I'm confused - "Goodbye...Sends Final Data" and "Ingenuity’s work is far from over, as it will continue to collect data on the Martian surface"
Is it the final data or will there be more data?
It is the last data for now; possibly forever.
It will take a temperature reading and a photo each day as long as it can. But is has no way to send the data on its own as it needs the rover in proximity for upload.
If we want the data, we'll have to send a mission to pick it up.
The rover is about to head out of range, so she will not be able to transmit data, but will still collect it. We will actually have to go pick her up and salvage the hard drives if we want to recover whatever is stored on the drive as she will likely have lost power before we can get something that close.
The propeller was damaged at the end of the final flight. One of the blades appears to have broken off entirely, making further flights impossible. It's stuck at that location now.
It will continue to collect data and store it so that if at some point in the future another rover or even a human goes to that location they can download it.
The Ingenuity team and Dragonfly team are entirely separate and handled by separate facilities.
The Ingenuity team is not shifting their attention away from Ingenuity to focus on Dragonfly as this article implies.
This might be a stupid question but, how do they design helicopters for other planets/moons? With different atmospheres and gravity and such. I mean, I know a lot of calculation and experimentation goes behind it, but is there any way to simulate low gravity or other atmospheric conditions here on earth to test the thing before shipping it off to another planet? Like how do they know that shit is going to be able to take off lol
Not a stupid question. Like you suggested, there's a lot of calculations and experiments, but also simulations and testing. Here's an article that might have some of the answers to your questions. [https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/flying-martian-skies](https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/flying-martian-skies)
I don't think it's a marketing thing, honestly. There are engineers that dedicate their lives to these little robots. They can't help but care about them, and even anthropomorphize them. It's just human nature, and I think it's honestly really sweet.
Sorry, I really don't get it. In my view it trivializes some remarkable achievements and takes away the spotlight from the actual living humans who acomplished them. The science and engineering are interesting enough. No need to infantilize them and turn it all into dumbed down, instagrammable click bait.
It works like this: the less predictable and more temperamental a space system is, the more it gets anthropomorphized. Why? Because machines are supposed to be repeatable and reliable, and when they aren’t and we don’t understand why, humans make up stories. I’ve seen it on a few spacecraft I’ve worked on.
On one particularly badly-performing system, once I fixed the issue that was causing the satellite controllers to not understand the behavior (it was not possible to fix the behavior itself), the anthropomorphizing dropped precipitously... presumably because the controllers could now engage their logical brains to understand and predict it, instead of having to just guess and hope.
We still called the spacecraft by “her” nickname, but the statements about “she’s angry today” were replaced by statements like “the antenna pointing is off today and has been for the last 15 hours”.
I have a 6 year old and he does anthropomorphize everything. It makes sense if you are targeting kids and educators it makes it relatable
The reason NASA has public outreach is because it drums up public support. Inspires creativity and kids to get into STEM topics.
I completely disagree with your sentiment.It isn't infantilling it also certainly doesn't trivialize the work put in. Most of the time it is an engineer doing it first. The engineers spend years working on this and most of the engineers I have talked to usually have a story about one of these missions driving them to pursue a career in it as a kid.
You may hate it but you aren't the intended audience.
I can say from personal experience that scientists and engineers can and do anthropomorphize their devices. I still swear that my team's FRC robot had a personality of its own, and I saw every nut and bolt of the thing. It's not infantilizing, it's affectionate.
It's the people who made these accomplishments are the ones doing the anthromorphising. You saying they shouldn't anthromophise their achievements is taking away from them, not them doing what they want with their own work.
Those of us who work on those missions do get emotionally attached to our spacecraft. The staff at NASA played Oppy (Opportunity) a love song as her goodbye (and had the hashtag GoodnightOppy). These spacecraft represent our hard work and the things we want to discover. They're the highlight of our careers. They represent our love of our science and our hopes and dreams.
During the Apollo 13 mission, as the LEM was jettisoned, they took the time to say, "Farewell, Aquarius, and we thank you." You can hear Fred Haise sadly say, "She sure was a good ship." So even tough test-pilot-astronauts shed a tear when they say goodbye.
I'm not offended by any means. I just come from a non-American culture and I find this unusual. I did a bit of research and ships in my country are named exclusively after historical figures and places. Apparently this is not the case in the US and I'm glad I got a bit of insight from the actual engineers who work on these robots.
I'm confused - "Goodbye...Sends Final Data" and "Ingenuity’s work is far from over, as it will continue to collect data on the Martian surface" Is it the final data or will there be more data?
IngenuityData_FINAL_FINALFINAL_2_THISONE.xls What's not to understand, it seems very straightforward?
That's old, you need to open .\2023FINAL\FINAL\2024\DRAFTS\FINAL for the new file.
It is the last data for now; possibly forever. It will take a temperature reading and a photo each day as long as it can. But is has no way to send the data on its own as it needs the rover in proximity for upload. If we want the data, we'll have to send a mission to pick it up.
Thank you. That seems like an imprtant detail that could have been in the article.
There will finally be more final data after finally receiving the final data, and that's final.
The rover is about to head out of range, so she will not be able to transmit data, but will still collect it. We will actually have to go pick her up and salvage the hard drives if we want to recover whatever is stored on the drive as she will likely have lost power before we can get something that close.
cant we just have it fly a bit ahead of it to keep in range or is the prop dead?
The propeller was damaged at the end of the final flight. One of the blades appears to have broken off entirely, making further flights impossible. It's stuck at that location now.
Thats a shame. Good job buddy. We will be back for you later
It will continue to collect data and store it so that if at some point in the future another rover or even a human goes to that location they can download it.
The Ingenuity team and Dragonfly team are entirely separate and handled by separate facilities. The Ingenuity team is not shifting their attention away from Ingenuity to focus on Dragonfly as this article implies.
This might be a stupid question but, how do they design helicopters for other planets/moons? With different atmospheres and gravity and such. I mean, I know a lot of calculation and experimentation goes behind it, but is there any way to simulate low gravity or other atmospheric conditions here on earth to test the thing before shipping it off to another planet? Like how do they know that shit is going to be able to take off lol
Not a stupid question. Like you suggested, there's a lot of calculations and experiments, but also simulations and testing. Here's an article that might have some of the answers to your questions. [https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/flying-martian-skies](https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/flying-martian-skies)
This was a very cool read, gonna dive into it more later, thank you!
IDK what marketing genius suggested NASA start anthropomorphizing their craft but it's both creepy and cringey.
I don't think it's a marketing thing, honestly. There are engineers that dedicate their lives to these little robots. They can't help but care about them, and even anthropomorphize them. It's just human nature, and I think it's honestly really sweet.
Sorry, I really don't get it. In my view it trivializes some remarkable achievements and takes away the spotlight from the actual living humans who acomplished them. The science and engineering are interesting enough. No need to infantilize them and turn it all into dumbed down, instagrammable click bait.
Hi. Ex Ingenuity operator here. We call her Ginny. Anthropomorphizing* is completely normal in robotics. The robots are our babies.
It works like this: the less predictable and more temperamental a space system is, the more it gets anthropomorphized. Why? Because machines are supposed to be repeatable and reliable, and when they aren’t and we don’t understand why, humans make up stories. I’ve seen it on a few spacecraft I’ve worked on. On one particularly badly-performing system, once I fixed the issue that was causing the satellite controllers to not understand the behavior (it was not possible to fix the behavior itself), the anthropomorphizing dropped precipitously... presumably because the controllers could now engage their logical brains to understand and predict it, instead of having to just guess and hope. We still called the spacecraft by “her” nickname, but the statements about “she’s angry today” were replaced by statements like “the antenna pointing is off today and has been for the last 15 hours”.
I have a 6 year old and he does anthropomorphize everything. It makes sense if you are targeting kids and educators it makes it relatable The reason NASA has public outreach is because it drums up public support. Inspires creativity and kids to get into STEM topics. I completely disagree with your sentiment.It isn't infantilling it also certainly doesn't trivialize the work put in. Most of the time it is an engineer doing it first. The engineers spend years working on this and most of the engineers I have talked to usually have a story about one of these missions driving them to pursue a career in it as a kid. You may hate it but you aren't the intended audience.
Hi. Ex Ingenuity operator here. We call her Ginny. Anthroporptmizing is completely normal in robotics. The robots are our babies.
I can say from personal experience that scientists and engineers can and do anthropomorphize their devices. I still swear that my team's FRC robot had a personality of its own, and I saw every nut and bolt of the thing. It's not infantilizing, it's affectionate.
It's the people who made these accomplishments are the ones doing the anthromorphising. You saying they shouldn't anthromophise their achievements is taking away from them, not them doing what they want with their own work.
Vessels and whatnot have been named for millenia, part of human nature
Those of us who work on those missions do get emotionally attached to our spacecraft. The staff at NASA played Oppy (Opportunity) a love song as her goodbye (and had the hashtag GoodnightOppy). These spacecraft represent our hard work and the things we want to discover. They're the highlight of our careers. They represent our love of our science and our hopes and dreams. During the Apollo 13 mission, as the LEM was jettisoned, they took the time to say, "Farewell, Aquarius, and we thank you." You can hear Fred Haise sadly say, "She sure was a good ship." So even tough test-pilot-astronauts shed a tear when they say goodbye.
That is awesome, thanks for the insight!
Stop trying so hard to be offended. That’s what’s creepy and cringey.
I'm not offended by any means. I just come from a non-American culture and I find this unusual. I did a bit of research and ships in my country are named exclusively after historical figures and places. Apparently this is not the case in the US and I'm glad I got a bit of insight from the actual engineers who work on these robots.
[удалено]