Speaking of community channels, back in the days DeAnza College CATV channel would have NASA TV in the early mornings. During Shuttle flights, I can watch the MMT briefings with Wayne Hale, there would be enough tech stuff to keep me interested but didn’t get too esoteric. Also included question/answers with the press. Since it was live it felt organic unlike carefully rehearsed and scripted with dialog to never get anywhere near a misspoke word or blunder.
Kind of like the Apollo program, in later missions TV stations didn’t cover later missions unless something big happened like an O2 tank blowing up. I guess for me not involved with Mars missions and I don’t have a passion for that planet, I wouldn’t have missed it anyways. Just saying.
When Apollo 12 was launched, NASA had it covered on TV. A bunch of people called the networks very upset because their favorite soap operas were preempted! Part of the problem is that NASA is forbidden to advertise itself. So, it has limited capability to educate the public and gin up public interest and support for the space exploration. Sad!
But they could use a boost in outreach, center events, and visitor centers that don’t require a fee. Back in the days when there was events at Ames like Moonfest, Yuris Night (the first ones that were not expensive), etc. There would be several divisions showing the things they work on and general public can ask actual scientists and engineers whatever questions they have. Commercial companies showing off their space related products, local restaurants can have their food tents, Ames jazz band plays various tunes, games and contests for the children.
This costs money, takes a lot of time for planning logistics and many had to pull a lot of all-nighters. Other centers have done the same (don’t know if they do now). I think problem is this intense pressure to reduce costs make it prohibitively expensive to ask for the amount of funding needed but in the end there would not be anything to show for it except a couple minutes in the evening news and few paragraphs in local papers.
The big payoff is to show tax payers where their money is going. And really smart scientists and engineers that create something 10 or 20 years later when as a child they were inspired by what they saw at one of these events.
Elements of the mainstream media will cover it, in the hope something goes wrong – then will cluck over the ‘waste of $3 Billion dollars of taxpayers money’ if it does.
Baffles me why Charles Houston would down-vote my post; what I said was true. And if he doubts my worldview; I’m somewhat of a ‘Liberal’, Sir on many issues and a Conservative on others. It might surprise you that we likely think more alike than you realize…
But the whole EDL system is supposedly and mostly the same thing they used for MSL/Curiosity. So, unless JPL was lying about how similar those systems are, they’re just repeating the same thing they did in 2012. Therefore, Yawn.
IIRC the folks from Hawthorne recently discover that the model that NASA was using for parachute deployment was not adequate enough. So NASA has been lucky with their Martian EDLs. Which is almost the same as the Viking landers from 1976 except for the Skycrane landing.
The model NASA was using didn’t quite covered how very large parachutes or multiple canopy parachute system behave when they get deployed.
The actual deployment was more stressful than what the model predicted when SpaceX was testing the parachute system for the Crew Dragon.
All the data gather from the recent SpaceX parachute test series have been passed on to the industry AIUI.
Apparently there wasn’t too much testing to evaluate the parachute performance model predictions to actual test performances after the Viking lander parachute test series,
“Yawn” is most definitely NOT the right way to characterize the landing, especially when it uses the ‘aero crane’ method. the landing is not the boring part. This time the helicopter drone might add to the excitement of the long term exploration.
This is not 1969. There is no longer only 3 media channels. The issue is now so many channels streaming that getting adequate coverage on any is problematic. now NASA calls it a success if 100000 are viewing. So it becomes critical to partner with other media organizations like Microsoft, Adobe, Facebook, Google…so they can help to broadcast. NASA still has to have good, comprehensive, thorough and yet not tedious content. IF there is any such effort ongoing for Perseverance, the first big event out the gates in 2021, in a month, I must ha e missed it. But I no longer recall, is Mars even a NASA goal? Isn’t Artemis the new goal? The first woman sent round the Moon by 2030? Mars is 25 or more likely 50 years in the future.
Comcast doesn’t broadcast NASA TV in my area. Instead I get one hour show once a week that’s about 3 years old on my community channel.
You can watch it online.
Get the NASA app for your smart phone if you have one.
Or get the NASA app for a Roku streamer.
Or watch it on NASAs YouTube channel.
There’s a lot of way to watch it.
Speaking of community channels, back in the days DeAnza College CATV channel would have NASA TV in the early mornings. During Shuttle flights, I can watch the MMT briefings with Wayne Hale, there would be enough tech stuff to keep me interested but didn’t get too esoteric. Also included question/answers with the press. Since it was live it felt organic unlike carefully rehearsed and scripted with dialog to never get anywhere near a misspoke word or blunder.
Kind of like the Apollo program, in later missions TV stations didn’t cover later missions unless something big happened like an O2 tank blowing up. I guess for me not involved with Mars missions and I don’t have a passion for that planet, I wouldn’t have missed it anyways. Just saying.
When Apollo 12 was launched, NASA had it covered on TV. A bunch of people called the networks very upset because their favorite soap operas were preempted! Part of the problem is that NASA is forbidden to advertise itself. So, it has limited capability to educate the public and gin up public interest and support for the space exploration. Sad!
>NASA is forbidden to advertise itself
But they could use a boost in outreach, center events, and visitor centers that don’t require a fee. Back in the days when there was events at Ames like Moonfest, Yuris Night (the first ones that were not expensive), etc. There would be several divisions showing the things they work on and general public can ask actual scientists and engineers whatever questions they have. Commercial companies showing off their space related products, local restaurants can have their food tents, Ames jazz band plays various tunes, games and contests for the children.
This costs money, takes a lot of time for planning logistics and many had to pull a lot of all-nighters. Other centers have done the same (don’t know if they do now). I think problem is this intense pressure to reduce costs make it prohibitively expensive to ask for the amount of funding needed but in the end there would not be anything to show for it except a couple minutes in the evening news and few paragraphs in local papers.
The big payoff is to show tax payers where their money is going. And really smart scientists and engineers that create something 10 or 20 years later when as a child they were inspired by what they saw at one of these events.
Elements of the mainstream media will cover it, in the hope something goes wrong – then will cluck over the ‘waste of $3 Billion dollars of taxpayers money’ if it does.
That’s the formula for media success!
Baffles me why Charles Houston would down-vote my post; what I said was true. And if he doubts my worldview; I’m somewhat of a ‘Liberal’, Sir on many issues and a Conservative on others. It might surprise you that we likely think more alike than you realize…
Yawn? Really? That’s just a little disrespectful to the folks who have put a lot of work into this mission.
They have had years to get ready to inform the public and they have dropped the ball.
Oh you’re talking about PAO…nevermind..
But the whole EDL system is supposedly and mostly the same thing they used for MSL/Curiosity. So, unless JPL was lying about how similar those systems are, they’re just repeating the same thing they did in 2012. Therefore, Yawn.
I’m hoping they’ll have even better descent imagery than last time. So, not yawn!
I would like a video taken by the skycrane showing the lowering of the rover and vice verse from the rover.
No yawn at all. It’s still exciting and no guarantee it will work either.
IIRC the folks from Hawthorne recently discover that the model that NASA was using for parachute deployment was not adequate enough. So NASA has been lucky with their Martian EDLs. Which is almost the same as the Viking landers from 1976 except for the Skycrane landing.
Could you please expand on the inadequency.
The model NASA was using didn’t quite covered how very large parachutes or multiple canopy parachute system behave when they get deployed.
The actual deployment was more stressful than what the model predicted when SpaceX was testing the parachute system for the Crew Dragon.
All the data gather from the recent SpaceX parachute test series have been passed on to the industry AIUI.
Apparently there wasn’t too much testing to evaluate the parachute performance model predictions to actual test performances after the Viking lander parachute test series,
“Yawn” is most definitely NOT the right way to characterize the landing, especially when it uses the ‘aero crane’ method. the landing is not the boring part. This time the helicopter drone might add to the excitement of the long term exploration.
No I am characterizing NASA’s approach to it.
It’s a shame, but a nation that doesn’t take care of its own people is on a one-way down-hill dead-end ever-steeper street.
This is not 1969. There is no longer only 3 media channels. The issue is now so many channels streaming that getting adequate coverage on any is problematic. now NASA calls it a success if 100000 are viewing. So it becomes critical to partner with other media organizations like Microsoft, Adobe, Facebook, Google…so they can help to broadcast. NASA still has to have good, comprehensive, thorough and yet not tedious content. IF there is any such effort ongoing for Perseverance, the first big event out the gates in 2021, in a month, I must ha e missed it. But I no longer recall, is Mars even a NASA goal? Isn’t Artemis the new goal? The first woman sent round the Moon by 2030? Mars is 25 or more likely 50 years in the future.