Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ESA Satellite Recovers: Total Loss To Geostationary

Posted by timothy on from the falling-forward-all-the-time dept.

Slimbob writes "About 2 years ago an Ariane 5 rocket malfunctioned and left a very expensive Artemis satellite in an unusable orbit. Well, over the course of 18 months, the European Space Agency actually managed to push the satellite into a usable orbit using measly 15mN ion thrusters! They managed the feat by reprogramming about 20% of the original control software and uplinking the patches to the satellite! See the ESA press release . Achievements include the first first major reprogramming of a telecommunications satellite, the first orbital transfer to geostationary orbit using ion propulsion, and the longest ever operational drift orbit."

17 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. Fuel by GigsVT · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The article says they used up almost all the ion fuel, but yet it will still have enough for 10 years of trim thrusting, was the original planned life much longer, or did it just have that much extra fuel?

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    1. Re:Fuel by Simon+Field · · Score: 4, Informative


      The article makes a distinction between the Xenon ion thrusters and "chemical propellant". The last orbital adjustments were made with "small chemical propellant thrusters, activated for the first time since launch".

      It looks like the 10 years number does not refer to the Xenon ion thrusters.

      --

      Free book: Science Toys You Can Make

    2. Re:Fuel by phobonetik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've been reading a few recent slashdot articles on Ion thrusters (e.g. the space ladder, I think). Where's a good intro on the things? I'm almost pleased they exist, sounds nice and sci-fi, even if i'm 21 :)

    3. Re:Fuel by warpSpeed · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The article says they used up almost all the ion fuel, but yet it will still have enough for 10 years of trim thrusting, was the original planned life much longer, or did it just have that much extra fuel?

      Since the operational drift is so much longer then what was originaly antisipated, I would be that they are consuming much less propellent then originaly expected, so they are able to get "10 years" out of what is left.

      GStar 3 or 4, put up by GTE in the late 80s, had a simmilar fate. It was lobbed into a bad orbit, written off (paid for), and then slowly (very slowly) moved into a "usable" orbit. The satellite had less propellent avaiable to it, so it was allowed to drift up and down, and side to side.

      GTE sold cheap time on the satellite since you could only get 5 to 20 minutes at a time without re-aiming your uplink antenna. A friend of mine wrote the software (in basic) that people used to aim thier uplinks antennas. However, since the satellite was paid for already, any money coming in was gravy at that point.

    4. Re:Fuel by Simon+Field · · Score: 2, Informative


      A Google search for "ion thrusters" returned a wealth of information, much of it suitable for an introduction. An excellent one is here.

      These devices are not new -- they have been in use for years.

      --

      Free book: Science Toys You Can Make

    5. Re:Fuel by PortWineBoy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I love ion thrusters too. I think you'll be seeing more and more of them. Dr. Mark Raymond of JPL kept up a mission log on the Deep Space 1 mission which used Ion propulsion to meet and dramatically exceed its design criteria. Some great photos of that Ion engine are here.

      --

      this sig deleted by another sig

  2. This isn't the first innovative satellite recovery by Sierran · · Score: 4, Informative
    A few years ago, Hughes Communications engineers used a lunar orbital slingshot maneuver to recover AsiaSat 1, which had been stranded in an unusable orbit. The insurance consortium that had already paid out for the satellite accepted a salvage deal with Hughes, who had manufactured it in the first place (it was launched on a Proton out of Baikonur). While they were using the designed maneuvering engines, as opposed to the stationkeeping thrusters, they ended up sending the satellite completely out of cislunar space in order to make the save.


    Reference: Flug-Revue

    --
    A hero is someone who knows when to run away. I am a hero. -Trent the Uncatchable
  3. "15mN ion thrusters" by rthille · · Score: 3, Funny

    15mN ion thrusters
    See honey, size doesn't matter!

    --
    Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    1. Re:"15mN ion thrusters" by MrPeach · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not the size of the thrusters, it's the length of it's operation!

  4. Re:Don't understand their error rate calculations by Merlin42 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think that instead of 109 it should have read 10 to the 9 or 10^9 ... now it makes perfect sense.

    --
    Thoughts on tech, Software Engineering, and stuff
  5. Cool Hack by JGski · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This kind of hacking has been going on for >30 years by NASA and the military to save satellites. Certainly saving expensive spacecraft is one of the clearly positive aspects of hacking and hacking talents.

  6. Expect more ions in the future by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The results of this botched lofting actually bode well for future satellite installations. Admittedly, using ion thrusters for final delivery would take much longer than using standard rocket technology, but it would also be enormously less expensive. The weight savings would be large, at a stage where weight is the most expensive part of the flight.

  7. Wow by robbo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Imagine trying to do that to a windows box. With each patch you'd have to engineer a probe to go up and hit 'Ok' when it reminds you to reboot. ;-)

    --
    So long, and thanks for all the Phish
  8. On patching satellites by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does anybody know what kind of authentication they use and how they deal with failed patches?

    Seems like somebody probably thought it through for the cost of one of these programs.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:On patching satellites by OneFix · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just a wild guess, but it's probably similar to how the Tivo does its update procedure. There are 2 boot partitions on the system...when an upgrade comes through, the system tests the integrity of the upgrade, switches the boot partition and reboots...

      I would figure they probably use a more elaborate system...but it's probably the same in practice...of course, they have simulators/emulators on the ground that can accurately recreate the satelite's internal components...so, there should be no bugs in the system when the patches are sent...

      The only thing they'ld need to worry about is noise on the uplink (corrupted files) and possible hardware failure...corrupted files could be tested for prior to patching, and hardware problems can be fixed by having backup systems...

  9. Re:Fuel: Why not... by Theaetetus · · Score: 2, Insightful
    _much_ cheaper to use solar-cell powered ion thrusters... which is what they did. That way, your fuel is already up there.

    -T

  10. Re:Fuel: Why not... by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, your energy is already up there. AFAI understand, you still need to bring something that can be ionized, then accellerated to provide the actual thrust. Advantage of the ion drive is that the exhaust speed can be higher than with a chemical rocket, so you need less fuel to produce the same thrust.