New Images Reveals The Incredible Story Behind the Odysseus Lander’s Sideways Landing
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 тра 2024
- In this video, we will show you some amazing images of the Odysseus lunar lander, the first US-made lander to land on the moon since the Apollo era. We will also explain what they reveal about the lander’s condition and location, and why this mission is so important for the future of lunar exploration. We will also discuss what we can learn from its successes and failures, and how we can improve the design and performance of future lunar landers. Watch this video to learn more about this historic and inspiring mission.
Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
01:04 New images
03:35 Sun outage and the mission end expectations
05:21 Possible solutions for this failed landing in the future mission
06:46 Outro
07:05 Enjoy
Best Telescopes for beginners:
Celestron 70mm Travel Scope
amzn.to/3jBi3yY
Celestron 114LCM Computerized Newtonian Telescope
amzn.to/3VzNUgU
Celestron - StarSense Explorer LT 80AZ
amzn.to/3jBRmds
Visit our website for up-to-the-minute updates:
www.nasaspacenews.com
Follow us
Facebook: / nasaspacenews
Twitter: / spacenewsnasa
Join this channel to get access to these perks:
/ @nasaspacenewsagency
#NSN #NASA #Astronomy#odysseus #lunar #lander #moon #images #photos #descent #landing #site #condition #location #mission #importance #future #exploration #success #failure #lesson #insight #improvement #innovation #design #performance #NASA #IntuitiveMachines #SpaceX #JeffKoons #science #art #technology - Наука та технологія
SPOILER ALERT ! ! ! THERE ARE NO NEW IMAGES OF THE MOON IN THIS VIDEO ! ! !😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
Thx🤣
@@bigkahuna444 at 1:05 and 5:24
@@Amradar123but is not a landing
@@bigkahuna444True but the title does not state that 😊
Agreed I can see that through a telescope even.
I'm going to use "sidways landing" instead of "crash" from now on
It flipped several times crash it is
Hilarious dude, dead right.
@@noelstarchild agreed he sho'is sideways crash landing
Where were the 'new images'?
The title of this video says clearly that they will explain . means the reveals the incredible story behind the new iomages which were released edarlier today and are to see on X-Twitter and on all the news and many space YT videos.
EXACTLY ! ! !👍
Id love to just see ONE normal non blurry photo.
You and almost 7 billion other people.
Blurry?? LOL How about those of us senior folks who actually watched Neil Armstrong take those first steps in 'glorious' b&w tv back then on a very weak signal from those early satellites. Today's blurry photos from space are 100x better than what we had.
@@richardwatters4638You realize you've been duped I'm sorry to say
@grey6912 duped huh? If we were duped we'd all be in a euphoric state viewing 360degree, 4k HD moon videos of the south pole and full on landing footage with the earth gleaming perfectly in the background. instead, we get failed mission after mission. With actual photos of said failures. This stuff is real...and real hard. So just stop with the duped, fake moon stuff. We are actually doing this for real, and it's just difficult and you're not helping!
@@vandengrey6912 I personally witnessed the development of America's space program and followed it avidly through the earlier Mercury orbital flights to the Gemini program and then to the Apollo flights through to 17. Were you even alive then? Sooo, let's have your reasons why I've been duped. Will be most happy to address them!
Note to self; Don't forget to turn on the landing radar!!
"DOH!"
Makes one appreciate even more the accomplishments of Neil Armstrong piloting his lander manually to a safe and upright position during that first mission in 1969. Since this lander ended up on its side, I'm wondering if the solar panels will be aligned properly for battery recharge after the sun emerges from its "sun outage".
That would be great but the video said something about a ‘ permanent sleep’
sun worshippers want people to think cartoons is real...Jesus is the truth,heathens
Or that you realize that we've been lied to for 50 years and that man never landed on the moon. Duh.
@@TheBrianRaglandChannel Wait, what? Are you trying to tell the me guys that could NOT land an experimental lunar lander on earth with all the visual lines of sight were NOT able to land it multiple times on the moon, by merely peering out a small window, with no radar, lidar at all and only a mere altimeter to guide their descent? You've just shattered my entire world view!!
@@id10t98 Mine as well. That awkward press conference was more than just nerves? Are you telling me there's no way they could have fit the lunar rover inside Apollo?
Oh yea, cool. How could we live stream 50 years ago but only have one cloudy pic?
The space program has gone backwards in the past 50 years lol.
A robot can't do what a man can do on landing .. see Neil Armstrong's Landing... ALSO Parachutes slow an object's descent using drag in the atmosphere. Because the Moon has very little atmosphere, a parachute would not work on a lunar lander. 6:34
Can't they use a hot balloon type of thing.....?
The lunar atmosphere is essentially a vacuum.
A top-heavy 'phone-booth' on stilts with sharp dinner-plate feet, coupled with lateral-velocity; what could go wrong?
ha ha ha nice
Landing without their object avoidance system was a bit of a crap shoot. They got distance and motion from the workaround, but I don’t think they had any way to avoid obstructions. Hovering would have mitigated the risk, but I guess they were hoping for a miracle with their system disabled. Not bad for landing with one eye closed I guess.
that cartoon lander could've done better...space is a cartoon
It is my hope that the next lander is a ball shaped transformer that will travel to the exact desired destination spot and the transform to upright position and deploy “drones” containing the scientific testing and documentation equipment, then Bluetooth the information to the lander which will then relay it to the LRP or directly to the earth.
IT'S EASY TO SAY WITH HINDSIGHT NOW THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE STAYED IN ORBIT AROUND THE MOON WHILE THEY SOLVED ALL THE PROBLEMS WITH THE LANDER BEFORE EVEN ATTEMPTING THE LANDING ! ! ! ? ? ?🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
Then y did they landed on wrong time just before the equinox? Isn't it a bad choice?
Support the moment of touchdown with RCS thrusters to decrease the likelihood of it tipping over. It may only take a small nudge to prevent a tipover
I don't know how many smart scientists was at this project. And I believe that everyone is really smart. But I don't understand that no one of this people didn't predict "what if this lander fall on the side?" How to do to push him back on his legs...
I believe they did cost cutting when it came to the landing gear and developing a way to stand itself up in case a disaster like this happened was not a part of their budget .
that's why there are many more missions.
NASA Space X and all others should hire me for the back up plan to the back up plan that backs up the back up plan. Most of my questions would be
" Who Engineered this?"
Finally, you're admitting mistakes. It's the only way you learn and do better next time.
Yes they should quit calling it a sideways landing and start calling it a crash landing failure!
Next time they should borrow my Gopro camera so we may have uninterrupted video from launch to touchdown! Is that too much to ask for in 2024?
@@derp8575the space program has gone backwards in the past 50 years lol
They can turn on the laser switch - someone on the team forgot to turn on the laser before they launched it. Human error - so they needed a better checklist.
A weeble shaped lander won't wobble and fall down !
But that would take engineering.
How about a different form factor? Not a tall thing on spindly legs! Look at nature - seed dispersal for some inspirations
A rocket using hypergolic fuel has one tank. Since they used a cryogenic fuel, it has two tanks that empty at different rates. They built it so both tanks were over the center of gravity to minimize shifts in balance. Yes, they need to make it less top heavy but this is a learning tool for SpaceX. They will be top heavy too.
I appreciate this channel and the direct and factual reporting. It is top rate, and is made uncerstandable. It seems to me that the robot was too tall and narrow and thus was top heavy. It appears they had an indepth mission with the right tools but in the wrong package. May they learn and redesign the spacecraft for the desired purpose which they had in mind.
Best solution is 10 seconds hovering phase like chandrayan 3 did,at 50 meter before landing spacecraft gobin hovering phase to cancel horizontal velocity and control vertical velocity
Copy Chinese technologies 😅😅😅
I think they had some fuel left ?
Yeah Chandrayaan 3 did the landing pretty flawlessly even with a so low budget
@@aungaisum8654 Chinese population is falling. Do you need some Indian technology? 😂
C'mon now! We "landed man on the moon" in the late 60's, but now with today's technology we can't land an object upright? Maybe instead of using new technology you should've just pulled out the old NASA plans from the 60's and 70's.
I think all luner landers should be in the shape of a ball.
Hi, can you do more videos about ISRO's projects like Gaganyaan? I'm from India and I started watching your channel at the time of Chandrayaan 3. Looking forward for more videos😊
Needs adequate battery life to easily handle the lunar night cycle
The odyseus mission is to deliver freight so it does not need it.
In the first press conference they said the lander still has fuel. With nothing to lose how about firing up the attitude adjustment rockets on the surface side and see if they can push the lander to an upright position. Do the rockets on the other sides swivel so they can add boost? It's just rocket science. It's going to die anyway> OD wants to live.
Good Luck and may the force be with her.
Between 1966 and 1969 NASA sent 6 Surveyor landers without any problem. What is the progress now ?
They all were all short with wide legs.
The progress is that it is now a commercial company doing the deliveries to the moon on a fraction (0.1%) of the NASA budget in the 60ies.
They will get rid of any remaining issues with the coming missions.
All that smart people and they didn't think of a way to tip it upright.
Smart is not to have that happen in the first place 😊
Next time maybe turn the intended landing software/hardware ON before departing Earth?
College educated rocket scientists can't be bothered with that kind of stuff ...
They are distracted by what a woman is and which bathroom to use.
Intuitive Machines have really made a name for themselvles ...they don't know WTF they're doing in the space business
should have a descent lander that gets to about a km of the surface then jettisons a couple sky cranes stacked on each other, which separate to carry a couple of opportunity sized payloads to just above the surface and untether. mars rover style.
Not only are there zero new images that are not already readily available, there is zero discussion of even the most basic information already available about why the lander toppled over, such as it being on a 12° slope near the rim of a degraded crater. Video title is just click-bait.
And described an image as showing the shadow of the lander and a plume of dust. Neither of which were in the image.
Never mind the technology. This is a commentary about the competence of 1969 vs the (in)competence of 2024.
So they wanted to land on the moon like an airplane? Vertically and horizontal motion with legs and not wheels?
Why did they launch this right before the sun going away?
#1. It seems to me all forward motion should have stopped and stabilized as it approached the ground.
#2. It was to far off from its original planned location?
#3. If it landed or hit a rock then things need to be revised if using an autonomous system.
#4. If humanly controlled, could it have been avoided?
Yes.
Humanity Control IS too risky. So the lander needs to hover and try to communicate with space Station on earth which cause minimum a good 10 Seconds or so that too with ITS engine burning causing Lot of noise and huge fuel
They should have followed India's Chandrayaan 3 , they had a 10 second hovering phase to cancel out Horizontal velocity about some meters above the ground and landed pretty flawlessly, even with a very low budget.
They should have followed India's Chandrayaan 3 , they had a 10 second hovering phase to cancel out Horizontal velocity about some meters above the ground and landed pretty flawlessly, even with a very low budget.
Special landing operation.
NASA should send the Mars Sky Crane over to help.
Or build their own crane for the next mission. I thought about wheels on each foot (that retract somehow but can roll over objects) to avoid the feet getting caught on objects.
Humpty dumpty made it to the moon
Humpty dumpty landed in a swoon
All the kings horses and all the kings men
Couldn't test the LIDAR lander assist again
I've been to the Smithsonian andcseen the lunar module but, im having a difficult time understanding how that dune buggy fit in that module? Hummm!!!
Foldable. Ingenius spring mechanism.
The answer is some.typing away if you search:
The frame is made of 2219 aluminium alloy tubing welded assemblies and consisted of a three-part chassis that was hinged in the center so it could be folded up and hung in the Lunar Module Quadrant 1 bay, which was kept open to space by omission of the outer skin panel. They have two side-by-side foldable seats made of tubular aluminium with nylon webbing and aluminum floor panels. An armrest was mounted between the seats, and each seat had adjustable footrests and a Velcro-fastened seat belt.
Boeing built the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRM) to fold so as to be stowed in the LM's storage bay while in flight. Popular Science magazine in Feb. '64 had a great article by Wernher Von Braun who was a director at NASA back then.
What happened to the intended selfies? Did the cameras not eject?
They didn't eject it because of the other problems they had.
@@MrEh5 Seems feasible but why don't they say so?
Why not just make these landers fit inside a large BB8 like sphere from Star Wars? This way, they can roll around and then open themselves in the correct orientation. When finished, close themselves and roll onto the next spot. Static landing legs just seems ancient tech and unimaginative. I'm being serious here.
As soon as I saw that thing it was obvious it had a high chance of tipping over. And I'm not even a rocket scientist...
All kind of new technology, time and Efford, millions of dollars and landed sideway. HOW? How in 1969 they said it was so EASY and they land on the Moon with three guys?
--- How these people have Problems to land in the moon with so much power and technology today? Excuses? yes. They got Thousands of Excuses.
no nuclear battery in its systems?
I think we need to send a rover to the moon. That way you can do a lot of test up there and send the information back.
I'd try to land it horizontally.
Space-X and NASA's Moon Landing 2024 is 1 of the most biggest sideway no more likely a cosmic crash mistake. I'm just glad there wasn't any astronauts in that first Moon Landing since 1969, it's only a test Landing. Let's hope Odysseys is fine. 🌌☀️🪐🌏🌍🌎👨🏻💻👩🏽💻🚀🛰🌑🌠
When *TWO* landers, one from Japan and one from the US, experience the SAME problem([limited power because solar panels are facing the wrong way after non-standard landing) -- you'd think someone would look at the penalties associated with solar panel redeployment or redundancy.
Lander was already designed and built when the issue with the Japanes la der occured. A Commercial company can not redesign a whole 95% finished project.
How about making a lander that isn't top heavy? A little basic physics in case the Q-36 Space Modulator is not nominal!
The Apollo LM landers were not top heavy and had wide spreading legs to reduce the risk of tipping over during landings. The Star Ship design is worrisome being so tall. A tip over would be tragic for the astronauts.
Lovely video. Thank you for sharing.
Sideways landing, WTF? More like crash landing..
should have got wallace and gromit build it ?? theirs went ok ???
I would like to know what cheese the lunar South Pole is made out of 😊
Wensleydale?
Wonder how they got that huge arrow on the moon 🤔🤔
Did anyone really think that these peeps would do what they said they would do and show new pics. But hell no, however, that one new CGI pic was new, so this is what a guy can expect. Didn't this thing go up and crash land sometime last week. I've got now late Tuesday evening. Their repetition of, maybe, possibly, perhaps, limited,kind of says it all.
a radiation decay battery ,nuclear battery like the voyager probes that also make heat to survive lunar nights
That is not available to private companies.
NASA?@@MrEh5
@@ne1cup NASA could if it needed long time data. But is it is heavy and thereforemore expensive.
For a commercial company which trying is to prove to be capable to deliver freight to the moon, it does not make sense to have it.
Thanks moon to be there.
Where on the Moon is the lander? big picture please.
Incredible Epic Fail.
it likely hit the moon too hard and broke some of the legs then bounce a little. It tips over as it returns to the moon with the broken legs.
We've been here before, right??
Why are there so many unknowns that nasa is trying to figure out when it comes to the landing??
Could this be because we really haven't been here before.
I can't imagine the location on the moon makes that much of a difference to the actual landing.
I believe we've been on the moon before, but this mission makes me wonder a bit.
Hehehe.. now don't be silly ! WE , mneans 12 NASA astronauts have really ! been on the moon from 1969 to 1972 piloting their moon lander with their own eyes on the surface on the moon ! NOT easy to let a robot moon lander via computer landing on the rubble , stoney rocky regolith messy surface on the moon! WHY peopl;e are forgetting this now ? Do the moon has clear landings roads without any rubblew on it eh ? All the silly smaer asses thinks they are the super trouper enineers on the spacy rocky world NOW ! Shut up all your ahhh so stupid smart asses ! Let the IM-1 team doing their work now to get us more images , which needs a bit of more time than usual it would ! Period !
Its not for single ship landing. They want to know what would happen if they land near another ship or building.
Autonomous versus controlled by a human pilot are two very different things.
@@MrEh5 Nope ! This is totally another topic and has nothing to do with the landing system the IM-1 team used to lanf the lander Odysseus !
@@BrandyBalloon Thank you so much for finally sdaying the Truth about the difference of manually landing and computer landing of a spacecraft ! These stupids out who are thimking they are the God's of computer landing a spacecraft are suich idiots not knowing how much is 1plus 1 ! A machine , not even KI or AI ever can mess with a human brain ! Period !
Whatever any critic says its still a successful landing may it be sideways as long as it is operational and didnt explode.
Those who criticised the sideways landing, post any company who successfully landed on the moon's north pole if you can find any.
Prove it with Real Evidence. Thats a photo of a rock, not the lander. It Crashed and No data . Epic Fail
No it was Not. Stop.deceiving yourself.
@@happyhunter Pictures are shown in the video at 1:08 and later moments
@@happyhunter you sound like everyone including the NASA space agency is a liar. They've already opened and corrected the blunders and still you wont believe.
Do you think that all thats involved in this endeavour would subject themselves, reputation and career to shame feom telling a lie?
You are pathetic
Did I understand wrong? The sun is behind the moon several days a month during new moon phase correct?
You are correct. I questioned the same erroneous statements.
The moon has an 28 earth day orbit means the moon has 14 day nights and 14 days sunny days
One a 14 day cycle.
My point is, video states sun will be behind the moon for two weeks. Also, states this only is every equinox. How is this rare if the sun is behind the moon a few days every month? Why is this relevant and why is not a problem every month? Also how will the sun be behind the moon for two weeks?
This does not block communication like it's said. It's just that there is no solar power during the lunar night. Also, nothing to do with equinoxes or solstices!
You're trying to land a tower. at that speed,,,,,,, why not think. Viking landers were low and wide. Don't. make a lander slim and tall. This is frustrating to the armchair engineers. lol
Say that to the SpaceX designers of Star Ship. Imagine if that thing tipped over while landing!
They did all that and forgot to put some good cameras on the dam lander , every time get more disappointed with those missions, there are no new images because there is no good cameras on it , any toy you buy today have a camera 10x better then those they put on this lander
A robot is a robot..can you make robot cry+ing? I think things will getting improvement .. better to best.
Where are the new images?
you get to imagine them.
@@id10t98Here and there in between the CGI :/
Let's see.
Powered flight 1903.
65 years later Man ON THE MOON.
50 years later luner lander on the moon crashed over sideways.
But: It is now a commercial mission with 0.1% of the 1969 Apollo budget.
I am upset with all the money We As A Country Don't Have...yet this whole was a blunder,that no one forget...this is the reason you send someone with it and now you have spare parts you can't use... someone has to pay interest on that money
We need a mission to land several solar panels just a bit up towards the equator equidistant around the South Pole interconnected to the south polar station for keeping it charged up and its robotic equipment
Yet no video because it didn't happen there's no way they didn't put a camera on it.... Booo
How the hell are they going to get it upright?
Not
The last message from the landers AI was....help me help me help me....i have fallen and cant get up....what the hell happened , landing strut broke or uneven lunar terrain . ??????
I I'm having trouble understanding what happened that makes any sense of this and the price tag that goes along with it. Doesn't feel like a success compared to 50 yrs ago. We have gone backwards and claim it be a success.. what have we learned ? Don't forget to flip the switch on.. I find that very hard to believe....
Damm.. no one land smothly so far.. Russia, crash ... Vikram, freeze.. now Odysseus and the JAXA's was tip off.... I hope China will send it's robot to help tip back those multi million dollar lander... 😢😢😢
NASA MADE A BIG BOO BOO THIS TIME
Not a nasa mission.
Not NASA. Lander was build by Private company Intuative Machines and they ran the mission. NASA only was part of a wider commercial payload.
Pretty sure NASA funded the expedition. Therefore not private. @@Amradar123
The 'solutions' to the problems are things that should have been thought through in the first place. Maybe this ridiculous company should have hired people with experience designing spacecraft. This is like someone rushed it through after having a junior high science class give them the design.
Blue Origin is m\making the same mistake
@@ne1cupSame for space-x and their lander.
Who go Fired for not turning on the object avoidance system???
No moon landing,it was recorded, it was done in the i.s.s... going back to Artemis after the russian film crew visit...don't be fooled..you do good work honestly keep up the great stuff
That is an uncommon one.
At least you admit we have humans living in space on the ISS 😊
Tell me you are unintelligent without telling me that you are unintelligent@@Amradar123
@@derp8575Let me try through this unintelligent statement: The earth is flat, and spaceflight is not possible.
SpaceX is going to have limited success with their 50m lander unless they install 21m legs
Why a failure is being called a success?
Because they landed at the first attempt and dispite falling over managed to conduct the majority of experiments.
Intuitive employees have a great future at Boeing!!!!
Why a whole mile off??
Ok, You said it, "plume of dust". Where is it plume of dust from Apollo 11? The pics show it sitting there spotless. I really want to believe we actually went to the moon in 69". But when there is really convincing evidence it is hard, that is if you are awake and even able to think outside the box. 9?11 for example. I believed the story until years later someone asked me how many buildings fell perfectly at free fall speeds, and I said 2. I was wrong. I am sure a majority of the people don't know. They pulled it from the news and did not even mention it in the official Commission Report. Not a word about building 7. Look it up. If you think you can handle the adult version of finding out there is no Santa. One you do there is no way back. Red Pill
Ok so Nasa claimed for years that the reason there was no blast crater or marks under the engines were because of the light gravity and such on the moon. Now they claim there was on this one. I have less and less faith we ever put men on the moon when 50 years later they can't land a unmanned spacecraft without it crashing it. Also isn't the reason a private company built this craft instead of Nasa is because they supposedly could not recreate the technology to go there as they said they threw all the information they used to do it 50 years ago away? Come on...
Apollo LM engines shut off before toutch down.
Wonder what was on the monitors of that control center. Why show a picture of a rock? Shameless
It landed up right but the solar winds knocked it over What a fat ZERO EGG in the face UP IN SMOKE project.
The content in this is poor. Please explain the errors, if information was lacking, and in built tolerance towards uncertainties associated with landing site. Often things that work look right. If you think about it as a little bug it looks more like a stick insect and it looks like it should land with the long axis parallel to the surface. I appreciate you will have got the cog right but even so. It feels wrong or a design stretch. Crowd source your ideas you may get good ones back?
Mr. Tell me please one thing that Nasa sent first man on moon 1969. Nasa sent six crewed landing on moon during 1969 to 1973 and sent 12 people on moon. So way not Nasa properly land Odysseus on moon after 52 year. 1969 space technology was poor as compared to 2024. Nasa sent man on moon in 1969 with poor space technology and Nasa not land Odysseus properly with advance space technology. Mr . Nasa never sent man on moon . Because 1969 to 1973 man moon landing are all Fake ok
@@isalamabadislamabad353It is not a NASA lander nor a NASA mission.
Do you have any scientific evidence that the moonlandings are not real?
LATERAL SURFACE AREA🤣
More space junk. Without being able to deploy its solar arrray, its a dead horse.
Mission failed, but they still sugar quoting it. I'm Super disappointed
Elon musk is like "all OK from my side dudes." 😂
How many failed attempts did Space-X have until their first successful launch? 😊
This is the first attempt by Intuative Machines and they landed.
@@Amradar123 u r right but what do you think, launching was easier or landing? I say landing is done is nailed in the 70s and 80s, iM could do better.
Anyhow, will odysseus give us data or it's already gone?
相変わらず間違いが多い動画(^o^;)
Another real cgi moon landing!!!
This mean fail. is not a success. it's not for Pride, but for shame to those who lost millions of dollars. It should be THUMB DOWN. How they have 979 thumbs up, who give it to this fail?
Your NASA for goodness sake. Why didn't you think of all these things that happened before hand????
Not NASA. Lander was build by Private company Intuative Machines and they ran the mission. NASA only was part of a wider commercial payload.
Survey says not helpful. We know no more today than we did the day it landed.
A "sun outage"??? 😂 Please replace its light bulb.
Some flat earther for sure can climb upthere to do the job.
It should be: "absense of sunlight".
And that is not a special event, it happens every two weeks. Why show the equinoxes?
And why show the landing of Perceverance with parachutes on Mars at 6:28?
Fix your AI.
Crash landing
oops
better hand it back over to NASA
This was done a whole lot cheaper than the typical NASA missions!!!! That’s the reason for commercial space exploration
Even NASA has erred. Metric vs U.S. customary units.
kinda like buying Rice Krispies vs Puffed Rice cereal