Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hamlet
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jerry
Timer or look-up table, the deployment based upon time-from entry, not altitude - same thing.
|
No it wasn't. I explained before that the deployment was initiated by the CASU when it detected the correct acceleration. This was not time-based. This physical event marks the transition from entry phase to descent phase and starts the timing for the parachute sequence. |
Actually, it was based upon a ratio between the velocity and the speed of sound - Mach 1.5 - although you mostly right - they measure the velocity to determine this parameter. The most important thing, is that the probe must have been slowed enough by the atmosphere enough not to totally shred the parachutes.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hamlet
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jerry
Ok, this one nails me, because I am saying the probe had been sitting on the moon thinking she was still airborne for sixty-seven minutes when this "change in the Doppler shift" occurred.
|
This nail is just another in a long line of nails in the coffin of your "theory". |
The nail misses, if the ending was signaled by a timed or acceleration based event. If the landing accelerometers were not sampled until the the probe was good-and-ready to sample them, the time stamp cannot be used to validate the landing time. It should be easy to determine this with time-stamped radar data - and if you were able to see the radar plot I posted on Wikipedia, it is clear the descent during that minute looked nothing like the expected profile.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hamlet
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jerry
All anyone has to do is confirm this "change in the Doppler shift" at 12:43 UTC is highly consistent with a sudden drop in acceleration, and well above the noise levels, and NOT consistent with movement caused when Huygens sudden realization she had been sitting on the ground for an hour, and it was past time to thrust the penetrometers into the frozen sand, and try to figure out what kind of cheese this moon is made out of.
|
What are you talking about? Huygens didn't have to "decide" to thrust the penetrometer into the surface. The penetrometer was deployed on a spear extending from the bottom of the SSP. It was thrust in when Huygens landed. The penetrometer was another accelerometer designed to measure the force of impact. How could it do that if it didn't deploy until after impact? Do you think about these things before you write them? |
Yes, but I am hoping someone who knows more than me and you, and the specific sequence - for example, does the transmitter send a special signal to confirm the landing - would jump in and explain when I threw that out. I know the polling of the devices by the software is somewhat the way I have described it, but the more detail, the better.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jerry
It is a valid question, and this is why the exact nature of the each of the changes in Doppler shift must be carefully analyzed and bumped against each other.
|
What makes you think the Doppler data won't be analyzed carefully? You keep stating the obvious as if this were some grand revelation.
|
I'm sure it has been, and will be, but not necessarily in the context of Newton and Einstein's curves not working.