Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NASA 'flying saucer' for Mars to land in Hawaii

page: 1
21

log in

join
+4 more 
posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 05:34 AM
link   

In June, while beachgoers in Hawaii sit blissfully unaware, a flying saucer will descend over the island of Kauai. This is not a trailer for an alien invasion movie – NASA is gearing up to conduct the first test flight of a disc-shaped spacecraft designed to safely land heavy loads and one day people on the surface of Mars.

The Low Density Supersonic Decelerator (LDSD) will be lofted into the stratosphere from the US Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai. The inflatable technology is intended to help slow down vehicles after they enter the thin Martian atmosphere at supersonic speeds.




www.newscientist.com...

The boys and girls at JPL are at it again. The device pictured above is designed to generate a great deal of drag to slow spacecraft traveling at cosmic velocities as they enter a thin atmosphere, as on Mars. Why is this in this forum? In order to simulate the thin Martian atmosphere, these disk shaped "ballutes" will be deployed high in the Earth's atmosphere over Hawaii. Be prepared for a flap of 100% credible reports of UFOs over Hawaii this summer. Stay tuned.

edit on 10-4-2014 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Thanks for the info - it's always a good idea to know about these projects.

S&F.



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 

Question: Is a LDSD just a big fancy name for a parachute with a new design applied? Please do not misconstrue humour for insult. Personally I almost fell off my chair at this one, from your linked article:


"It may seem obvious, but the difference between landing and crashing is stopping," says Allen Chen at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California


In any case, I wish them luck.


ETA: Yup, its a balloon and a parachute!

The LDSD design solves this quandary using a balloon-like decelerator and a giant parachute twice the size of Curiosity's
edit on 10/4/14 by LightSpeedDriver because: ETA



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 



Question: Is a LDSD just a big fancy name for a parachute with a new design applied? - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


It is a combination heat-shield parachute balloon. And yes, the guy from JPL was trying to be funny.



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 06:24 AM
link   
Just remember, another name for ballute is dead duck.



What Balut May Look Like



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 

Or they could come clean about flux liners and use them instead..



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 06:29 AM
link   

DJW001
It is a combination heat-shield parachute balloon. And yes, the guy from JPL was trying to be funny.


Yanno, it just struck me that it's starting to sound a bit new-agey over at NASA. I don't know if someone there is smoking tobacco substitutes these days or they just hired a new Abbreviation expert or, conspiratorially, that this is in fact proof of multiple "densities" but I like it!

NASA

New Agey Spacey Agency?



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


LOL - when I read the thread title and saw it was in the "Aliens & UFOs" forum I got a little excited.




posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


You know, if you wanted to fly in an alien ambassador that does not have cloaking technology, that's one way to do it. I'm not saying it's aliens but...



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


As much as space travel and our lack of it annoys me, at the very least they are setting their sights on something other than low earth orbit.

I would rather aim for Andromeda and end up on Mars than aim for Mars and end up on the ISS.

We need the dreamers back and we need the media to get involved to reintroduce Americans to a real space program. I would rather spend trillions on moving into space than wasting them on military programs.
edit on 10-4-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
An inflatable shell landing vehicle? I believe I've heard a story about a craft flying through the atmosphere and hitting the ground, but only balloon-like parts were found...



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   

DJW001

The boys and girls at JPL are at it again. The device pictured above is designed to generate a great deal of drag to slow spacecraft traveling at cosmic velocities as they enter a thin atmosphere, as on Mars. Why is this in this forum? In order to simulate the thin Martian atmosphere, these disk shaped "ballutes" will be deployed high in the Earth's atmosphere over Hawaii. Be prepared for a flap of 100% credible reports of UFOs over Hawaii this summer. Stay tuned.

edit on 10-4-2014 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)


Cool story and all. I can't wait till we have more and better missions to mars, but...

This Saucer looking thing is not a UFO, more of an IFO.
Maybe you meant credible reports of Falling Saucers?




posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   
We don't even have a moon base! The obvious staging area for serious space travel; even to Mars.





We need the dreamers back and we need the media to get involved to reintroduce Americans to a real space program. I would rather spend trillions on moving into space than wasting them on military programs.




Something is wrong with NASA, if we don't have a moon base after almost 50 years of first setting foot on the moon.

The space shuttle and ISS seems like a halfassed approach to space travel imo.

just sayin....
edit on 10-4-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Here is another photo and additional information:



www.space-travel.com...



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Shows how little progress we have made in the last 40-50 years. We still rely on the same old technology. Small metal barrels and parachutes.


Together, these new drag devices can increase payload delivery to the surface of Mars from our current capability of 1.5 metric tons to 2 to 3 metric tons


wow what amazing progress. Must have cost a few billions.

Same thing with the Mars rovers. Poorly made mini cars that can be stopped by gravel. Quite laughable.

If they don't have any bigger ambitions than that, lets just leave it all together and try it again in a 100 years or so.



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Chazam
reply to post by DJW001
 


Shows how little progress we have made in the last 40-50 years. We still rely on the same old technology. Small metal barrels and parachutes.


Together, these new drag devices can increase payload delivery to the surface of Mars from our current capability of 1.5 metric tons to 2 to 3 metric tons


wow what amazing progress. Must have cost a few billions.

Same thing with the Mars rovers. Poorly made mini cars that can be stopped by gravel. Quite laughable.

If they don't have any bigger ambitions than that, lets just leave it all together and try it again in a 100 years or so.


Well, draw up some plans and get some seed money for your revolutionary technology. We're waiting with bated breath.



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   

olaru12
We don't even have a moon base! The obvious staging area for serious space travel; even to Mars.





We need the dreamers back and we need the media to get involved to reintroduce Americans to a real space program. I would rather spend trillions on moving into space than wasting them on military programs.




Something is wrong with NASA, if we don't have a moon base after almost 50 years of first setting foot on the moon.

The space shuttle and ISS seems like a halfassed approach to space travel imo.

just sayin....
edit on 10-4-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)


I would rephrase this statement to "We don't even have a moon base that we know of."

From everything I've read there is a "public NASA" and a "Black Ops NASA."

I don't think any of us have a clue what NASA has done secretly. Officially, we've never been back to the moon. But since I don't buy "the official" JFK assassination story any more than I buy the official 911 account, I can't say that I buy the official NASA story either.





new topics

top topics



 
21

log in

join