Talk:Rosetta (spacecraft)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rosetta (spacecraft) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

Spaceflight Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Europe: ESA High‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by ESA task force (assessed as Top-importance).

A news item involving Rosetta (spacecraft) was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 1 October 2016.

Wikipedia

Rosetta landing[edit]

On the main page, the Rosetta landing was described as a "crash-landing" but this article describes it as a slow landing, specifically "The orbiter descended more slowly than Philae did." where Philae's landing was already a "soft landing". http://www.nature.com/news/comet-crash-a-guide-to-rosetta-s-big-finale-1.20682 notes "Rather than disintegrate on impact, the orbiter will perform a gentle crash-landing, striking the comet at a slow walking speed (around 1 metre per second) at 10:40 utc. But because Rosetta is not designed to land, even this could cause its 32-metre-wide solar-panel wings to snap, and the craft to tumble and bounce." Is "crash-landing" the best phrasing? cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 13:34, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because it was not designed to land, it has no landing gear, and some damage was anticipated on contact with subsequent loss of control. BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would just call it "landing". It probably got damaged, but we have no way of checking its current status and no way to communicate with it, so it does not really matter. --mfb (talk) 13:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Media coverage and Vangelis[edit]

Vangelis released studio album Rosetta which is related to the ESA mission. Think it is relevant information, but didn't know where to edit it in the article so decided for the sub-section "Media coverage". However, as the sub-section is short and the sentence, after an edit, "On 23 September 2016, Vangelis released the studio album Rosetta in honour of the mission" is a bit out of scope, decided to edit information about the final official Livestream event "Rosetta Grand Finale" and hour-long video "Rosetta's final hour" in which was used album's music, thus making the sub-section more cohesive. However, in the reference there is no mention of Vangelis, but in the final video cue to "01:02:19" and "01:013:35" for the relevant bits.--Crovata (talk) 03:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've added the time frame to the Livestream citation. — Huntster (t @ c) 05:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rosetta flyby anomaly[edit]

Article Pioneer anomaly states:

"...cause of the Rosetta flyby anomaly..."

I was expecting to find some information about this anomaly in this article, e.g. flyby of which object, when it was measured, what was measured, and some values. And possible explanations.

--Mortense (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]