Graduate by Regressing in Surface Probe design , loosing the Wheel .

Happened across this link today about the ZIL-29061 made in Russia . www.abovetopsecret.com...

Watched a few others witht he same design which led to the Fordson snow tractor ( AKA The Snow Devil ) design of propelling itself . Now flash back to the Nasa probe that got stuck using the wheel . The likely hood of that design on a Nasa probe I suspect would not have gotten stuck .

The American version below and patent that Nasa could use without having to worry about the USSR and their similar design .

thesteamblog.wordpress.com...

Now Nasa and their rocket scientists could somehow keep the same principal and make it work with a little sweat and tears of joy . Do some RnD and see if it fits into their programs . Less complicated designs for future probes , but if they insist on the wheel oh well . Maybe they should give it some thought .

What really do they have to loose ? I,m calling dibs on the idea .

Looks like it would dig it's own grave on an alien planet. Besides I don't see how it could traverse abrupt rocks, you see it works in snow, on permafrost. That means there is hard ground. Besides Russia has never successfully lifted a craft half that weight beyond LEO.

Do you release how much smaller the Soyuz is than the Space Shuttle? The Russians also weren't very good at soft landings/powered landings on alien planets. That's the real reason they never sent men to the moon. Only one two orbit test flight of their Buran actually landed without a parachute drop, the only Buran space flight.

That thing must weigh 20 tons at least.

I understand you are talking about scaling down but still, having 8 independent wheels offer much greater maneuverability than two tracks. It's not like they were stupid. The life of all of the NASA rovers exceeded their mission plan, that cannot be said about the Russian rovers.

Getting stuck is more about expiring it's energy source than it's traction, I suppose you mean the recent Mars rover that got what they call stuck, even though it's 90 day mission lasted 1,990 some days.

My concept was strictly for the cork screw traction plus being able to float if they ever do run into fluids .

The wheels all 8 of them couldn't get them out because they had no traction on the powder / sandy surface going forwards and backwards . Surface area contact would be greater and consistent along the running edges with the cork screw design . Whether they articulate would come from RnD or how many per side used . Tensile strength of the blades on a cork screw design , bet it blunt or sharp edged .

Specifications

Length/weight
The Curiosity rover will have a length of 10 feet (3.0 m) and weigh 1,984 pounds (900 kg) including 176 pounds (80 kg) of scientific instruments.[13] It will be the same size as a Mini Cooper automobile.[26] This compares to the Mars Exploration Rovers which have a length of 5 feet 2 inches (1.57 m) and weigh 384 pounds (174 kg) including 15 pounds (6.8 kg) of scientific instruments.

If they wanted a large rock crawler they should of sent something that would / could do it but they were not climbing motorbike sized or even watermelon / pumpkin sized ejected crater material were they ?

The Russian designs are so bulky and look like they should be used for ballast sorry to say but they do work .

The wheel is vastly superior as a means of locomotion. What advantage does this thing have?

This design uses an Archimedes Screw for propulsion. It is very old technology with multiple uses.

In the past, the Archimedes Screw has also been used on small boats for propulsion and as a simple means to lift grain and water. In modern times, they are used in combines and in micro-hydro power generators.

It does not have any advantage over wheels on solid terrain. It doesn't really have much of an advantage over tracks on snow and ice.

Sorry , but when they recreated the conditions similar to those of mars this is what happened to the wheels .

www.wired.com...

www3.sympatico.ca...