simcoder t1_ixfqj9r wrote on November 23, 2022 at 2:31 AM

Reply to comment by TrenchTingz in Realistically speaking When do you think we will land humans on Mars? by EnaGrimm

"All terrain" vehicles tend to be short and wide so that uneven terrain doesn't cause your ship to fall over. I just can't really see how you modify Starship to address how not "all terrain" its basic design is.

I have to wonder if that isn't one of the hidden benefits of the "catcher" system they've put in place here on Earth. IE to avoid risking one of the ships falling over on landing.

I know there are other benefits but the catcher system is maybe the one way you sort of guarantee that it won't fall over on landing. Although it also introduces other risks but that's another thread :P

TrenchTingz t1_ixfqs97 wrote on November 23, 2022 at 2:33 AM

With all due respect, no they don’t, look up some military “all terrain” vehicles. It’s all about distribution and suspension. The first landing is the only hard one, and if necessary we revive the old mars landing system for the 3d robot.

simcoder t1_ixfue7v wrote on November 23, 2022 at 3:03 AM

Hmmm. OK. That was a pretty broad statement and probably doesn't hold up across the board. Fair enough.

I guess the issue to me is that Starship is basically 5 times taller than it is wide (iirc). That just seems fairly prone to tipping over while landing on perfectly flat ground (with the right adverse conditions). And in "all terrain" conditions, it just seems like you be lucky if it didn't tip over.

Maybe I'm over thinking it. But it seems like ideally you'd want the inverse of that ratio for an "all terrain" lander. IE one that is wider than it is taller. So pretty much no matter what type of slope you land on, you can be fairly confident that the thing will remain upright.