peregrine lander, unfortunately it didn't get used in that case.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
SpaceX F9 - IM-1 Nova-C Lander - LC-39A - Includes Post Launch Discussion
- Thread starter Grendal
- Start date
Reading Eric Berger’s reporting it’s amazing that the lander made a soft touchdown and was able to send a signal home. But as of this moment there is no announcement on the IM-1 update page confirming the landing or providing any information about the status of the vehicle since landing. Which leads me to believe that there are serious issues with the vehicle.
According to this Ars article, they had to patch in sensors from one of the payloads to use for the craft to land, as some of its failed.
Prety cool and gutsy save!
From the Ars article:
IM did not reveal any of that information yesterday on their website and they still haven’t.
"Lunar Surface Day One Update (23FEB2024 0818 CST)Odysseus is alive and well. Flight controllers are communicating and commanding the vehicle to download science data. The lander has good telemetry and solar charging.We continue to learn more about the vehicle’s specific information (Lat/Lon), overall health, and attitude (orientation). Intuitive Machines CEO Steve Altemus will participate in a press conference later today to discuss this historic moment. Press conference information will be coordinated with NASA and published shortly."
www.nasa.gov
"NASA and Intuitive Machines will host a televised news conference at 5 p.m. EST Friday, Feb. 23, to detail the Odysseus lander’s historic soft Moon landing."
NASA, Intuitive Machines to Discuss Historic Moon Mission Today - NASA
NASA and Intuitive Machines will host a televised news conference at 5 p.m. EST Friday, Feb. 23, to detail the Odysseus lander’s historic soft Moon landing.
www.nasa.gov
Not the first lander.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land at the South Pole.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land at the South Pole on its side.
But they were the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land at the South Pole on its side using a methalox engine.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land at the South Pole.
Not the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land at the South Pole on its side.
But they were the first lander to reach the Moon and soft land at the South Pole on its side using a methalox engine.
Last edited:
After 15 minutes of that event I lost patience and felt I was unlikely to learn anything else of significance during the remaining 54 minutes! I’ll wait for the Ars Technica analysis.
This is a sad case of NASA trying to make a victory out of an embarrassing failure. While I acknowledge that the methalox engine performed well and that’s an accomplishment, it’s still a screwup to have the lander make a slow speed crash on touchdown and end up flat on its back, so to speak.
@JB47394 if you watched the entire event, did they say anything about the 2mph horizontal velocity at touchdown (stated in the first few minutes by the IM guy) being more than they planned or was that nominal? To my non-expert brain that seems excessive.
The Chinese have figured out how to land on the Moon; they are 3 for 3. That is impressive. Apollo was 6 out of 6 attempts (Apollo 13 did not make an attempt as it never entered lunar orbit).
This is a sad case of NASA trying to make a victory out of an embarrassing failure. While I acknowledge that the methalox engine performed well and that’s an accomplishment, it’s still a screwup to have the lander make a slow speed crash on touchdown and end up flat on its back, so to speak.
@JB47394 if you watched the entire event, did they say anything about the 2mph horizontal velocity at touchdown (stated in the first few minutes by the IM guy) being more than they planned or was that nominal? To my non-expert brain that seems excessive.
The Chinese have figured out how to land on the Moon; they are 3 for 3. That is impressive. Apollo was 6 out of 6 attempts (Apollo 13 did not make an attempt as it never entered lunar orbit).
Last edited:
Nominal was 2 mph vertical and 0 mph horizontal. They came in at 6 mph vertical and 2 mph horizontal.
I just noticed that the CTO, Tim Crain, worked at NASA on the Morpheus lander, the precursor of the Odysseus lander.
Everything points to it being on its side.
The IM guys said that they're just as anxious to see those images as we are. I didn't hear anything about why there's a delay.
Edit: Here's the CEO's description of what they're waiting to do so they can get images. They have to eject a camera out of the lander. They don't seem to yet have "command ability" to prepare the camera for its task.
Last edited:
Mike1080i
Member
I believe they did hint at the answer. The lander is setup to switch antennas and/or radios in the event of a lost or poor comm link to try to establish a good link. With it on it's side, it's doing that continually now. So they likely only have brief windows to talk to it before it switches. Once they can command it to stay on a better antenna they should be able to get more data and images down.
It's mentioned at about the 55:30 point in:
Last edited:
Wow. Way off nominal. But the IM guy who opened the event made a point of emphasizing how that was “walking speed” and what an accomplishment that was.
I continue to be appalled at the PR stuff that has spewed out of IM and NASA during this mission.
Feels like there’s an opportunity to incorporate weeble technology into the next lander.
Ooof... that sounds like it might be a mechanical safety switch to avoid blowing out somebody's retina during assembly.... kinda doubtful it would be under software control, although possible.
I wonder if this was on the lander, or, as the article I posted earlier described, on one of the payloads they had to hastily hack a patch for to allow them to be used because the craft's were non-functional... or was this switch WHY they weren't working?
If my interpretation of that statement, read literally, is correct, that is a huge error. Almost unbelievable. How could that not have been on the checklist of items to do before enclosing the vehicle in the fairing?
Speculation on/ perhaps the NASA demo lidar that IM hastily activated to provide landing information, technology that was on the Peregrine lander that failed and therefore was not tested in flight before, did not provide sufficient accuracy and therefore the IM-1 engine was not commanded to give sufficient thrust to null out the horizontal velocity and adequately reduce the vertical velocity at touchdown.
Reuters: Moon lander Odysseus tipped sideways on lunar surface but 'alive and well'
Yes I am exaggerating just a bit…
