794
Russia's Luna-25 spacecraft crashes into Moon
(www.bbc.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
794 points (98.4% liked)
Space
8669 readers
2 users here now
Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Picture of the Day
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
Related Communities
๐ญ Science
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
- !space@lemmy.world
๐ Engineering
๐ Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Last attempt to pass on the knowledge before the Luna 24 people are gone - it landed 18 August 1976.
Do you know the background for this? What do they want to achieve now that they didn't in '76?
I get that it's a space race between Russia and India, but surely there must be more to it. Is it just the prestige of landing on the south pole?
This was just to make headlines and demonstrate the greatness of glorious Mother Russia. Unsurprisingly it didn't quite work out like that.
Not really a race (media just likes to frame it that way)
Main goal is prospecting for potential base locations, because the poles have the best chances of finding easily accessible water ice.
And yeah, prestige too, because landing from polar orbit is more difficult.
Holy shit - somehow I had either missed or forgotten that they found ice on the moon.
That explains it, thanks!!
Why is it harder to land in the poles? Iโm not doubting you, just curious
Mainly, because the poles are always just barely within line of sight to Earth (and thus line of communications) if at all. So the probe has to either operate autonomously or you have to maintain coms via a relay satellite. Either isn't exactly easy with hardware that must also be radiation-hardened and lightweight. Initiating the deorbit burn should (I am guessing this) be done from the backside or you'll run into even more problems when you overshoot the landing site.
Thanks for sharing. That all makes sense.
My unsubstantiated speculation is that it's because of exactly what who you're replying to said. It's been a number of years since roscosmos has had a successful mission to another celestial body, so I think this was supposed to be a verification that they still had this capability to enable a lunar base program (as another reply mentioned).
Yes, it seems likely this is an element as well - and if that's the motivation performing an uncontrolled landing must sting a bit extra, even if they were aiming to pull off something more challenging than in '76.
There was a lot of development in those almost 50 years. I guess the instruments are better, the drilling equipment better...
IIRC Luna 24 found some traces of water, and poles are often prime suspects to find water in higher quantities ...