graphic: NASA/JPL
Along with countless other people interested in spaceflight and astronomy, I congratulate JPL Project Manager John Callas and his expert team on a fabulous mission that came to an end in a planet-wide dust storm on 10th June last year, and was officially declared completed yesterday. The rover exceeded its planned life by 14 years, 294 days
Here's a wonderful interactive infographic of Oppy's journey, courtesy of The New York Times.
19 comments:
Irrelevant comment from "RCH" disallowed.
In what way was it irrelevant, I wonder?
It was an obituary of someone I've never heard of who died in 2015. I wouldn't assume the "RCH" is the RCH.
Who says America can't produce a long-lasting, high-quality vehicle for off-planet offroading? ;-)
If you've never heard of the deceased, then what makes you so certain that the comment is irrelevant? Why not let the audience make that decision. Furthermore, if someone is posing as Hoagland, wouldn't his fans be astute enough to make that call, as well?
« Why not let the audience make that decision. »
Because it's my blog and I make those decisions.
We don't want to read anything here that Hoagland tries to post. Good work, expat. Who says that censorship is a bad thing? Now, is there anyway we can get a hold of all his books and burn them?
Sarcastic little bugger, ain't you? Look, if the real RCH posted a comment that had anything to do with the topic you'd find me cheering, not burning. He never has, although he used to respond to my e-mail. See this, for example.
If you're going to say that the post you've censored by RCH is not Richard C. Hoagland, then it would only be fair to explain how you have jumped to such a dubious conclusion. I'm mean, why mention it at all? Why not just filter it out, and not tell everyone that you did that? It's as if you are teasing us, into believing that Hoagland actually cares to respond here, at all.
No, the point is the opposite. I do not want you to believe that the real RCH comments here. I think it's highly unlikely.
Based on what?
"Based on what?"
Probably based on the fact the real RCH has an aversion to posting where he does not have the ability to delete contrary opinions to his own.
On topic: What a great mission and a sad end for Oppy. Mars 2020 and the ExoMars mission will provide better scientific instrumentation, and Insight's seismic sensor is performing nominally with the heat probe expected to reach its planned depth of 5m in the next few months.
Oppy's engineering and scientific legacy will be hard to beat but the future looks bright for the surface exploration of Mars.
SpaceJames
Hi expat,
Congrats! You seem to have attracted someone far more contrary, and perhaps, more annoying than me...
Monkey Puzzled said...
" If you're going to say that the post you've censored by RCH is not Richard C. Hoagland, then it would only be fair to explain how you have jumped to such a dubious conclusion. I'm mean, why mention it at all? Why not just filter it out, and not tell everyone that you did that? It's as if you are teasing us, into believing that Hoagland actually cares to respond here, at all."
I'll presume you are the same poster as Anonymous Monkey Shines, Monkey Shriner, CJ & Methamphetamonk, not that it matters.
Allow me to explain.
1. expat doesn't need to explain why he thinks it's not Richard Hoagland posting. I'm guessing it was probably you (expat would probably have more information), given your apparent willingness to post under any random name - which only lends justification to his initial refusal, albeit in retrospect, but if he says the post was not relevant, that's good enough. If it was an obituary of someone he's never heard of, why should he allow it?
2. Why mention it at all? It's something you don't seem to understand: Good, old fashioned good manners.
Like, if you post and nothing appears, do you assume it wasn't received, or do you assume it's been rejected, or what?
I'm going to have to support Patrick on this one, because the comment with the obituary was not typed with the flourishes, invariably used by Richard C Hoagland. However, the deceased subject of the obituary, always used those same flourishes.
Patrick, weren't you one of the regulars on Hoagland's, facebutt page? Do you remember Storm Thor? He used that style, as well.
When G+ finally, kicks the bucket, this blog can still be retrieved at:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190101000000*/https://dorkmission.blogspot.com
I do remember Storm Thor, yes. At the time I had a definite theory about the true identity of that individual, but I forget now.
But the question is, Theadora, how would you know what style the comment was written in? Do you know because you were the author??
Google leaks like a sieve.
"But the question is, Theadora, how would you know what style the comment was written in? Do you know because you were the author??
Lol! Brilliant, Expat!
Now, who's being sarcastic?
Post a Comment