Monroe said:
What do you think about quided parachutes?
Joshua said:
Inside the WikiSat team, we have developed and calibrated our autonomous parachute built by Niki, assembred by Tobias and calibrated by me. See this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPm3ooVAyAs
The problem is the glide slope (50%) only allows 5 kilometers of travel if takes control at 10 kilometers when parachute is deployed. In February perhaps we use this parachute in the balloon flight #3.
Ryan said:
I'm not sure we should develop any systems that has zero relevance to our Moon landing. i. e. We can't use guided parachutes in a Moon landing.
Monroe said:
Right, but I am behind the curve at the moment and learning. Seems there is parallel possibility's. This is discussion only and relevant to guidance for our Mark-I Lander there are similarity's in multiple systems and developing a platform that is useful in all of them, may prove wise? If that is possible I am unsure. I am looking for way's to build a good fundation for our Mark-I Lander that may benefit other portions of our Team FREDNET project as Mark-II or III.
Joshua said:
Oh sure! You can see that we use same platform for:
- WikiSat satellite for the N-Prize
- Lunar PicoRover computer for the X-Prize
- A possible Home Made launcher to guide the trajectory
- Autonomous parachute controller for training and fun
- Texas Instruments eZ430 platform
- Arduino-Nano platform
- and perhaps the Waspmote platform
----
Well, you can see in this discussion some Pros and Cons for the Parallel development. We try to improve, test and validate in near space in a Open Source way. Everybody arround the world can buy one of these components and make space science using Open Hardware technology.
0 comments:
Post a Comment