What would you take to mars?

Route 6x6 Discussion Board: Lets Ride: For Groups and Clubs to talk about riding locations.: What would you take to mars?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By mr. tinker on Unrecorded Date: Edit

if you went all the way to mars would you take a 4-wheeler or a 6-wheeler? the answer is obvious!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By David Keeso (Argomag) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

MR. TINKER- That would be by far the most awsome thing to do- ARGO or MAXing on Mars. Love it!

Can you imagine how much fun that would be, especially if their is less or no gravity there- bouncy, bouncy, bounch, that would be so much fun.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By mr. tinker on Unrecorded Date: Edit

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/images/rover1_detail_500.jpg


wonder how much this six wheeler cost?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By shane forsythe (Shanefor1) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

nasa spent so much thair not game to admit.

or a little $**, and the rest on parties.

i wonder if they allso evaluated putting electric moters in a max and argo to see if they work better than rover???????

ps, mars has the largest volcano known 27 miles high, so high it goes out of the atmosphere.
imagine driving up that in a 6x6.

i guess that would test the theory of what would happen if you throw up in a space suit.

ooowe, we can only dream....

shane

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By David Keeso (Argomag) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

Shane, I think the Mars rover that they recently sent and landed successfully is much smaller than an ARGO or MAX. I think the ARGO and MAZX would melt entering Mars' atmosphere unless it was very heavily sheilded but the cost of sending a huge vehicle would likely be to great. But who knows. Governments are always saying that they have no money for things but always seem to have enough to put where it isn't needed right now. (Do we really need to explore Mars NOW?) Aren't their more pressing issues on Eearth that need addressing before NASA starts throwing metal into space- Things like lowering the cost of a new fully loaded ARGO, and a free maintenence person to go with it to fix it whenever it goes down and not have to try to figure it out for ourselves.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By shane forsythe (Shanefor1) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

david,
i totally agree with you.
i was thinking of nasa using a scaled down max/argo with all steel ( no rubber tyres / drive belts.
also on news nasa were worried about rover tyres etc. get snagged on wires / baloons when it drive of the lander ,

what sort of atv is it?? , nota very good one. maybe bart simpson could use it as a skate board?

i seen a thing on the news last night usa is planning to build a moon base and send rockets / equipment from there , much cheaper and easier than from earth.

well we need to explore other planets because we are f#%^*#ing this one.

yeah i agree free atv's for everyone lol, the budjeters could call it a mobilaty allowance lol.

ps.i dont think we are the polluters on r6x6 we want to get backto nature ( or as far away from cities as possable , its the big companies selling cheap s#^&*t we don't need i'm talking about.
shane.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By David Keeso (Argomag) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

Shane, I feel pretty dumb going back again on what I said about the size of the rover. I was watching the news this morning and their was something on the rover. (first time I had seen footage of it) and the thing looked wider than an ARGO and about as long. That may have just been the way they showed it, but the thing looked big.Can anyone tell us the real size of that rover?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By Beauforf on Unrecorded Date: Edit

I vote for Extreme Machine 2000

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By shane forsythe (Shanefor1) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

i don' know the size of the rover but if you look at the capsule it was in it looks like it could of held 3 astronauts, like apollo moon missions .

and yeah the extreme machine 2000. wow, i'm in awe, all bow down in it's presence. lol.

shane

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By JBC on Unrecorded Date: Edit

It's a 6x6.
Rover
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/spacecraft_surface_rover.html

Rover Speed

The rover has a top speed on flat hard ground of 5 centimeters (2 inches) per second. However, in order to ensure a safe drive, the rover is equipped with hazard avoidance software that causes the rover to stop and reassess its location every few seconds. So, over time, the vehicle achieves an average speed of 1 centimeter per second. The rover is programmed to drive for roughly 10 seconds, then stop to observe and understand the terrain it has driven into for 20 seconds, before moving safely onward for another 10 seconds.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By JBC on Unrecorded Date: Edit

No news sources give a size except for "375 pounds (170 kilograms)and about the size of a large riding lawn mower or the size of a golf cart or the size of a St. Bernard."

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By Fred Sowerwine, Montana's Max dealer (Fred4dot) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

375 pound Saint Bernard! That would be some dog!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By JBC on Unrecorded Date: Edit

It sure would be. I was chased by one a number of years ago and I swear it was 400 pounds plus.
But that is what the reporter wrote.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By shane forsythe (Shanefor1) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

fred,
that's a grate idea, and when we get astronauts there they allready have something to rescue them. lol.

now to be serious (if i can ?)
i have no idea why n,a,s,a, didn't eveluate a all metal max / argo electric powered if rover is as big as that (a golf buggy )

shurly max would be better , it's shown it works on rocks on earth and when you consider the reports on rover 1 "got stuck on a rock" max would of driven strait over, rover is pretty useless, and a huge waste of money.

proven designs are allways better.
rover has moving crude suspension, 4 wheels turn 6 wheel moters.
therefore max has less moving parts and that includes steering , 6w drive.

sorry fred mars doesn't have much waterso psi on the ground doesn't matter there.lol.

gotta go rover's lonley up there needs a pat.lol.
shane

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By Fred Sowerwine, Montana's Max dealer (Fred4dot) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

shane, I think the rovers are pretty neat and at 385 lbs, about 1/2 the weight of a Max II. Don't forget they are a remote controlled vehicle and it takes ten minutes for a command to get to it. Have you watched some of the maneuvers - don't we wish our skid steers could do that. Don't think I would care for their top speed though. I am intrigued by the fact that we could get it there and are able to do all it will be able to do (assuming it wakes back up and goes back to work). If it is garbage, it will probably because of a $2.00 computer board built on a Monday or a Friday afternoon, by a minimum wage disgruntled worker.

PSI on the ground might be very important on Mars - a lot of the surface is dry powder (dust) and a heavy machine would sink and be swallowed up like in quicksand (that's probably what happened to the British machine - landed in a dust bowl and went to the bottom). Or some Martian has a new toy.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By shane forsythe (Shanefor1) on Unrecorded Date: Edit

fred,
max has a proven track record and they don't get disgruntled workers , you don't last this long if you don't look after your workers.(or they get sorted out quick smart.)

that's where odg has an advantige all canadians (and australians, and brits) are on minimum wage,
as the song goes "i'm a slave on minimum wage" , lol.

yes i seen the manuvers, but don't want one. did you see the news when they were worried it would get snagged on a cord and the air bags.

iwouldn't worrie about crossing a cable, balloon with a max / argo.

as for the $2.00 computer part well of course the max would have to be out-fitted with these and all steel parts and that part is out of max's controll.

but why should nasa waste time and money when they can convert a vehicle with a proven track record.

yes i know nasa had a testing ground made for rover but max / argo have been through tough tests too.

build a rover with plastic body and rubber wheels the size of max / argo and i bet no one buys it.

it's up to nasa to organize a production team who are competant and don't leave out a washer ( a,k,a, hubble telescope ).

psi ...ok, i stand corrected about psi on ground, mars it probably is important. (to not disturb the underground cities by breaking through the roof.

and yes i suspect the hubble not working was a story nasa came up with to buy some time to see what they would find.
and i hope the british people got some good footage of thairs being shaken by an alien before it went off line.lol.
shane.


Add a Message


This is a public posting area. If you do not have an account, enter your full name into the "Username" box and leave the "Password" box empty. Your e-mail address is optional.
Username:  
Password:
E-mail:

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation