this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
171 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
64937 readers
4013 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
interesting. its not just about the moon:
"LuGRE’s groundbreaking success opens the door for future NASA Artemis missions and other space explorations to use GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) signals. This means they can accurately figure out their position, speed, and time without human help. It’s a huge leap forward for navigation systems on the Moon and Mars!"
this should be pretty huge. think about the various failed landings and such you have seen in the news.:
"Traditionally, NASA engineers use a combination of onboard sensors and Earth-based tracking signals to track spacecraft. LuGRE’s demonstration shows that GNSS signals can autonomously aid navigation, even at the Moon’s distance."
so this really changes space exploration as or more significant to the reusable rocket stages.
They were only able to receive signals from the bare minimum to achieve a solution (4 GPS and 1 Galileo). Their achieved accuracy was +/- 1.5km and +/- 2m/s. That is good enough in astronomic scales to get you to a planet, but it isn't going to help failed landings or autonomous landings.
I don't think there was any new tech involved, just a receiver put on a moon lander to see if it could detect signals. And this won't really do anything for Mars for two reasons: 1) the signal strength would be too small for any reasonable antenna to detect GPS L1/L5 at Mars distances, and 2) the distance would make the geometry be unusable to trilaterate a solution... think about a triangle where two lengths are 100 million miles and the third length is 100 miles. That is a completely worthless geometry for trilateration of a position solution. Even if we could somehow detect a GPS signal at Mars, best case is we get atomic clock time.
Which is an improvement in of itself. That improves flying craft navigation to and from the moon into something significantly easier to automate and coordinate between multiple ships, more than ballistic dead reckoning.
is it really such a huge deal ? Afaik "ballistic dead rekoning" is really, really accurate and isnt difficult to automate (it's mostly math after all)
For longer missions it helps to be able to re-calibrate, as with dead-reckoning, the errors cumulate