Starship Asterisk*

Nitpicker wrote:
Yours in slop,
Nitpicker.

DavidLeodis wrote:
Spirit Rover was an amazing performer and Opportunity Rover still is.
I wonder if Spirit has 'died' or could it yet be 'revived' somehow?

DavidLeodis wrote:
As for the dust I wonder if a vacuum cleaner will work on Mars?

DavidLeodis wrote:As for the dust I wonder if a vacuum cleaner will work on Mars?

Chris Peterson wrote:

DavidLeodis wrote:As for the dust I wonder if a vacuum cleaner will work on Mars?

Even where I live, at an altitude of 9000 feet, vacuum cleaners are noticeably less efficient than their design specs suggest. Wind energy is uneconomic, and electronics that depend on fans for cooling have an annoying habit of burning up.

Nitpicker wrote:... Another factor I noticed was that at 9000 feet, say, water boils at about 90°C or 195°F. Impossible to get a nice hot cup of tea of coffee (egad).

Anthony Barreiro wrote:I'm imagining some NASA mechanical engineer spending a couple years imagining, designing, prototyping, and testing several Mars rover solar panel dust removal mechanisms..."

BillBixby wrote:

Anthony Barreiro wrote:
I'm imagining some NASA mechanical engineer spending a couple years imagining, designing, prototyping, and testing several Mars rover solar panel dust removal mechanisms..."

I would like to see two or more competing groups work on developing independent ideas for cleaning, then merging to compare notes and ideas to determine if something practical could be developed. NASA, Disney and DreamWorks all, among many organizations, have the type of people that make the impossible happen. Engineers living on the cutting edge.

BillBixby wrote:I would like to see two or more competing groups work on developing independent ideas for cleaning, then merging to compare notes and ideas to determine if something practical could be developed. NASA, Disney and DreamWorks all, among many organizations, have the type of people that make the impossible happen. Engineers living on the cutting edge.

geckzilla wrote:Pressure cooker! I love my pressure cooker. Any excuse to use it is good to me. ;)

Dustin M. wrote:
What about using charge to clean. If the panels could be static charged, the charge would transfer to the dust maybe, and like charged objects repel. Then a dust collector of opposite charge could collect the dust. Unfortunately some testing would need to be done to be sure it would work.

Chris Peterson wrote:

geckzilla wrote:Pressure cooker! I love my pressure cooker. Any excuse to use it is good to me.

We don't need an excuse. With a 90°C boiling point, lots of stuff can't be cooked any other way.

geckzilla wrote:You have to try pretty hard to hurt yourself with a pressure cooker, though. There are a lot of safety mechanisms. Steam burn, maybe.

geckzilla wrote:You have to try pretty hard to hurt yourself with a pressure cooker, though. There are a lot of safety mechanisms. Steam burn, maybe.

Nitpicker wrote:

geckzilla wrote:
You have to try pretty hard to hurt yourself with a pressure cooker, though. There are a lot of safety mechanisms. Steam burn, maybe.

Oh I'm not so sure. A combination of sleepiness, hypoxia and caffeine deprivation can make me pretty silly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_cooking#Safety_features wrote:
<<Early pressure cookers equipped with only a primary safety valve risked explosion from food blocking the release valve. On second generation pressure cookers, a common safety feature is the gasket, which expands to release excess pressure downward between the lid and the pot. This release of excess pressure is forceful and sufficient to extinguish the flame of a gas stove.

A pressure cooker can be used to compensate for lower atmospheric pressure at high elevations. The boiling point of water drops by approximately 1 °C per every 294 metres of altitude (1 °F per every 540 feet of altitude), causing the boiling point of water to be significantly below the 100 °C (212 °F) at standard pressure. At higher altitudes, the boiling point of liquid in the pressure cooker will be slightly lower than it would be at sea level. When pressure cooking at high altitudes, cooking times need to be increased by approximately 5% for every 980 feet (300 m) above 2,000 feet (610 m) elevation. The absolute pressure in a pressure cooker will always be lower at higher altitudes, since the pressure cooker can only add the same amount of internal pressure over existing atmospheric pressure at any altitude.>>

geckzilla wrote:
I poked at the rubber overpressure plug on my pressure cooker because it seemed like it was stuck and the thing popped out and steam exploded out but it was not as forceful as one might imagine.

A cork popping from a bottle of champagne is more damaging and dangerous.

geckzilla wrote:I poked at the rubber overpressure plug on my pressure cooker because it seemed like it was stuck and the thing popped out and steam exploded out but it was not as forceful as one might imagine. A cork popping from a bottle of champagne is more damaging and dangerous.

Nitpicker wrote:
Okay, I'll concede. Champagne for breakfast seems safe enough.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck%27s_Fizz_%28cocktail%29 wrote:
<<The Buck's Fizz is an alcoholic drink made of two parts orange juice to one part champagne. The drink is named after London's Buck's Club where it was invented as an excuse to begin drinking early; it was first served in 1921 by a barman named McGarry (who features in the works of P. G. Wodehouse as the barman of Buck's Club and the Drones Club). The Mimosa cocktail, invented four years later in Paris, also contains sparkling wine and orange juice, but in equal measures. Buck's Fizz is touted as a morning "antidote" for a hangover. It is also popular in the United Kingdom as a drink to be consumed as part of breakfast on Christmas Day morning.>>