Lunar lander lifts off, then promptly crashes

As the sole contestant in the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge, Armadillo Aerospace's predictably named Armadillo managed to complete two parts of a NASA challenge to win $350,000 in prize money. However, on attempting the top task -- fly 50 meters up, fly 50 meters sideways, and land -- the Armadillo tripped up, plummeting to the ground and losing the chance to win $1 million. It'll get another chance today, although at least the team won't be rushed by the non-existent competitors. Packing 1,800 pounds of thrust to the vessel's 1,500 pound weight, the Armadillo is guided by GPS and other sensors: one day we could be taking trips to the moon in the distant, distant successor to this little beast.

[Via Crave]

[Brian @ Oct 30th 2007 9:18AM]

Holy crap, that thing weighs 1500 pounds? How big is it?

[Justin @ Oct 30th 2007 9:18AM]

No mention of John Carmack? I mean, I know this isn't a games blog, but a mention couldn't hurt, could it?

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 11:05AM]

I'm sorry, since I don't live, breath and idolize Mr. Carmack for taking a polygon shit... what does he have to do with a Lunar Lander.

[Justin @ Oct 30th 2007 11:07AM]

Nothing other than it was his company and all. His money.

Details.

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 11:12AM]

Sorry, I guess that could be read wrong. Why does the occupation of the person have any bearing on it? The world is too obsessed with fame. Who cares if he created it or Joe Schmaltz created it? Is it not enough that the company was mentioned? Do we have to idolize him because he created a video game? Would you care if Ben Affleck was on one of the teams? What if they didn't mention his name? If you would care, I feel sorry for you.

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 11:13AM]

So why do you complain if his name wasn't mentioned, but you don't care about the other people on the team? I'm sure he didn't build it singlehandedly. What makes him more important than the other people in said company? Money? Yeah, I feel even worse for you now.

[Justin @ Oct 30th 2007 11:21AM]

I care because it's actually relevant to the discussion and because an article that actually has to pass by an editor (see the Wired article on the subject, for example) would have included that information. If Ben Affleck someday has anything to do with gadgetry and/or electronics in general, then he might warrant a mention if he bankrolls a project like this.

Carmack isn't just Doom and Quake anymore; he's much more involved than that

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 11:21AM]

And FYI. If he wanted his name attached to every story about said company, why didn't he just call it John Carmack Aeronautics?

[Justin @ Oct 30th 2007 11:26AM]

I merely think that his name is relevant to geekitude and gadgetry in general and therefore his name should be mentioned as a point of interest, if nothing else.

You seem to be foaming at the mouth that it's completely irrelevant and that nobody's name should ever be mentioned. Why? What difference would it really make to you? Did he eat your baby or something?

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 11:37AM]

He didn't do anything to me. But if we start mentioning his name, why not everybody on the team? I don't understand this fascination with someone and the fame/money. IF you wish to follow him in his career, and you know that he banked the company, why wouldn't the company name be enough? Even then, if you followed the Crave link because you truly were interested in it. You'd see that the Crave link idolized him as well. Hell, they placed his name in the first sentence they thought it mattered so much. Fortunately for the rest of the world, there are people that don't care about the creator, but the contest and machinery itself.

Science has no room for glory boaters. It's about expanding knowledge, not fame.

[Justin @ Oct 30th 2007 11:59AM]

Who said anything about...well, anything you're alleging? I don't idolize the man. I had no idea he was even involved in anything remotely related to rocketry until I saw the Wired headline last night despite the fact that he's apparently been involved for 7 or 8 years now. I have no idea how much he's worth, how many houses he owns, what cars he drives, and I don't care.

But the way so many posters here lick the boots of Steve Jobs, what would it hurt to mention the head of another outfit once in a while when it's not just another "CE-oh no he didn't!" post?

And by your logic, I suppose you think that Albert Einstein was just another showboater. How dare we know his name! How dare he put food on the table and win awards!

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 2:27PM]

You simply asking why his name wasn't mentioned is enough evidence of what I was talking about. You wanted to have Engadget pull his name out exclusively and place it in a special note. I don't see anyone complaining that James Bouer, the primary welder wasn't mentioned. Maybe it's because he's not rich or famous? What about the other folks? Why should you place Carmack at the top of the story. I don't get it. No, maybe I do. It's to attract people like you, who follow brands and people instead of the product. It's good advertising dollars. Brand/name recognition.

And I'm sure Einstein didn't get into science to become rich but from everything I've read, he was truly interested in the way things worked (but only he could have answered that.) It was through people like you, placing the person above the science that made people like him famous. Key holing the entire project to one person and complaining when their name wasn't mentioned.

[Justin @ Oct 30th 2007 2:37PM]

I can't help but think, with that last comment of yours, that you're completely trolling me.

Without Carmack, it wouldn't have happened. At all. Period. (Or full stop if you prefer.) They could have found another welder (and I get the impression that you made that name up out of thin air, but if not, my apologies to James).

You noticed, I hope, that there were exactly zero other entries, right? It's not like people were crawling out of the woodwork to support these machines. Those who did deserve credit for their actions.

If you can't comprehend this, then I hope you never take the lead on a project and then put that on your resume; by your own logic, again, you shouldn't take credit for it.

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 2:48PM]

Thanks for proving that you didn't read any of the links. The Welder was mentioned in the Crave link, and:

"All eyes are on Armadillo because it's once again the lone competitor in the lunar challenge, which was supposed to have nine teams flying this year. Last year, Armadillo emerged as the only team up to snuff with Federal Aviation Administration safety requirements and was technically ready to launch its vehicle. This year, the same thing happened. Teams like Denver-based Micro-Space weren't able to meet the FAA safety standards, and one mystery team dropped out before the challenge."

Nine teams showing interest, but they didn't meet the qualifications. The interest was there. And you think that just because one person fronted the cash means that if that person had not existed, someone else would not have stepped up? What a shallow viewpoint.

[Brian @ Oct 30th 2007 10:59PM]

Andir3.0 = emo trolling kid

Seriously, let off. The only person who really cares about fame / publicity is YOU.

Justin just asked why the head financier was not mentioned on a blog where we obsess over geek things and geek people.

I'm sure Bill Gates just donates money to charity for more fame, and warren buffet does the same. I'm sure the founder of Amazon is just building the worlds first space port because he wants to see himself on Google ten million more times.

You give credit when it's due, and if John Carmack bankrolls the technology that could one day take humans into space, or to the moon, then he should be given credit. It doesn't mean we're going to dress like him, talk like him, or make a phoblog about it, it just means that he gets some respect for doing what he loves. Creating.

[Jerome @ Oct 30th 2007 9:21AM]

I have seen them on dailyplanet and it is pretty cool!

The new version ( the one in the picture ) is very stable!

They need to hover for 3 minute before flying 50 meter sideways!
The normal challenge is ~30 seconds of hovering and the TOP is 3 min.
They had to change the nozzle so it won't melt. Dailyplanet had some pretty cool video of the beast exploding will testing! :P

really nice stuff

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 30th 2007 9:36AM]

VIDEO????

[Dixonij @ Oct 30th 2007 9:50AM]

Does it have a Terminator head stick shift?

Looks like a two sphered version of Sputnik with a rocket attached. Best of luck to the team with the $1 million prize attempt!

[david @ Oct 30th 2007 10:24AM]

Umm, they do know that there are no GPS satellites in orbit around the moon don't they?

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 30th 2007 11:39AM]

... that you know of. ;)

But I'd guess that it's more the act of mobility in question here rather than the location.

[Eric @ Oct 30th 2007 12:10PM]

This is exactly what I thought about. To me, that shows they are in it purely for the money (and, I guess that's okay if that is what you are after), but, if you cannot apply the navigational science, then what is the point. The mere fact that you can stabilize the flight of the craft isn't the hard part, we've been stabilizing flight for smooth take off and hover for a while now....if it can't hit it's intended destination, it really isn't going to be worth a thing. They will just be showing they can win $1 Million by doing something that has been done before, and not really adding anything usable to the objective.

[holly olson @ Dec 21st 2007 9:39PM]

Hey, anyone that reads this, I work for a company called Space Island Group and they need investors to help them keep the shuttle program going. We are going to put solar panels at 22,000 miles in orbit to produce microwave beams and transmit them down to earth to make electricity. Then they are going to keep the containers that got the solar panels in space, and make them into living quarters for researchers, hotel chains, tourism, honey mooners, FOX space sports and much more!!! Please if you want to learn more about it visit our website at www.spaceislandgroup.com or call me (Holly) at 801-628-9935. We need your help to see this company through for the future. Thank you.

[johnzilla @ Oct 30th 2007 12:39PM]

Yet another poorly worded headline.

This isn't a lunar lander. It is a lunar lander prototype. Or a lunar lander contestant.

Reading the headline, my first thought was someone had put something on the moon (China, perhaps?) and that it had crashed.

[Dan @ Oct 30th 2007 1:41PM]

if they can get to the moom, trust me: they can drop off some fresh new lunar GPS (LPS?) sattelites on the way before dumping a lander. The technology to orbit the moon was developed before most of us were born.

[tom @ Oct 30th 2007 1:52PM]

Wrong on the name as even a cursory view of armadillo's website could have told you. This vehicle was not called the 'Armadillo' -- this was the "Module", or "the Mod" vehicle for short. 'Modular' is reference to the fact that this thing is literally designed to be built, without the legs sticking out, as an assembly-line type modular vehicle like a bunch of legos. The idea is so that you can snap 16 of them together and put one on top (for 17 modules), to let you get closer to orbit. http://www.armadilloaerospace.com

[Chris @ Oct 30th 2007 10:44PM]

The title is VERY misleading. I'd have to check my dictionary, but the craft by no means "promptly" crashed. Don't bother mentioning the good attempts they put in or anything. You make it sound like it crashed and burned on the first attempt. Seriously guys, give some credit where it's due.

[Matthew Ross @ Oct 31st 2007 1:03PM]

Yes, it is misleading. This is the most factually incorrect write-up of Armadillo's attempt I've seen yet. Let's see:

1. The headline, as Chris points out. The rocket got within 8 seconds of winning the Level 1 first prize. At no point did it "lift off and promptly crash."

2. The name of the rocket, as tom pointed out. Armadillo brought two Mods and Pixel. Years ago when Armadillo was still using Hydrogen Peroxide as a propellant, they had a development path leading to a rocket they referred to as "Black Armadillo," but they abandoned peroxide and that name 2 1/2 years ago.

3. Armadillo did not complete two parts of the Challenge. If they had, they would have won the $350,000. The first part of Level 1 of the contest is to fly up to 50 meters, translate over 50 meters, then land on a 10 meter landing pad just like the one you took off from, and do that in no less than 90 seconds. The second part is to reload propellants and do the same thing in reverse. Armadillo completed the first part with no problems, and got within 8 seconds of completing the second part.

4. "...the Armadillo tripped up, plummeting to the ground and losing the chance to win $1 million." Yes, Armadillo did lose the chance at winning the $1 million, but not because they crashed and therefore lost out on that particular part of the contest, as the wording in this write-up seems to imply. They lost out on the chance at $1 million because they never even got to try for Level 2, having not yet won Level 1. You don't have to win Level 1 to try for Level 2, but Armadillo didn't want to try for Level 2 until they had already won Level 1. First prize for Level 1 is $350,000, first prize for Level 2 is $1 million.

5. "...losing the chance to win $1 million. It'll get another chance today..." The "today" is true if Sunday were meant, but they were getting another chance to win the $350,000 Level 1 first prize. They never even got to Level 2, so $1 million was never on the line.