/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10855179
>and weren't the size of a fucking car
Well, MSL/2020 are about a ton. Vikings were roughly 2/3 of that. I don't see much difference, I think you should be able to scale it unless it's really subtle. As I said, NASA was proposing an order of magnitude larger manned lander with a possible rover, relatively recently measured in NASA time (5 years ago). They seemed to have no problem with it.

>The mars rovers ... have much more sensitive and delicate equipment on board.
Not really, it's equally sensitive.

>The mars rovers have to move around, and have much more sensitive and delicate equipment on board. Dust and rocks kicked up by rocket exhaust runs the risk of damaging the rover during touchdown.
I don't see how it's possible, especially with a classic landing platform which is located below the rover. The thrusters can be tilted outwards as well, no need for the tethered solution.

>The largest you can do an airbag landing is with the twin rovers, and even then they were pushing the limit. Any other method that protects the rover from damage is either too heavy or too big, or both.
Not really, Russians will be using a classic lander with a ramp for the EU rover, while having a mass more comparable to Curiosity than MER.

I'd love to read something that explains the skycrane in detail.