It was getting damaged pretty much as soon as they started using it. It's kinda weird they didn't catch something like that in testing on earth? Were the rocks on Mars just that more jagged?

But also I think the wheels are aluminum as well, so very soft metal.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago

Designing any kind of space vehicle is always a trade off.

The vehicle needs to be light enough to be launched from earth to mars, but durable enough to fulfill its mission goals.

I’m sure if nasa had access to a vehicle that could send an M1 Abram’s sized, solid steel rover to mars, they totally would, but that would probably cost more than a moon mission, and the whole point of rovers is that they’re fairly cheap for the amount of research you can get out of them.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's lasted this long. I think they made the right decisions. No matter what it is, it's going to be damaged. The goal is to make it still operate despite the damage for as long as possible. The goal isn't to make it last forever, or to never be damaged. The more massive the wheels are the less mass everything else can be, so it's a big trade-off.

[–] tfowinder@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago

It has travelled 32.39 km (20.13 mi) on Mars as of 19 September 2024

[–] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah but I recall them having signs of damage early on that they didn't expect to happen.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yes rocks are more sharp on planets or moons with no or very little atmosphere because erosion by wind/rain forces is reduced.