this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
92 points (100.0% liked)

news

24519 readers
732 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Mr. Bakanov explained that unique scientific schools operate in Russia: they are focused on the study of Venus, the Moon, and Mars. According to him, no one in the world has replicated the Russian [sic] technology of landing on Venus yet.

What a joke... This is 1970s & 80s Soviet technology that has not been replicated by anyone else, Russian Federation included. Great Russian chauvinism moment.

[–] fox@hexbear.net 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Also, nobody's replicated it because after the soviets revealed Venus is a boiling acid hell there just wasn't much will or interest to keep landing on it. Like, try selling a billion dollar mission to Venus that'll melt into sludge 2 hours after landing vs one to Mars that'll run for a decade minimum.

And rover landing tech has come crazy far since parachutes attached to cannonballs. We've put a helicopter on Mars. But I'm not even sure a sky crane system like we use on Mars would be viable on Venus. Higher gravity, higher pressure, more corrosive atmosphere, higher heat.

[–] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Why would you even want to use the sky crane system on Venus? It has a thick atmosphere. You use a more appropriate landing mechanism. And if your lander that's gonna be destroyed in a couple hours costs a billion dollars then that's just an issue with production. Produce several, relatively unsophisticated landers and reserve the billions of dollar missions to like an airship or something.

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 7 points 8 months ago

An airship mission to Venus' upper atmosphere would be pretty cool

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Can you fly in a carbon dioxide atmosphere? Why do we need to send rover landers? Why don't we upgrade to quadcopter drones that can get around more? Perhaps with a base station?

[–] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's density that matters, and Venus has a very dense atmosphere. If you go high enough it becomes Earthlike in some ways. Landers can get certain data that is impossible to obtain from afar. Same reason we land on Mars. I have no idea how you'd begin to make a rover for Venus. It would break down in hours or you'd need to invent computers that can operate at several hundred degrees.

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

High density is good for flight no? The thicker the density the easier it gets to use propellers?

[–] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 4 points 8 months ago

Yes exactly which is why flight on Mars is kind of tricky and flight on Venus (ignore the acid) or Titan is a lot easier