Slashdot Mirror


NASA Releases Classic Software To Public Domain

xpccx writes in with a bit from NewsBytes, "NASA turned 43 this month and marked the occasion by releasing more than 200 of its scientific and engineering applications for public use. The modular Fortran programs can be modified, compiled and run on most Linux platforms." The software can be found at OpenChannelSoftware.com. At long last I am ready to prepare my own space mission. I wonder if a whiskey barrel is gonna be air tight after I launch it/me into space with a trebuchet. (It's this sort of unconventional thinking that should get me my job at NASA. Or at least get me put to sleep).

47 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. Nasa.com by yatest5 · · Score: 2

    Next they'll be buying NASA.com - my mate is a support geezer and got his manager ringing him saying 'I want to see the mars landings but www.nasa.com has just got breasts all over the place' - oh how we laughed...

    --
    • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
  2. NASA by MxTxL · · Score: 2
    It will be cool to see what the NASA coders have up their sleeves. It will be interesting to see just how they think. Of course, as a younger coder, i'm not sure i'm going to want to learn FORTRAN just to do it.

    Are there other examples of NASA released code?

    1. Re:NASA by EricWright · · Score: 2

      Learn FORTRAN? That's funny. If you know basically any language, you can read FORTRAN... Just don't shudder too often. And no loud shouting, either.

    2. Re:NASA by JordanH · · Score: 2
      A few odd corners of the language should be checked into before delving too deeply into FORTRAN.

      For a lot of code that doesn't declare everything, you'll need to understand the variable name/typing default rules.

      You should understand what a COMMON, and EQUIVALENCE. Uhhmm, remember that everything is call by reference is important.

      That about does it, though, certainly up through FORTRAN77. FORTRAN90 is a much more complicated language.

    3. Re:NASA by Bluesee · · Score: 2

      I'm as old as NASA and I will be writing FORTRAN code as soon as I get off my ass and start my workday.

      It's not about the language, it's about the analysis, and frankly, for straightforward engineering (heat transfer, aero, even simulation), there is not a more appropriate language.

      It's nice not having to program windows and GUI's, but Real Analysis (TM).

      --
      SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
    4. Re:NASA by gorilla · · Score: 2

      For many of the problems that NASA code addresses, you're going to find all the code is in FORTRAN. It's the language that engineers & scientists have used for programming. Nowadays the front end might be programmed in another language, but the number crunching will probably still be done in a F77 library.

    5. Re:NASA by DGolden · · Score: 2

      Well, fortran and Ada. Actualy, while there's a kick-ass GPL Ada 95 compiler, there's no comparably complete fortran 95 gcc frontend, just an embryonic project. Which is a pity. F95 is pretty different to F77, and not actually all that bad...

      --
      Choice of masters is not freedom.
    6. Re:NASA by EricWright · · Score: 2

      Yeah... I forgot my manners. I didn't get to use F90 until my last 3 months or so (after 5 years of F77)... it did look like a much better language.

    7. Re:NASA by zulux · · Score: 2

      The old joke:

      A good FORTAN programmer can write FORTAN code in any language!

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  3. And..... by mbadolato · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...a new discovery in the cause of the Apollo 13's malfunction was made when someone noticed hacked code with the comment "3y3 0WnZ j00, N@5@"

  4. Sounds Good by dragons_flight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The NASA code used on space missions is some of the most throughly debugged anywhere. Can't afford a blue screen of death when lives are actually on the line. Also, you have to be pretty fault tolerant in case cosmic rays or other external phenomena are messing with your data.

    Of course the drawback is that most NASA code is too specialized to be of general interest.

    1. Re:Sounds Good by merlin_jim · · Score: 2

      I'm just disappointed they didn't release the shuttle sync stuff... the shuttle runs two computers, the ground runs another... and they have software that keeps in sync, down to the system clock. I've even heard rumor that it runs on commodity (radiation-hardened) 386 CPUs.

      That would be some cool software to get my hands on...

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    2. Re:Sounds Good by G-funk · · Score: 2

      Indeed. The one place where you can blame a crash on cosmic rays and get away with it, and they debug the code too well to use our favourite excuse (well save the phase of the moon).

      Sheesh!

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    3. Re:Sounds Good by Detritus · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Congratulations, everything that you posted is wrong.

      See this page for some factual information on the Shuttle's computer systems.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    4. Re:Sounds Good by merlin_jim · · Score: 2

      Gee... guess it's my day to be wrong.

      I distinctly remember reading that some NASA program had a setup like this, but can't recall where I read it...

      In any case, I do want to take a look at the redundency / parallelism stuff. Should be some really nice code there...

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    5. Re:Sounds Good by mpe · · Score: 2

      I'm just disappointed they didn't release the shuttle sync stuff... the shuttle runs two computers, the ground runs another...

      No the orbiter runs 5 (though IIRC some of the early flights actually carried 6). How can anyone get this wrong, considering that it was problems with synchronising the orbiter computers which delayed the first flight...

      I've even heard rumor that it runs on commodity (radiation-hardened) 386 CPUs.

      More likely you are thinking of the HST.

    6. Re:Sounds Good by merlin_jim · · Score: 2

      As one of the replies pointed out, this is clearly not the case.

      What you're describing is known as Tell Me Thrice bitwise redundancy. Three-way bitwise redundancy relies on three processors, any time a bit doesn't match, it has a best of two rule. Tell Me Thrice consults a seperate computer, usually on a slower link but in a secure, controlled environment, in that case.

      I don't think Tell Me Thrice has ever actually been implemented, though. If anyone has done it, it would be NASA... any idea what program it might have been?

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    7. Re:Sounds Good by nomadic · · Score: 2

      Are they trying to cloak the low power of their computers when they use "words" as storage units rather than bytes?

    8. Re:Sounds Good by MentlFlos · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The thing you gotta remember when thinking about these kinds of systems is that they are specialized to do only a few things. Even then, they usually have tons of support hardware to actually do the hard work.

      For example, I have a cisco 2514 router. Its main processor is a 68030 (think Mac LC series or around there). Do you think that this processor does all the work in this device? Nah. It just tells the chips that do the actual work what to do.

      The same idea could go for the computer in your car. If the sensors can only read in X samples per second... why waste the money on a computer that can read in X^2 samples/sec.

      NASA isn't doing the "big dick" contest with computers. They are building these things on a budget to do a task and do it well. If they need a computer that has a 1bit bus and a clock speed of 1hz, then so be it.

      end rant.

    9. Re:Sounds Good by merlin_jim · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but Tell-Me-Thrice has relevance even if two bits out of three always agree... it basically makes the assumption that if any of the bits don't agree, then something has gone wrong, and the minute chance that two of your processors are wrong and one is right is enough of a risk to a critical application (e.g. guiding a couple billion dollars worth of hardware around the solar system such that it gets where its going) that its best to just consult a known-good bit source (ground computer) in that case...

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
  5. Bugs? by ebcdic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It will be interesting to see if the "many-eyes" effect of free software turns up bugs in these programs that have been used for years.

  6. Re:Yet another terrorist attack! by radja · · Score: 2

    fortran, cause you can send it by email which is pretty hard to do with anthrax.

    //rdj

    --

    No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
    --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
  7. Trebuchet by Yet+Another+Smith · · Score: 2

    Hey, if they award you the X-Prize posthumously, be sure to leave at least part of the money to the Free Software Foundation, or some such .org.

    --
    if ($it != $onething) {$it = $another;}
  8. Trebuchet by FortKnox · · Score: 2

    after I launch it/me into space with a trebuchet

    Thanks to memepool's links, you can Buy a nice trebuchet for only $89 !!!

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  9. metric by Reckless+Visionary · · Score: 2

    Make sure you check the metric to English unit conversions before you use the sofware for anything important.

    --
    I think I'll stop here.
  10. System Requirements by jwriney · · Score: 5, Funny

    readme.txt
    ==========
    To run this code, you will need the following:

    * a Fortran compiler
    * a space shuttle

    --riney

    1. Re:System Requirements by Winged+Cat · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't suppose we could somehow convince AOL to ship this code on space shuttles? I don't mean NASA's shuttles, I mean manufacture more until we're sick of seeing them (or, at least, receipts for us to pick them up at the nearest spaceport) in our mailboxes... ;)

  11. Obligatory man-launching trebuchet link by victim · · Score: 2

    Those who haven't read it yet should read this link where Ron L. Toms launches people with a trebuchet. (You can also find him jumping the grand canyon if you look around.)

  12. whiskey barrel? That's nothing... by EvilJohn · · Score: 2
    ... I'm using a Cement Mixer.

    (Score yourself two bonus points if you remember this show.)

    --

    Less Talk, More Beer.
  13. Re:Finally by Detritus · · Score: 2

    Only if it is written by civil servants. Most NASA software is written by contractors.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  14. Re:Finally by johnbk · · Score: 2, Informative

    I am president of Open Channel Software. Most of the NASA software we are listing have a fee associated with the software, imposed on us by NASA and an organization called NTTC. We are trying to 'open' the process, at minimum, pushing for free downloads for private individuals. We are also trying to get community activity going around some of the more popular programs.

  15. Most modern NASA software is open by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most of the software developed for NASA projects these days is open -- at least, the scientific operations and data analysis software. For example, check out the solarsoft distribution of solar physics analysis software, including planning tools for most existing solar instruments. CVS and Sourceforge it ain't -- but you can get your hands on the actual software that is being used in the SOHO, TRACE, Yohkoh, and HESSI missions (and soon STEREO and Solar-B too).

  16. some such .org.... by cybercuzco · · Score: 2

    Like oh, say, Slashdot.ORG

    --

  17. Just imagine! by Erris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What a different world it would be if all tax $ funded software were available like this.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  18. NASA Releases Classic Hardware To BattleBots by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

    By Musan S
    WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A.,
    25 Oct 2001, 11:47 AM CST

    Kenme, Government Office of Strange Rumors. NASA turned 43 this month and marked the occasion by releasing more than 200 of its scientific and engineering appliances for use on BattleBots, the robot fighting show on Comedy Central. The outer space-ready booster rockets, thermal shielding equipment and gyroscopes can be modified and pitted against each other or most exisitng BattleBots such as Son of Whyachi and BioHazard. The Robert C. Byrd National Technology Transfer Center in Wheeling, W.Va., and BattleBots Inc., a for-profit scrap metal producer, are collecting the "NASA Classics" collection of new BattleBots based on discarded NASA equipment.

    The Byrd center has distributed more than 50 NASA technology-based BattleBots created by NASA engineers, said the center's president, Joseph Allen, in a statement. BattleBots now has access to NASA tech and "will help NASA promote the use of Cosmic Ray Shielding, Reagan-era Star Wars laser technology, and Hydrazine-based propellants for the television viewing public's benefit," Allen said.

    The classic tech, waiting to be annhilated for over 30 years in showers of sparks and smoke on cable television, served a variety of purposes at NASA. None of which is as interesting as what the twisted minds behind past BattleBots envision. Said Robert Everhart, creator of Atomic Wedgie, "Those NASA engineers are some scary folks. Atomic Wedgie can withstand most onslaughts, such as Diesector's Pick Axe or Minion's Fireman's emergency saw, but a 300 terawatt neodymium laser? Forget about it." Details are sketchy, but one NASA engineer with a giant smirk on his face who spoke on conditions of anonymity identified three NASA tech BattleBots in the works: the "Apollo Lunar Launcher", the "Viking Mission to Hell", and the "Rubble Telescope".

    Reported by Bewsnytes.com.

    11:47 CST

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  19. Re:Fortran? by cburley · · Score: 2, Informative
    Yeah, right. Tell me, what Distribution comes with Fortran?

    Red Hat, certainly. Probably it's easier to make a list of GNU/Linux distributions that don't come with a Fortran compiler, given that:

    • The GNU Fortran compiler (g77) is a component of the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC).

    • A free Fortran-to-C convertor tool (f2c), including run-time libraries, is available from netlib, and has been included on some distributions since before g77 was released to the public.

    If the Fortran code released by NASA sticks to the FORTRAN 77 standard, it'll likely work "out of the box" on Linux distributions.

    (Note that, while installing a distribution like Red Hat, you might have to explicitly select g77 to get it installed...it's not so small that it can be installed without checking with the admin doing the install, I guess.)

    --
    Practice random senselessness and act kind of beautiful.
  20. Hmmm by kruczkowski · · Score: 2

    Cool, I open /. and see NASA software. Click on the link wait for it to load, watching TV while waiting...

    After a few seconds I look and the first think I see on the right is, "Crack Growth and Fatigue Analysis"

    What does this have to do with uh software, nasa, umm computers?

    --
    hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
    1. Re:Hmmm by markmoss · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure if that was a serious question, but... Metal fatigue is a big concern at NASA because it can cause spacecraft to come apart in flight. A piece of metal under stress can develop tiny cracks. (If you designed the metal as thin as possible to save wait, substitute "will" for "can".) When the stress is relieved and then applied again, the cracks may grow. After a certain number of cycles, the cracks get too big and the metal breaks.

      The classic case of this was a very early jet airliner called something like Comet. Because early jet engines were pretty inefficient, they made the skin exceptionally thin so as to have more weight-carrying capacity available for fuel. When it climbed to altitude, the pressurized cabin would slightly bulge the skin outwards around the windows. When it landed, the skin would pop back. After a few months, planes started coming apart in mid-air. Microscopic examination (of not yet crashed planes) found patterns of cracks in the skin near the windows. They had to scrap the entire fleet...

      The same thing could quite easily happen with the space shuttle -- not just from cabin pressure, but also from high-stress launches and landings. Or the skin on a Mars probe may expand and contract thousands of times due to sun heating as it rotates in space. Making the metal thicker will prevent this, but every ounce of structural metal takes away an ounce of payload. So NASA has to design right to the edge of initiating metal fatigue for repeated-use items (the space shuttle), and for some probes it may accept that metal fatigue will happen, but the cracks will grow so slowly that the mission is finished before it fails. This requires very good software for simulating crack growth and analyzing metal fatigue.

  21. www.openchannelsoftware.com just posted ... by jayteedee · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Friday, October 26, 2001
    We would like to apologize to visitors from Slashdot, along with the rest of our community, for the problems we have experienced with our server this morning. We are in the process of upgrading our server to accommodate the spike in requests. We thank everyone for both their interest, and their patience. For those interested in downloading code from the NASA Classics Collection, you should be aware that we are currently required to charge a fee for the software. We are working with the people from NASA to try to "open" this software to enable downloads without fees, at least for private, non-commercial use.


    Just so I don't troll too terribly :)


    Probably the most famous application they are releasing is the NASTRAN (NASa STRuctural ANalysis) System which most of us aerospace types are already using in the industry. They also released some composite and general structural design tools.


    They also release numerous 2D and 3D aero flow tools.


    The one that caught my eye: SCRAM - An Engineer's Tool for Prediction of Airframe Integrated Scramjet Performance.


    The one-I-expected-to-be-there-but-wasn't: Planetary, interplanetary, and/or Mars multiple degree of freedom dynamic simulations. They gotta have a few of those, but apparently none were released.

    --
    Religion and science are both 90% crap..but that doesn't negate the other 10%.
  22. Public Domain - If you have money! by Black+Art · · Score: 2

    OpenChannel Software is SELLING copies of these programs. Don't expect any of them to be free or even cheap.

    One projects i was looking at (a compression algorithm comparision program) was about $154 for source.

    Sounds like another backroom deal where things get put in the public domain, but one company get control of it.

    Blech. And people wonder why no one trusts the government...

    --
    "Trademarks are the heraldry of the new feudalism."
    1. Re:Public Domain - If you have money! by afniv · · Score: 2

      Yeah, the source to TRASYS, which I used to use, is only $6500. That would be the most I would have paid for "open source". I tad too expensive for me.

      --
      ~afniv
      "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
      Richard von Weizs
  23. This is NOT Open Source (yet)!!! by kbonin · · Score: 2
    For example: NASTRANS license fees:

    Unix source docs: $250

    DEC Alpha AXP executable use: $2000 / year
    HP9000 HP-UX executable use: $2000 / year
    IBM RS/6000 executable use: $2000 / year
    DOS/Win3.1/95 executable use: $1000 / year
    Sun Solaris 2.x executable use: $2000 / year

    DEC ALPHA OSF/1 source access: $7000 / year
    SGI IRIX 5.x source access: $7000 / year
    Sun Solaris 2.x source access: $7000 / year


    Be nice when this code IS actually open source.

  24. Death is relative by fm6 · · Score: 2
    Can't afford a blue screen of death when lives are actually on the line.
    NASA's record is less than perfect. Remember Apollo 11? The onboard computer went into "executive overload" when it was most needed. I guess that's nicer than a simple crash, but not much of a difference from Armstrong and Adlrin's POV.
  25. Re:Finally by SkewlD00d · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Who gets the fees and how much?

    2. NTTC says "Open Channel Software (OCS) is an Internet-based organization that publishes, distributes and commercializes software created at academic and research institutions"

    3. NTTC describes themselves as a "research commericialization center."

    4. What are we paying tax dollars for if we have to pay to use the products of Federally Funded research? I thought the whole point of federally funded research was to do the jobs that typically wouldn't be undertaken in a commercial environment. Now these Special-Interest Groups (SIGs) and lobbyists are trying to sell-out the system. What gives? By the way, I work in a federally funded security research lab, so I have a basic idea of how the 'System' works.



    See this NTTC press release on this article.

    --
    The biggest trick the devil pulled was letting lawyers become politicians so they can write the laws.
  26. How is this "public domain"? by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2

    So I visited the site to look at their AI offerings, and the first interesting package I saw, AUTOCLASS III, costs $900 to download. If that's your idea of public domain, I'll just keep hoping we encounter alien life that uses the GPL.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  27. Wah wah by Graymalkin · · Score: 2

    MWSG, more whining slashdot geeks. Those free for non-commercial use contracts people use are ridiculous because you all know damn well that it is rare that anyone who uses that software in a corporate fashion pays for the stuff. How many of you have "free for educational or non-commercial use" software on your PCs at work? I bet a good number of you do. If you just want the code to play around with you can find a number of CFD Fortran programs all over the internet. The cost of binaries for these toys is about what you'll pay for FLUENT anyhow. Funny how the same people that complain about NASA messing up mission or needing more money are the same ones bitching that they dare charge money for something they worked on.

    --
    I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    1. Re:Wah wah by Graymalkin · · Score: 2

      A number of people alive today and almost certainly the 15 year old Linux geeks bitching about GNU software haven't paid for these programs. Should it be free to send stuff up on the Space Shuttle since the US taxpayer hasalready paid for it? I want my own space suit as well as a ride on the net supply mission to the ISS since my taxes are paying for it.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.