Genesis Capsule Crashes; Chutes Blamed

Cyclotron_Boy writes "The Genesis probe (reported here) has crashed to the ground, near a road in the Utah desert. The stunt chopper pilots were not to blame, though. The drogue chute didn't open on re-entry. NASA TV is covering it currently. The choppers have landed near the probe, but no word yet as to the condition of the space dust." Many readers have also pointed to CNN's coverage. Update: 09/08 16:39 GMT by J : MSNBC has more coverage and a sad photo of the half-buried capsule: "The capsule broke open on impact. It was not yet clear whether the $260 million Genesis mission was ruined."

Comments

Heard on the NASA Channel

[Anonymous Coward]

KHAAAAAN!

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[Anonymous Coward]

i clicked the link ... it scared the $hit out of my hounds!

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[Anonymous Coward]

That was hilarious! I about choked on a pretzel! :)

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[Anonymous Coward]

it made a noble sound....

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[Anonymous Coward]

space.com image of 'UFO'

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[pentalive]

Andromeda Strain

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok two things occur to me...
first, the chopper pilots who had to be flying around thinking "just catch the 'chute, catch the 'chute...Where's the damm 'chute!"

Second, what're the chances that this project was run by the same guys who confused meters and yards a few years ago...

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[dasmegabyte]

Well, Genesis has come crashing down. Note to NASA: this is not the time to resurrect the Saturn series of booster rockets.

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[cbelt3]

Did you notice that the Genesis capsule looked EXACTLY like the one on the "Andromeda Strain" ?

Re:Heard on the NASA Channel

[famebait]

You did say "when entering the lithosphere", right?

Another priceless moment.

[d41d8cd98f00b204e980]

Probe to collect solar dust: $264 million

Defective piece of hardware --made in Taiwan, supposed to fire-open the chutes: $5.95

The face of JPL scientists: priceless!

Re:Another priceless moment.

[strictfoo]

Poor planning: priceless

Another NASA probe named Stardust is due to return to the Utah Test and Training Range in 2006, bearing samples of cosmic dust from a comet's wake. Stardust uses a similar parachute system to brake its descent. However, the Stardust capsule is designed to be cut loose from its parachute and survive impact.

"Yeah, let's just put that failsafe on one of the two probes." - Good call NASA

Re:Another priceless moment.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Probe to collect solar dust: $264 million"

The MSNBC article listed it as $260. I guess this is the Microsoft TCO coming into play.
Space capsules are cheaper when loaded with Windows and viewed on MSNBC.

Failure timeline

[RobertB-DC]

Here are some relevant quotes from the Spaceflight Now play-by-play. It looks like there were a number of things that could have gone wrong. Let's say it again, class... "Space Ain't Easy."

* Starting about 1045 GMT, the spacecraft spins itself up to 10 revolutions per minute. The spinning will provide the unguided sample return capsule with additional stability during entry. The spacecraft then rotates to the proper orientation for release and spins up to 15 revolutions per minute.

* Genesis will be stabilize with its nose down because of the location of its center of gravity, its spin rate and its aerodynamic shape.

* About 45 seconds after entry interface, the capsule will be exposed to a deceleration force three times the force of Earth gravity, or 3 G's. This arms a timer that is started when the deceleration force passes back down through 3 G's. All of the parachute releases are initiated from this timer.

* After one minute of atmospheric descent, the capsule should be at an altitude of 197,000 feet [...] Slightly over 10 seconds later, the capsule will be exposed to about 30 G's, the greatest deceleration it will endure during Earth entry.

* 1554 GMT (11:54 a.m. EDT)
The capsule has been spotted high over the planet!

* 1557 GMT (11:57 a.m. EDT)
The capsule appears to be tumbling!

* 1557 GMT (11:57 a.m. EDT)
The Genesis sample return capule is rapidly tumbling with no chute.

* 1558 GMT (11:58 a.m. EDT)
IMPACT! The capsule has slammed into the Utah desert after failing to deploy its chutes and parafoil.

* 1604 GMT (12:04 p.m. EDT)
Mission control says without the drogue chute and subsequent parafoil, the capsule would hit the ground at about 100 mph.

* 1610 GMT (12:10 p.m. EDT)
Recovery forces are moving toward the capsule, which has made a very spectacular crater.

(Disclaimer: I posted this in the pre-impact discussion as well.)

Re:Failure timeline

[AKAImBatman]

I'm watching NASA TV now, and they have not yet come to any conclusions other than "a parachute failure occurred". They know that the parafoil failed, but are unsure about the drought chute. They are currently concerned about other possible system failures.

They stated that they'll have a press conference on the event in an hour. NASA TV will be off the air until then.

Re:Failure timeline

[networkBoy]

A crash landing, even at the capsule's relatively slow speed of 9 mph, could ruin some of the data collected during the mission. from CNN piece

So I suppose 100 Mph is pretty bad then eh?
-nB

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

Best laid plans of mice and men

Re:Failure timeline

[wjsteele]

"* After one minute of atmospheric descent, the capsule should be at an altitude of 197,000 feet [...] Slightly over 10 seconds later, the capsule will be exposed to about 30 G's, the greatest deceleration it will endure during Earth entry."

30 G's??? I'd say that last millisecond was more like 300 G's. :-)

Bill

Re:Failure timeline

[lucabrasi999]

Miles per Hour? Or Kilometers per hour? Maybe NASA should check those measurements again...

Re:Failure timeline

[RobertB-DC]

Foo: Slightly over 10 seconds later, the capsule will be exposed to about 30 G's, the greatest deceleration it will endure during Earth entry.
Bar: 30 G's??? I'd say that last millisecond was more like 300 G's. :-)

Good point. Also, you'd think that Spaceflight Now would have said "atmospheric entry" instead of "Earth entry" -- though it did indeed enter the Earth, albeit unexpectedly. Maybe they knew something we didn't. :)

Re:Failure timeline

[David Horn]

They won't be able to go near it for quite some time as they're concerned that the pyros could still detonate.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

A very likely cause is that the tumbling cause the decelleration sensor to be incorrectly oriented. The trigger for the parachute sequence is almost certainly a single-axis accelerometer, and if the capsule is not aligned properly, it will never see the proper acceleration, and this never trigger the sequence.

There is absolutely no indication that the sequence ever started. The heat shield is still attached, and none of the recovery system covers separated before impact.

Brett

Re:Failure timeline

[lucabrasi999]

* 1610 GMT (12:10 p.m. EDT) Recovery forces are moving toward the capsule, which has made a very spectacular crater.

1620 GMT -- Recovery forces begin cleanup.

Re:Failure timeline

[Artifex]

Interestingly, when I was watching this live over the internet, they appeared to go to a picture of the capsule underneath a canopy, in a very grainy b/w sequence that lasted just a few seconds, then they switched to another camera, and later said they didn't yet have visual on any chutes.

Too bad I don't have cable, I'd have loved to have this on my Replay, to show you some caps of the sequence.

BTW, I did catch the LAT/LON, they said it was 40 07 40 and 113 30 29, that would actually show up in China. If you say -113 instead of +113, you get a location in the Deseret Test Center. Here's a Mapquest map. They also said it was "just north of the road." Of course, they could have accidentally or deliberately been a bit off on their coordinates, but this is what they said.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

"Space Ain't Easy." ...but it's necessary.

Re:Failure timeline

[RobertB-DC]

A very likely cause is that the tumbling cause the decelleration sensor to be incorrectly oriented. The trigger for the parachute sequence is almost certainly a single-axis accelerometer, and if the capsule is not aligned properly, it will never see the proper acceleration, and thus never trigger the sequence.

I thought it was interesting that the acceleration has to go past 3 gees to *arm* the device, then back below three gees to actually *deploy* it. Miss #1 and you don't get armed, and you leave a crater. Miss #2 and you get armed, leave a crater, *and* a little surprise for the recovery crew. Is this a new design, I wonder, or is this a tried-and-true method that's worked better than anything else so far?

By the way, "Brett", why not go ahead and log in? It's (virtually) painless!

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

That sort of sequence is not uncommon (assuming you consider that there haven't been a lot of automated, unmanned planetary entries since the 60's). It ensures the various parts deploy based on external conditions, not on a pre-set timeline (which could be off by minutes). High G's = reentry has started, reduced G's = dynamic pressure is low enough to safely deploy the drogue. Then deploy the main based on either the tension on the drogue chute line, or time.

Of course the time is critical - I seem to recall reading that the total entry to main deploy is only about 3 minutes, and a 10-second error (from clock, or equivalent tracking errors) would make a *huge* difference.

Brett

Re:Failure timeline

[balster neb]

But seriosly, anyone else here feels real sad about this? Just seeing the wreckage of this fairly high tech thing lying in the desert sand. There were a lot of high hopes for this fairly interesting scientific experiment.

Forget the lost money -- the folks behind the probe at NASA must be feeling terrible seeing years of hard work lying broken and half buried in the sand.

Sure, this is a relatively small failure (compared to say, Columbia), but anything of this sort is sad.

Re:Failure timeline

[autophile]

Starting about 1045 GMT, the spacecraft spins itself up to 10 revolutions per minute. The spinning will provide the unguided sample return capsule with additional stability during entry. The spacecraft then rotates to the proper orientation for release and spins up to 15 revolutions per minute.

When I was watching the thing via the long-range camera on NASA TV, it looked to me that, even when the capsule was just a bright dot with changing luminosity, it was spinning at much higher than 15 rpm. More like 60 - 80 rpm. At that point, I figured what I'd see next...

I'm just surprised the crater wasn't bigger, and that the impact was at only 100 mph. --Rob

Re:Failure timeline

[MadMorf]

Well, somebody's got to say it...

Welcome, to our new Alien Masters!

Re:Failure timeline

[jafac]

Note to self:
For subsequent capsule re-entry operations, include a redundant RF-remote override for firing of pyros for chute.

Thank God this thing was unmanned.

Re:Failure timeline

[Mulletproof]

Hey now, engineers always publish their specs with some padding in mind... It can actually take double that.

Re:Failure timeline

[LiquidCoooled]

I wonder if this is what the martians saw when Beagle arrived?

Re:Failure timeline

[anubi]

RobertB: You are so right about these projects not at all being easy.

They are at the cutting-edge of cutting-edge technology.

I noticed one poster joking about NASA having a 0.500 batting average. You know, when you consider what kind of game NASA is playing and the complexity of the playing field, 0.500 sounds damn good to even me, and they have been doing a helluva lot better than that.

I think you must have worked in the arena in the technical area to have had the insight on just how complex the issues are. Very few can appreciate the job JPL/NASA have done until they have been intimately involved in it. Once someone comes to term with the complexity and the unforgiving realities of natural laws governing mission success or failure, one understands why engineers and scientists cannot always be the obedient underlings the Dan Goldin types would like us to be.

Even with our best work, we cannot guarantee success - all we can do is get the statistical weights of success more in our favor. Even with our utmost care and attention, there are still so many things that can possibly go wrong.

Like anything else though, even if the thing we worked on failed, we still learn a helluva lot on how to do it better next time.

To me, the greatest tragedy is when we lose one of our guys, through accident, layoff, or retirement, because that represents a total loss of all the accumulated experience of that individual. Everything else can be replaced, but the experience and knowledge gained from it is priceless.

Re:Failure timeline

[LurkerXXX]

Did you see the CNN pictures with the helicopter right next the the remains of the capsule? The particles were stored on tiny tiny fragments of diamond and other minerals. If I had potential data, that cost many millions to get, sitting in tiny pieces parts on the desert floor broken up from the crash... I don't think I'd want a helicopter to land right next to it and potentially blow away part of my data.

Re:Failure timeline

[Martin Blank]

Forget the lost money -- the folks behind the probe at NASA must be feeling terrible seeing years of hard work lying broken and half buried in the sand.

Very true. I caught the replay of it (without sound) on a TV at work and thought something was wrong, that the capsule had broken away from the parafoil on capture. I could feel my stomach sinking -- and hitting -- about as fast as the capsule.

OTOH, the contractors are probably ready to give it another shot.

Re:Failure timeline

[jlp2097]

So I suppose 100 Mph is pretty bad then eh?

Canadian, Eh? ;)

Re:Failure timeline

[jerde]

it looked to me that, even when the capsule was just a bright dot with changing luminosity, it was spinning at much higher than 15 rpm. More like 60 - 80 rpm.

If it were spinning the way it was supposed to, you wouldn't have been able to see it: it was supposed to spin neatly around its axis, for stability. (Like a flying saucer spinning)

Instead, it lost aerodynamic stability altogether, and started tumbling randomly in all directions, which is what you saw. I think once it started tumbling, all hope was lost, since the G-forces of re-entry were jolting the insides in all different directions as it tumbled. Some of those forces might have been even higher than what it encountered on impact.

(i.e. you don't want to be spinning in different directions as you're doing a 30-G descent) :(

- Peter

Re:Failure timeline

[Cat_Byte]

I do. Things like this are the only things politicians remember when it comes to fund allocations...sigh. And they don't think of it as they need more $$ to keep this from happening. They see it as incompetence for not being able to succeed on what they have and cut funding even further most of the time.

Re:Failure timeline

[Afrosheen]

Makes perfect sense, but also makes you wonder just how difficult it would have been to install an "Oh Shit" remote trigger, just in case. I mean, a 200+ million dollar project might need a little manual intervention.

The stunt team could have hit a big red button, causing the probe's parachute to deploy, then swoop down for the capture. The whole mission seemed kinda wacky in the first place, with the helicopter and all. I wonder who sat down and decided it'd be a good idea.

Also you have to wonder HOW the damn thing hit land to begin with. Isn't 70% of the Earth's surface covered with water? You have a 3 in 10 chance of hitting land if this is true.

Re:Failure timeline

[karstux]

>> Thank God this thing was unmanned.

Well, a manned craft probably wouldn't have had this problem: Surely there would have been manual override controls.

This is precisely why probes and other un-manned spacecraft will never completely replace manned missions: If thinngs happen out of schedule, or different from a predicted sequence, a human will always be able to find a creative solution.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

That video was probably shot with a very long lens. Such a lens will appear to compress or 'flaten' the depth of field, so things look closer together than they really are.

Other video seemed to show the helicopter was much farther way.

Re:Failure timeline

[edsarkiss]

When I was watching the thing via the long-range camera on NASA TV, it looked to me that, even when the capsule was just a bright dot with changing luminosity, it was spinning at much higher than 15 rpm. More like 60 - 80 rpm.

you would have a hard time seeing even 15rpm watching tv (30 fields/sec), let alone "60-80".

why do i even read the comments on slashdot?

Re:Failure timeline

[cpt kangarooski]

Hell, it's just dust. They should've left it in a stable orbit for later recovery. Some astronauts could pick it up later, or perhaps we could've finally gotten some space ROVs for it, which would of course have other handy applications.

Re:Failure timeline

[karstux]

I'd guess that, once the capsule was broken open, the samples were compromised anyway. Performing science on them would probably be potentially unsafe - where do you draw the line between original data and terrestrial contamination?

Re:Failure timeline

[wulfhound]

RPM are per minute, not per second... 60-80rpm is one rev per second, or 30 fields/rev - perfectly visible.

Re:Failure timeline

[CuriHP]

If I recall, the helicopter method is how the military retrieved film from the first spy satellites (High rez digital pictures didn't exist yet.). So it's not entirelly new, though still somewhat wacky.

Re:Failure timeline

[Lost Penguin]

"IMPACT! The capsule has slammed into the Utah desert after failing to deploy its chutes and parafoil."

Missed;
They were aiming for Lindon!

Re:Failure timeline

[cpt kangarooski]

Because they aimed.

It's not as though we just deorbit stuff and pray like hell that it lands somewhere reasonable. This is why we had ships hanging around where our early capsules landed, why the Russians could get their capsules to land in Russia, and why the Shuttle, when not exploding, lands safely at any of a few predictable locations.

We certainly don't have a worldwide sky of helicopters, so they'd better well have aimed this thing towards the few (or one) copters they had to capture it.

It's not that hard.

It's only when we're not carefully controlling things -- like meteors, Skylabs and such, that they land all over the place. And even then we can make some guesses.

Re:Failure timeline

[CrudPuppy]

I would guess that they are better off having hit land than water in terms of recovering ANY useful data from the collector plates. But I am also guessing that since they feared that even a parachute landing would not be soft enough (hence the need for mid-air retrieval) then this "landing" has completely fucked their data. Sad.

Re:Failure timeline

[edsarkiss]

doh!

Re:Failure timeline

[HokieJP]

Well, I'm no expert, but I think re-entry creates a fair amount of EM interference. Enough to make any kind of radio control impossible.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

Also you have to wonder HOW the damn thing hit land to begin with. Isn't 70% of the Earth's surface covered with water? You have a 3 in 10 chance of hitting land if this is true.

They had a very specific part of Utah already planned as the landing site, and that part of the re-entry went as planned. So it wasn't a random chance that the return capsule was over land.

Re:Failure timeline

[psetzer]

When the recovery chutes won't deploy, the only creative thing that a human can do is flap their arms really quickly.

Re:Failure timeline

[kevlar]

Well the problem with NASA is it has severe budget problems. The organization hemorrhages millions of dollars and they don't know where. When organizations can't account of millions of dollars missing, its a definite sign of fraud. People at NASA are embezzling tax payer dollars and as much as I love NASA and what they stand for, I don't want more money to end up in their pockets.

I'd much rather we provide grants to comericial companies like Scaled Composites where you can gauge results better.

Obviously NASA is not going away and they shouldn't, but they have severe budget problems.

Re:Failure timeline

[CvD]

Why not use a simple altimeter? Yeah it'd have to be somewhat more complex being out in space for a while and all that, but in the skydiving world nearly everybody has an automatic activation device which will deploy their reserve parachute at a set altitude if still in freefall, should the skydiver become incapacitated or distracted or whatever.

If they used a system as described above, which seems very fail-prone, why?? when there are better systems available? And like someone else said, why didn't they have a backup remote radio system to release the parachute? Probably cause it would weigh too much, but like we've seen, the parachute deploying is a pretty crucial part of the mission...

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell, it's just dust. They should've left it in a stable orbit for later recovery. Some astronauts could pick it up later, or perhaps we could've finally gotten some space ROVs for it, which would of course have other handy applications.

That's a really good point. Don't we still have the International Space Station?

Re:Failure timeline

[snake_dad]

Almost correct. It was 'normal' airplanes, not helicopters, in those days.

Re:Failure timeline

[TheGrimace]

"why do i even read the comments on slashdot?" Heh...

Re:Failure timeline

[The Dobber]

Close. They did mid-air snags of the Corona's film capsule with C-119 (The Flying Boxcar).

http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~kclarke/Corona/story2. ht m

The capsules had a nifty lil device to thwart recovery by the Russians should the aircraft miss and it dropped into the ocean. A salt plug in the capsule would dissolve after a period of immersion and it would sink.

Re:Failure timeline

[Hans Lehmann]

you would have a hard time seeing even 15rpm watching tv (30 fields/sec), let alone "60-80".

For the clueless: rpm means Revolutions Per Minute. 15rpm is one revolution every 4 seconds, barely faster than a merry-go-round.

Re:Failure timeline

[Kishar]

Because of the trip up?

An altimeter-based system would have blown the explosives for the 'chute on the trip into space, which I imagine wouldn't have been good.

Re:Failure timeline

[eht]

Just to nitpick, TV, at least in the US is about 60 fields/sec (59.94 but who is counting), which is about 30 frames/sec (29.97).

Re:Failure timeline

[MoonBuggy]

30 G's??? I'd say that last millisecond was more like 300 G's. :-)

Cool, that means my hard drive can survive re-entry ;-)

Seriously though, isn't 300Gs a hell of a lot of force? - the sticker on the top of my Seagate SATA drive says that the warranty is invalid only if the drive is exposed to a shock in excess of that.

Re:Failure timeline

[eatmadust]

This is not a Troll. This has to be a reference to the Mars Climate Orbiter from wikipedia: Spate of failures Following the success of Global Surveyor and Pathfinder, another spate of failures occurred in 1998 and 1999, with the Japanese Nozomi orbiter and NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter, Mars Polar Lander, and Deep Space 2 penetrators all suffering various fatal errors. Mars Climate Orbiter is infamous for project engineers mixing up the usage of imperial units with metric units, causing the orbiter to burn up while entering Mars' atmosphere.

Re:Failure timeline

[Muad'Dave]

...barely faster than a merry-go-round.

15 rpm on a 30' diameter merry-go-round will get you 1.16g of lateral acceleration. That's a little fast for me...

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

obviously you haven't watched MacGuyver ;-)

Re:Failure timeline

[lucabrasi999]

Mars Climate Orbiter is infamous for project engineers mixing up the usage of imperial units with metric units, causing the orbiter to burn up while entering Mars' atmosphere

Bingo! You now win the prize! The check is in the mail. Just don't cash it for a couple of weeks.

Re:Failure timeline

[Hans Lehmann]

I'd much rather we provide grants to comericial companies like Scaled Composites where you can gauge results better.

Because as we all know, private companies are much more trustworthy when given a big steaming pile of government money. And how exactly can you gauge the results of a Scaled Composites mission any better than a NASA mission?

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll never understand why Nasa won't just put these vehicles in orbit and retreive them with the space shuttle while up there for other purposes. If reentry is so complex, why not do it with a more trusted vehicle. Is the EVA required for the capture too dangerous? Is it impossible to slow down the object enough to put it in orbit and retrieve it there?

Re:Failure timeline

[jandrese]

Hot damn, where is your merry-go-round? That sounds like a blast to ride, not for little kids though.

Re:Failure timeline

[dgatwood]

Only during a very short period of time while you pass through the ionosphere. It's called an ionization blackout and is caused by hot, ionized gasses in the upper atmosphere. If you stand outside at night and see the aurora borealis... same thing, basically.

Once you have passed into an area of denser atmopsphere, radio communication becomes possible again. The Apollo, if we use that as a guide for where parachutes would typically be deployed, deployed its chute at about 25,000 feet (about 7.6 km). The ionosphere starts at about 260,000 feet (about 80 km). Now I'm not saying that parachutes wouldn't be deployed higher for something trying to land on land, but not ten times higher....

Just my $0.02.

Re:Failure timeline

[Afrosheen]

It was still pretty fuckin stupid. In the off chance that the chopper missed, splat. If the parachute didn't deploy, splat. Now, had they aimed it for a lake or the sea, you miss, splash. You can still pick it up with a chopper.

In the immortal words of John Madden, "ya gotta wonder what they were thinking on that one.".

Re:Failure timeline

[sharkdba]

But seriosly, anyone else here feels real sad about this?

Yes. I was surprised at the amount of joking around here. After all it was supposed to bring particles from the sun, which would help in our understanding of what is going on in there. The only hope is that there will be enough data to analyze what went wrong.

On the other hand, if there will be more missions like this (collecting various space particles) and reentry is such a critical maneuver, why can't NASA practice on this part for a while? They could send a cheap dummy probe into space, and then practice catching it on reentry, until the process is almost perfect. THEN send a multimillion probe to a "real" object.

Re:Failure timeline

[CmdrGravy]

Hmmm, this would indicate the possibility of some kind of conspiracy although personally I think we should not rule terrorism.

I think it's probable that a fundamentalist particle denier sect of Mormons secreted a suicide bomber on board the capsule, unfortunately the bomber appears to have stolen the explosive latch and taped it around his waist thus rendering the release mechanism inactive.

Re:Failure timeline

[Illserve]

There's a good reason people are upset.

It's because of Apollo.

Even without considering the technology difference between now and 1960's, this is a relative cakewalk to the miracles they performed in getting Men to and from the moon several times without a single fatality.

And when you consider the difference in materials and instrumentation, it's an even worse comparison.

NASA maybe be underfunded, but they are still screwing up on the things they are doing. We are beyond the point at which bringing an unmanned satellite down from orbit should be troublesome.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

You hit water it's more like, 'splat', then various pieces sink. I'm pretty sure hitting water that fast is as bad as hitting ground.

Re:Failure timeline

[atrizzah]

And people want them to send nuclear waste to space! Ha!

Re:Failure timeline

[Delta Vel]

I cried, watching the crash. Nothing like when I heard about Columbia (I'd say "or the Challenger" but I wasn't old enough to understand then) but yeah.

I'm not ashamed to admit it.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

miracles they performed in getting Men to and from the moon several times without a single fatality.

I guess you're not counting the three men who died on the launch pad in the Apollo 1 tragedy...

Re:Failure timeline

[wjsteele]

Well, I'd say 300 G's is a lot of force... look at what it did their pretty little egg (spacecraft)... it's gonna take a lot of the King's Horses and a lot of his Men to put it back together, that's for sure!

Bill

Re:Failure timeline

[Garion Maki]

just a gues... but coulden't it be that the space shuttle needs to be empty to land?
the difference in weight could screw some stuff up, and since there are people onboard the shuttle, you don't want to screw up...

but ofcourse, they should still think of designing a shuttle type of spaceship that can take off loaded (with satelites, supply's etc.) and land loaded (with probes etc.)

Re:Failure timeline

[mlyle]

It chooses where to land based on the earth-entry burn. The spacecraft landed within its error ellipse, at the Utah test and training range. So navigation worked pretty well.

Sending radio signals to a probe at orbital velocity in the process of entering the earth's atmosphere is difficult because of the plasma that forms from the entry heat. And deploying the chutes later (at higher atmospheric pressure) likely wouldn't work very well. The Shuttle is one of the few crafts that keeps telemetry data going during entry-- using the Telemetry Data Relay Satellites that NASA has established for this purpose (they talk upwards so that the radio signal doesn't need to go through the plasma). I hope that more sample return missions in the future will use this type of option to get telemetry data back home.

Re:Failure timeline

[Garion Maki]

how about covering the sensor with a cap, and pulling the space between the cap and the sensor near to vacuum?

when you launch, the vacuum sucks the cap onto the sencor, making shure that it stays there, and when the preshure outside of the cap equals the inside, the cap would not be held at it place anymore, and if you leave a bit of air in the vacuum space (very low preshure), then it would even blow of once you reached the full vacuum on space, leaving the sensor free for reentry...

Re:Failure timeline

[Col Bat Guano]

Yeah, cutting edge technology. Like knowing to use Metric throughout...

Re:Failure timeline

[Cecil]

Just a note. It is very common in North America to reverse the generally accepted axis of longitude coordinates so that west is positive and east is negative, so I'm sure it's not just a mistake.

I work on GIS software, too, so I am not just talking out my ass (for once). And yes, before you ask, our software does reverse the longitudes to make west positive.

Re:Failure timeline

[Illserve]

No, I'm not.

That was a test firing, so it wasn't part of the actual process in bringing men to and from the moon. Safety checks and processes were circumvented (plus pressurized pure oxygen in the capsule!!), because people didn't consider a test firing on the pad dangerous.

Similarly I wouldn't consider the astronauts killed in airplane crashes against them.

But every time the chips were down and men left the launchpad, they got back alive.

Re:Failure timeline

[zakath]

That's great and all. Let's just put this to the American people and see if they're satisfied with the rate of success compared to the amount of money they're dumping into maintaining a fat-cat bureaucracy. I'm a huge fan of space exploration but seeing what great thing NASA did early on, with much less, compared to the blunders they've made lately really makes me wonder.

Re:Failure timeline

[Afrosheen]

ASSOCIATED PRESS: AP NEWSWIRE 3PM GMT

Following the disastrous failure of the Genesis probe landing today, NASA scientists have given careful thought and consideration to the next-generation Genesis probe's re-entry system. The system's failure to deploy a parachute/parafoil descent mechanism today has been completely removed from the design. The new design solution is simple and elegant and is awaiting approval from Caltech and JPL scientists. The new solution? A circus net. Yes, the very same net that catches high-flying trapeze artists at the circus has been given the preliminary green light by NASA. Using kevlar and carbon-fiber reinforced strands rather than the traditional elastomer blend, the netting will be an order of magnitude stronger than it's circus cousin, yet can absorb the impact of a common egg traveling 4000mph without breaking the egg. Scientists only have to work out what to do with the egg once the initial bounce occurs; suggestions include medieval moats surrounding the net with trained swordfish for retrieval or very large bags of feathers.

Re:Failure timeline

[Somegeek]

just a gues... but coulden't it be that the space shuttle needs to be empty to land?

Bad guess.

They bring lots of payloads back down, commonly science experiments that they took up in a labratory module that they bring back down with them.

Check the following link for a story where they captured two satellites and returned to Earth with them.

http://www.spacenet.on.ca/stories/robotics/westarp alapa/

Re:Failure timeline

[LiquidCoooled]

Do not underestimate the power of an inanimate carbon rod!

Re:Failure timeline

[LiquidCoooled]

Why not just leave it switched off until your actually in space, or until such a time that they are needed? Spacecraft can be controlled for all other kinds of actions, why not this one?

Dave: "This is Mission control, we are go for parachute enable process, on my mark"

ship: "beep"

Dave: "This is Mission control, enable automated parachute deployment."

ship: "I'm sorry dave, I can't do that!"

Dave: "Why not?"

ship: "Because I'm buried in SCO's backyard, you forgot to adjust your clock for daylight savings time!!!"

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, basic physics would tell you it'd probably hit at 0 G's. Without a parachute to slow the descent it would quickly hit terminal velocity (remember the movie.. when gravitational pull, acceleration, is exactly countered by drag). Two forces in perfect cancellation means no acceleration (f=ma). Therefore, it hit a 0 G's.

Re:Failure timeline

[anubi]

There was one heck of a "paradigm shift" ( to use management words ) that took place in the 90's. You must have seen it too.

Engineering wasn't all that got hit. Our factories took it hard. We all got to hear that "whooshing sound" Ross Perot spoke of.

Being able to do something special wasn't valued much anymore as we strove for commodification of the labor market. No-one seems valued much for being able to make things work anymore, what seems valued highly are the "people skills" to tell someone else to do it.

We are spawning off a generation of people who barely know how to use something, much less fix it if it breaks. Who among us can fix a broken TV... or even explain to their kid how it works? ( I pick that because I used to fix TV's at the neighborhood fixit shop for fun when I was a kid.)

I am seeing such a mad rush today to adopt technology without a prerequisite understanding of how that technology works.

I feel it started with the transistor radio, as soon after they came out, it became the norm to just toss it when it breaks. Soon thereafter, nobody included schematics with the purchase of an electronic product.

I still have my old "Technical Manuals" that came with my original PC... Not only did they have the wiring diagram for each card in the book, they also had SOURCE CODE of the BIOS!!!

Things are different today. We are expected to use things without understanding how they work.

I remember well when the "managementization craze" hit our little aerospace company. Everything changed from us understanding exactly what we were doing, and trying our best to do it right the first time, to trying to do it under ever decreasing cost goals.

Ever tried to take a timed test where the instructor gives you a bit more work to do than you have time for? Yes, it is a good way to make sure not a minute is wasted - but then, one is very apt to make mistakes one should have not made.

In the space exploration world, the only passing grade is 100%. Genesis got a point knocked off for some little doodad in its drogue chute system malfunctioning after an otherwise perfect score.

Am I a little bitter... yes.

I was one of those guys who did not go well with management techniques when they got in the way of doing something right. It takes me a lot of time to work with something long enough to understand it to a point I really feel comfortable with it. It became the order of the day to have someone constantly lording over me and goading me on with books full of charge numbers and accounting systems to manage me by the hour on how long I am allocated to work on something.

It became just like that timed test...

How do I tell someone making twice as much money as I am to buzz off? The company has kinda made it obvious whose expertise is more valuable.

There was a day when each of us techies felt we were an indispensable member of a team, and each of us relied on each other much like components of a race car.

As we became commoditized and interchangeable, something happened to my "inner drive". I feel I am just another nut in the box.

I've seen this psychological warfare going on in the workplace, as the manager types strip us of our individuality to make us all look like commodity parts. We have to act the same, dress the same, look the same, and spend our day in identical cubicles like rows of laying hens.

Remember when engineers worked in labs, not cubicles?

Re:Failure timeline

[mlyle]

Not exactly the same thing.. The energy of re-entry creates a blanket of charged particles that prevent communications. It's not natural occurance of hot, ionized gases that creates the problem, per se, but the actual energy of the craft heating and ionizing a layer of plasma beneath it. This is the reason why the Shuttle, during re-entry, talks "up" to TDRS satellites instead of down to the ground. UHF comms are not typically established until the shuttle is at a relatively low altitude.

So basically, the time of blackout is not tied to when the craft is in the ionosphere-- but rather when re-entry energies are high (some of which occurs in the ionosphere). A typical blackout for a high energy re-entry would extend from 90 km down to 40km of altitude.

deployed its chute at about 25,000 feet (about 7.6 km).

Ah, but there's more to the design of the craft than just the total amount of parachute braking to accomplish. Genesis was designed with a drogue chute at 33km (108k ft) for stability during the descent. The higher altitude allows the drogue chute to be structurally simpler and lighter, as the peak forces encountered during deployment are less, and serves to stabilize the craft on descent. It would effective to some altitude somewhat lower than that, but at some point the stresses caused by the higher atmospheric pressure would have undesirable effects.

So basically, there's a narrow window after communications would be re-established to get useful telemetry and deploy the chute. And many of the possible failure modes (computer failure, battery failure, pyro failure) would not be addressed by such a "emergency deploy" button.

A good solution to all this might be to just use TDRS at a really low bitrate for sample return missions like this. I hope NASA develops systems to allow that to happen. It would both give us a better idea on why things failed and perhaps allow recovery from some situations like this.

Re:Failure timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, great work Newton.

He wasn't referring to the short period of time between first touching the surface of the Earth and coming to a final stop at the bottom of its crater, though. Nope, definitely not that time.

Re:Failure timeline

[twostar]

this is aerospace, the factor of safety is only 1.5

Re:Failure timeline

[Lt.Hawkins]

except for that whole (or partial?) challenger thing.

Re:Failure timeline

[Tablizer]

Genesis now has a new name: Earth Beagle

Re:Failure timeline

[tiny69]

The first 13 missions didn't provide any images. There were problems with everything - heart-breaking failures.

And people complain when a single NASA mission fails...

Re:Failure timeline

[Behrooz]

There's no such thing as a 'cheap' dummy probe when adding in launch costs on current hardware. The shuttle costs over $20,000 per pound of payload launched to LEO.

>$40M per ton. Not cheap.

Re:Failure timeline

[sharkdba]

...adding in launch costs on current hardware

Well, in that case, why not send a bunch of them at once, put them all in orbit, and then start sending them down one at a time. Should bring the cost per unit down.

Re:Failure timeline

[Bagheera]

BTW, I did catch the LAT/LON, they said it was 40 07 40 and 113 30 29, that would actually show up in China. If you say -113 instead of +113, you get a location in the Deseret Test Center.

Actually, Lat and Lon are measured Ease/West from Greenwich, and North/South of the equater, so the correct syntax would have been 113W by 40N (plus minutes and seconds, of course.)

As I remember it, star charts us a similar nomenclature with degrees east/west from Aries and north/south from the ecliptic.

The display (I wasn't watching, so only have your description here) may have simply omited the pertinant W/N data. They knew which hemisphere it was coming down in, after all.

Re:Failure timeline

[dradler]

30 G's??? I'd say that last millisecond was more like 300 G's. :-)

Using 193 mph as the impact speed and 30 inches (half the capsule diameter) as the stopping distance, I calculate about 5000 Gs.

Re:Failure timeline

[Boronx]

They would have to have burned off some velocity some how, otherwise the capsule wouldn't have been captured by the Earth.

They'd either need some kind of propulsion, or some sort of anti-slingshot effect.

Re:Failure timeline

[DerekLyons]

Makes perfect sense, but also makes you wonder just how difficult it would have been to install an "Oh Shit" remote trigger, just in case. I mean, a 200+ million dollar project might need a little manual intervention.

Do keep in mind that such an "Oh Shit" device is not itself free from the possibility of failure. (It was just such an "Oh Shit" system, the backup O-ring, that failed on Challenger.)

Re:Failure timeline

[DerekLyons]

There's a good reason people are upset. It's because of Apollo.

You are utterly correct... Because the public has an utterly and completely distorted picture of how safe and sucessful Apollo was. The many foul-ups, near misses, accidents, broken hardware, etc. etc. are not widely known.

And when you consider the difference in materials and instrumentation, it's an even worse comparison.

Again, you are utterly correct. Apollo was heavily instrumented, had multiple backups that could be activated by the crew, and only had a short operational lifetime. Genesis wasn't heavily instrumented, had no crew to operate the backups, and had a long periods during which most of it's systems were near inert.

Re:Failure timeline

[CProgrammer98]

Congratulations, your ability to confuse units means you now qualify as a NASA Scientist.

Your first salary check is in the mail...

Re:Failure timeline

[CProgrammer98]

Last time I checked, Space Shuttles didn't go to the moon, which is the context he was talking about...

Re:Failure timeline

[Mark Hood]

I thought it was interesting that the acceleration has to go past 3 gees to *arm* the device, then back below three gees to actually *deploy* it. [...] Is this a new design, I wonder, or is this a tried-and-true method that's worked better than anything else so far?

It worked for Keanu...

Mark

PS OK, technically it worked for Dennis, but Keanu's such a silly name.

Re:Failure timeline

[surprise_audit]

I thought the comms blackout was at least partly caused by the intense heat of re-entry wrapping a layer of plasma around the forward end of the object. So, yes it's an ionization blackout, but no it's not (solely) due to the ionosphere.

Re:Failure timeline

[Kishar]

the vacuum sucks the cap onto the sencor [sic]

Vacuums don't suck. Everything else blows.

Re:Failure timeline

[dradler]

Using 193 mph as the impact speed and 30 inches (half the capsule diameter) as the stopping distance, I calculate about 5000 Gs.

Oops. Forgot to divide by 9.8. It was 500 G's.

Re:Failure timeline

[6th time lucky]

No, the "Oh Shit" device for Challenger would have been an operational ejection system. The backup O-ring, or even the primary O-ring was the F*** up. (and the solution, hey lets just add a third one and see if *that* one holds-i wonder if duct tape (MIL spec of course at $1000 a roll) is used anywhere in the space program)

Re:Failure timeline

[gujo-odori]

I think that swallows would be the most effective retrieval mechanism after the initial bounce. Two of them could catch it on a string and carry it, you see...

Re:Failure timeline

[6th time lucky]

Well we certainly wont have an ISS for long if NASA starts aiming half-ton probes travelling at 20000mph are it with their current track record.

I don't know about capturing solar particles

[Anonymous Coward]

But I smell some future engineering opportunities for a wiz-bang excavation technique for the next Mars rover mission.

hmmmm....

[The Salamander]

Personally, I blame the ground.

Re:hmmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

I blame GRAVITY!

Re:hmmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Gravity would not have been a problem without the ground...

Re:hmmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

the ground would not have been a problem without gravity

Re:hmmmm....

[Flower]

Definitely wasn't Genesis' friend.

Re:hmmmm....

[mrchaotica]

The ground and gravity are conspiring against us!!!

Re:hmmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

At least the capsule hit the ground, it could have been worse the other way around. After all..

in Soviet Russia, the ground slams into your space capsule!

Re:hmmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember: It's not the fall that kills you - it's the sudden stop at the ground.

Re:hmmmm....

[Archangel Michael]

For those on the left "It is Bush's fault"

For those on the right "It was caused by Kerry in Vietnam"

For those in the center "It was Fox News' fault"

For those near Roswell "It was the aliens fault"

For the environmental wackos "It will cause global warming"

For the NOW gang, "It is a sad day for womens reproductive rights"

For Scott Peterson trial, "This proves Scott did not kill Lacy" ...... I could go one. But should I?

Re:hmmmm....

[Craig Davison]

I blame Phil Collins. Trespass was their only really good album, although I did enjoy Nursery Cryme.

Re:hmmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

the trick to flying is to throw yourself at the ground and miss.

Re:hmmmm....

[Cat_Byte]

Its not the fall. Its the sudden stop at the end. I lean towards it being the ground.

Re:hmmmm....

[Cat_Byte]

For those on the right "It was caused by Kerry in Vietnam"

Hey I'm on the right. It wasn't because he was in Vietnam. It was because he voted for the parachute funding before he voted against it.

Re:hmmmm....

[xSauronx]

omg ....thee appears to be what looks like a volcano coming from the ground...quick...the ground is devloping weapons of mass destruction, we must stop this!

Re:hmmmm....

[thrill12]

I wonder what it was thinking... Not something in the sorts of:

And wow! Hey! What's this thing coming towards me very fast? Very very fast. So big and flat and round, it needs a big wide sounding word like... ow... ound... round... ground! That's it! That's a good name - ground! I wonder if it will be friends with me?

Re:hmmmm....

[nasta]

For those on slashdot "It's the slashdot effects fault!"

Right!

Re:hmmmm....

[NanoGator]

"Personally, I blame the ground."

I got in trouble in high school over a comment like that. Channel 1 ran a pop quiz "What is the most common cause of plane crashes?" I blurted out "Gravity!"

Evidently, that's a 'see the principal' offense.

Re:hmmmm....

[badasscat]

Hey I'm on the right. It wasn't because he was in Vietnam. It was because he voted for the parachute funding before he voted against it.

I'm on the left, and I say the accident occured because the first parachute was AWOL, and the backup parachute refused to report for duty when called.

(At least my metaphor is actually a metaphor.)

Re:hmmmm....

[sharkdba]

The ground and gravity are conspiring against us!!!

You forgot to mention the real factor behind the destruction: electromagnetic force. It's what actually caused the ultimate destruction. Gravity was just a helper here...

Re:hmmmm....

[hplasm]

It's the damn particles ganging up on us now!!

Re:hmmmm....

[Cat_Byte]

I'm still on the right and say the documents were forged! ;)

Hazmat teams on site

[unfortunateson]

Latest reports have a 10-foot-tall fungal-like growth expanding rapidly and resisting all fire and chemical methods of containment.

Not.

But it would have been interesting.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Anonymous Coward]

i blame all of this on the hurricanes that have been owning florida

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[RobertB-DC]

Latest reports have a 10-foot-tall fungal-like growth expanding rapidly and resisting all fire and chemical methods of containment.

Oh, come on. Everyone knows it's going to be nearly impossible to tell what's going on, except that the rubber fittings on the helicopters will spontaneously dissolve, and the only survivors in the nearby town will be the colicky baby and the Sterno swigging wino. Right?

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[pilgrim23]

In honor of this the "landing site" has been renamed Grovers Mill New Jersey

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Rei]

... and it keeps babbling on about Juffo-wup.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[balster neb]

On that note, the crashed probe looks very much like a UFO :)

I am currently counting down days till I receive one or more of these pics forwared as chain email that claims a UFO crashed in Utah/Arizona/Texas/Nevada, and the guys standing by the helicoptor are from NASA/The Pentagon/The CIA. The whole incident was covered up, and these photographs were leaked from a website/retrieved from the camera of a witness who later dissapeared.

Seriously, people have been fooled into believing that these stills from Armageddon are actually pictures of Space Shuttle Columbia blowing up.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear god,

an Andromeda Strain joke.

I bow to you.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, the cover-up people in the Department of Alien Affairs have developed much more advanced techniques. Nowadays they can predict a crash-landing UFO several days in advance, cook up a cover story of a landing scientific probe, embellish it with fascinating stories of stunt helicopter pilots, and then they say the "probe" crashed to explain why there are no scientific results. But I can see right through their plans! Hang on, there's someone on the door...

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Anonymous Coward]

you are the non and I grow turgid

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[stefanlasiewski]

The moral of the story?

Always trust the dirty drunk guy who drinks sterno.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Anonymous Coward]

It's OK though, I still have the red aluminum "key" my Dad conned off the usher at the movie theater, so I can safely disarm the thermonuclear device when the seals go. Everybody can rest easy on this one and wait for the "Self destruct has been cancelled" message on the PA system.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[myowntrueself]

Even so, they will *hopefully* now quarantine the entire state of Utah.

Should fix all manner of problems in the world...

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[Beautyon]

If you love that movie, you ABSOLUTELY must see "Strain Andromeda The".

It will completely, and utterly open your mind.

And I am not just saying that.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[magefile]

Y'might want to rethink your choice of words ... until I clicked the link, I thought you meant idiots^H^H^H^H^H^Hpeople thought pics of SSC blowing up were Armageddon (as in, a vision of the end of the universe).

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[magefile]

Or just nuke the damn thing to prevent contamination. I mean, you never know what's going to slip over the border.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[AndroidCat]

Bah, it's enough of a strain watching Andromeda on Saturdays.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[bckrispi]

Fwiffo, darling. Answer the door!

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[AndroidCat]

That would explain the sound of a giant lid being unscrewed that the crews are hearing from the pit.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[myowntrueself]

"I mean, you never know what's going to slip over the border"

Yeah all sorts of slime... like Darl McBride.

Or mormons!

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[DJTodd242]

Well I'm glad to see that I have some credibility, even if it's only around here. Now pass the squeeze.

Re:Hazmat teams on site

[stefanlasiewski]

So it's Memento + The Andromeda Strain?

Don't Nuke It...

[the darn]

Andromeda feeds on radiation!

Re:Don't Nuke It...

[gangien]

Wow, nice referrnce, lol.

Re:Don't Nuke It...

[CanadianCrackPot]

No Rommie uses AP/P reactions to power herself. I mean come on its the most powerful Battleship around, (aside from a Federation starship sorry but Picard would make short work of the Andromeda Ascendant with the Picard Manouver).

According to Nasa TV...

[marbike]

The drouge chutes failed to deploy correctly and the parafoil either sheared off or never deployed. They are concerned that the mortar used to deploy the drouge is still live, so they are treating the scene as a "Live Spacecraft".

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Buran]

I also have to wonder about the pyro heaters for the chutes. If you've seen Apollo 13, you know there was worry that the heaters, which had been turned off to save power, might not have been able to heat the chutes enough before re-entry to keep them functional.

That mission defied the odds, the chutes deployed (all of them!) and it landed. Looks like fate may have finally caught up.

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[AKAImBatman]

I also have to wonder about the pyro heaters for the chutes

I don't know about Genesis in particular, but many modern space probes use small Pu-238 particles as heaters. Since the heat is actually generated by radioactivity, there is no power draw, and no way to turn the thing off.

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Paulrothrock]

They are concerned that the mortar used to deploy the drouge is still live

"I tried to warn them that proto-mortars were unstable, but they wouldn't listen!"

Do I get extra points because I used a pun and a Star Trek reference?

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[CodeWanker]

This is probably the downside of "Smarter, faster, cheaper." Remember Viking and Voyager? We sent 2 because we figured 1 of them would fail and, Hot Diggety Dog! They both worked. So we got cocky. And now we have this kinda thing happening.

But, you know, for $260,000,000, you oughta get a capsule that can survive a 100 m.p.h. impact. Back in the 1960's we embedded probes inside balsa wood balls for landing on the moon since parachutes won't work there. And at University of Oklahoma, every first year engineering student had to make a shell that would let a raw egg be dropped off the top of our football stadium and survive the impact unbroken.

So, what kind of schools did these Rocket Scientists go to?

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Anonymous Coward]

The school of reality, where you learn you can't just engineer a solution, you have to stay within budget

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Anonymous Coward]

..so they are treating the scene as a "Live Spacecraft".

so thats what a live spacecraft looks like!

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Anonymous Coward]

The school of reality, where you learn you can't just engineer a solution, you have to stay within budget

because shoe boxes, tissue paper, and duct tape are so expensive...

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[mreed911]

When I worked as a paramedic in the Houston area, we had an injury type code in our patient report computers of "spacecraft-related injury."

NOW I know why...

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you don't get any. I strongly suggest you get a life though...

Re:According to Nasa TV...

[Giro d'Italia]

They went to schools that give you partial credit for incorrect/incomplete answers, and now they get a lesson on how one screwup ruins everything. It would have been much cheaper to do this in school....

Whoops

[Augusto]

OK, so we had stun pilots training for 5 years, couldn't they dive in ala James Bond with their own parachutes, grab the capsule and use their own parachutes to slow down it's fall? I mean, if they get movie people, wouldn't it work like that in real life.

C'mon, NASA, get creative :-)

Re:Whoops

[dspacemonkey]

Set pilots to stun!

Sorry Augusto, but I had to ;o)

Re:Whoops

[NarrMaster]

Wow, that maneuver was excellent.... I'm stunned!
/ducks

Re:Whoops

[saider]

Actual Transcript:

Stuntman: ok, I see it - there it is.

Manager: Go! Go! Go!

[wind whipping sound heard in mic]

Stuntman: Ok, got it - Yow! This thing is HOT!

Manager: If you don't save it you don't get paid.

Stuntman: Neither do you!

[manager jumps to save probe - but forgets parachute]

See, the hollywood types were in charge but because of their lack of understanding for science and physics, they dropped the ball (pun intended).

Re:Whoops

[bizpile]

OK, so we had stun pilots training for 5 years, couldn't they dive in ala James Bond with their own parachutes, grab the capsule and use their own parachutes to slow down it's fall? I mean, if they get movie people, wouldn't it work like that in real life.

Except that the spacecraft would have been at a few thousand degrees. I guess Q would have had to stitch up an asbestos tux.

Re:Whoops

[Jedi Holocron]

They should have sent this guy to catch it mid-flight and bring it down.

Re:Whoops

[AKAImBatman]

I guess Q would have had to stitch up an asbestos tux.

Don't forget the neoprene gentleman's gloves! (I used to dig around in hot oil vats using neoprene gloves. Didn't even feel the slightest amount of heat!)

Re:Whoops

[baggins2002]

James Bond is with the UK. If he were only in the CIA, then he could have saved the capsule and prevented the war in Iraq. ( I figured hell while we're dreaming). But instead we get Micheal Moore and a crater in the desert. The dollar doesn't buy you what it used to.

Here some more rumors

The drogue shoot was controlled by Windows CE

RIAA sabotaged it, because it had a Britney Spears mp3 onboard

I've got to quit using the generic brand of aluminum foil, I think this stuff leaks more than Reynolds wrap.

Re:Whoops

[Archangel Michael]

Reign of Fire?

http://www.imdb.com/Title?0253556/

Re:Whoops

[sharkdba]

Correct link: Reign of Fire

Re:Whoops

[sharkdba]

Except that the spacecraft would have been at a few thousand degrees.

The temperature would be an obstacle, but could be dealt with (certain tools on extensions to attach to the craft). However the real problem here would be speed (or so I think) in which the craft was ascending w/o the parachutes.

Oh well

[essreenim]

The Genesis probe (reported here) has crashed to the ground, near a road in the Utah desert.
better look next time Spock..

Re:Oh well

[MsWillow]

Is this road anywhere near Darl McBride's home? Maybe this wasn't really a failure, but God's way of telling Darl that he should drop his frivolous lawsuit?

Re:Oh well

[AKAImBatman]

Maybe this wasn't really a failure, but God's way of telling Darl that he should drop his frivolous lawsuit?

I thought that involved a gigawatt laser and three metric tons of Jiffy Pop?

Re:Oh well

[tulmad]

Be careful, or he'll claim he owns this too.

Andromeda Strain

[d_p]

So much for containing the specimens...

Re:Andromeda Strain

[Anonymous Coward]

Even before this crash, this whole mission has been reminding me of this movie. I will say the crash made me think about even more strongly. I still think this is a great sci fi flick from its time (early 70's or was it late 60's), and worth seeing today.

D'Oh

[grunt107]

Sounds like time for a re-Genesis.

What color was Genesis' parachute?

[Anonymous Coward]

Inquiring minds want to know!

On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[darth_MALL]

A tad depressing to see the story posted to MSNBC with the headline OOPS. I'm sure the engineers are glad to see their multi-million dollar failure taken so lightheartedly.

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[principio]

The headline on Fox News was "SPLAT!"

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but remember, this is /., where Fox News != real news, so the editors can't include a link to their coverage. To do so would be blasphemy.

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[Barlo_Mung_42]

No, on Fox news the headline would be "Kerry's vote against funding results in more disaster."

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[ackthpt]

A tad depressing to see the story posted to MSNBC with the headline OOPS.

Maybe they got the headline mixed up...

A Sad Loss For NASA and Science (The Genesis Story)

OOPS (The SP2 Story)

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

Democrats cause cancer.

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh boo hoo, they might feel a little disappointed about totally wasting 260 million dollars on yet another spectacular NASA failure.

Re:On MSNBC Too! *sigh*

[tbaggy]

Even better, the crack MSNBC reporting team somehow only thinks this thing is worth $260!

"The $260 Genesis mission was bringing back to Earth a set of fragile disks containing billions of atoms collected from solar wind, the first cosmic samples to be returned to Earth from beyond the moon."

I'd personally would have put *atleast* $500 into it if you wanted it to land correctly!

To safe the ground crew, NASA will wait 24 hours?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the entirety of their blood supply fails to crystallize, they get the green light to process the capsule.

I blame the Europeans myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

They were ticked off when we laughed at Beagle 2, so they decided to get their revenge.

Re:I blame the Europeans myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

What worries me: 140 comments already and not a single one bringing up the terrorists... You folks are losing your touch.

Re:I blame the Europeans myself...

[strictfoo]

You missed it

Re:I blame the Europeans myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't be too far off.

Parachutes de France makes up part of the Parachutes and Protection Systems of Pioneer Systems

http://www.pioneeraero.com/com_info.htm/

Re:I blame the Europeans myself...

[Patrik_AKA_RedX]

Indeed. Now I hope you Americans learned your lesson. Do not lauch at the Europeans or else we are forced to use our gravity again.

Invasion has begun

[Odonian]

and I for one welcome our new Comet-Dust Overlords!

Re:Invasion has begun

[networkBoy]

That would be Star Dust Overloards.

Genesis?

[Anonymous Coward]

More like the last @NO CARRIER

Stunt chopper shot out of sky..

[planckscale]

by killer space dust drone...

PWN3D.

[Tackhead]

> "The choppers have landed near the probe, but no word yet as to the condition of the space dust."

I'm not normally a betting man, but I'd wager the space dust is is just fine. The containment vessel designed to isolate the dust, however... lookin' a little shaky.

Re:PWN3D.

[betelgeuse-4]

From the footage I've seen it looks like it is still roughly in one piece, but the outer surface has broken so it's difficult to call either way.

Re:PWN3D.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not normally a betting man, but I'd wager the space dust is is just fine.

This would make a nice ./ poll :P

Apocolypse Now

[Some guy named Chris]

The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water-- the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.

-- Revelation 8, NIV

Here comes the evil space germs to wipe us out. Better get that ark on the moon ready quick.

Re:Apocolypse Now

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one welcome our new space germ yadda yadda yadda...

Re:Apocolypse Now

[lucabrasi999]

When I saw the subject line Apocalypse Now, I was expecting some comment about the "Smell of napalm in the morning." I was a bit surprised to read something from that other apocalypse.

You can tell how religious I am. :)

Re:Apocolypse Now

[Anonymous Coward]

"I saw Genesis capusle tumbling through the sky on the edge of a razor blade, that's my dream, my nightmare, a ballistic re-entry of capsule and the sample remains intact."

Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[badboy_tw2002]

Sipping my first coffee of the day, I almost spit it out when I saw "Breaking News" on CNN's site, and a picture of a man staring over a flying saucer.

Ok, maybe it was. I definately need more sleep :)

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[Anonymous Coward]

Likewise. Looking at the downed vehicle, before there was anything else human in the picture to give it scale, it was not hard to imagine we were looking at a 500-foot-wide saucer embedded in the desert. Shades of 'Contact'. Kind of cool.

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[RobertB-DC]

Sipping my first coffee of the day, I almost spit it out when I saw "Breaking News" on CNN's site, and a picture of a man staring over a flying saucer.

This looks like a great opportunity to play a round of Fun With Captions!

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell me that's not a flying saucer.

http://www.wired.com/news/images/full/genesis_f. jp g

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

Ok, that's pretty nifty! Since I don't have mod points, I'll just play along


--
GMail invites for iPod referrals

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[PhaseChange]

Yep, and in a few years we'll all be seeing Official Nasa Photos of a mysterious disk falling through the sky and crashing into the desert, thus "proving" the existence of aliens.

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[Gleng]

Here's one. And another.

Re:Ok, I'm sure it wasn't just me....

[kitzilla]

> Sipping my first coffee of the day, I almost spit it out when I saw "Breaking News" on CNN's site *Breaking* news pretty much describes the capsule, I'd agree.

Lat/Long of impact (geocaching opportunity?)

[Anonymous Coward]

40 deg. 7 min. 40 sec
113 deg. 30 min 29 sec

Re:Lat/Long of impact (geocaching opportunity?)

[thelenm]

I don't think you'll probably want to go geocaching there. It's in the Dugway Proving Grounds.

Re:Lat/Long of impact (geocaching opportunity?)

[6Yankee]

Tried the link, and this is what Mozilla gave me:

Publisher authenticity verified by: "U.S. Government"
! The security certificate was issued by a company that is not trusted.

I had to laugh...

The disturbing thing....

[FlimFlamboyant]

Is that someone at NASA actually thought this was a good idea. Granted, they *MIGHT* have pulled it off if the chute had deployed. But even then, it's obviously tricky. Why not just drop it in the ocean like the Apollo return capsules? Maybe someone could explain this to me.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[Odonian]

Apollo capsules had chutes too. If they didn't they would also have ended up in itty bitty pieces, only at the bottom of the ocean.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[dspacemonkey]

At 100mph, you're generally buggered whatever you hit...

Re:The disturbing thing....

[flux]

At 100 mph a sea might not be that much better thing to impact anyway. Plus this way they know where it is; I would imagine the capsule to be heavier than water, thus it would sink into the ocean, turning the capsule capture mission into deep sea exploration one..

Re:The disturbing thing....

[FlimFlamboyant]

Yes, I am aware of that ;). Why could they not have used a similar method here? The article does mention the fact that even hitting the ground at 9mph could damage some of the data that it collected, but wouldn't the jar of capturing this thing mid-air be very likely of doing the same thing? I dunno.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[FlimFlamboyant]

My point wasn't that it would be ok for the thing to hit the ocean at 100mph (I thought that would've been obvious; guess not!)... That's obviously not going to work. Obviously, this mission depended on the chuts deploying, no matter what. The only thing I'm questioning is their initial plan.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[machine of god]

I'm sure I'm not the first one to bring this up, but it's not like we've never done this before.

It's perfectly feasable

Re:The disturbing thing....

[Anonymous Coward]

The substrates used to collect the samples were too delicate even for water recovery; the midair snatch was the gentlest way anyone could figure out to do it.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[corngrower]

Yep, canisters containing photographic film were routinely dropped from satellites and snagged in the air by aircraft during the cold war.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[DerekLyons]

Is that someone at NASA actually thought this was a good idea. Granted, they *MIGHT* have pulled it off if the chute had deployed. But even then, it's obviously tricky. Why not just drop it in the ocean like the Apollo return capsules? Maybe someone could explain this to me.

There's a variety of reasons...

• The weather over the desert is far more predictable than the weather over the ocean. (Very important when you only get one shot.)
• Ocean recovery means using a ship+helicopers, which is far more expensive than helicopters alone.
• Making something as small as the Genesis recovery capsule bouyant means either a) enlarging it or b) adding an inflatable system. Both solutions have problems.

There are probably others, but those seem the big ones by BOTE.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[Rich0]

One difference is that those canisters were falling much more slowly - this thing was coming in from a very high orbit. This could have made it more difficult to control the re-entry.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[Teancum]

While these are very sound reasons, they don't really make sense in regards to the Great Salt Lake. For starters:

1. The desert that this was recovered at was within 30 miles of the Great Salt Lake. The climate and weather patterns are not all that different by going just a few miles.
2. Getting ships (well, sheriff patrol craft) into Salt Lake isn't that hard to do, and for sheer publicity I'm sure the state government would provide any rescue equipment necessary for retrevial. And that just for the state here to show it can do something better than the feds. Besides, Hill AFB is sitting close enough that it would be as effective as any aircraft carrier in the Pacific.

The arguments regarding boyancy are still valid, but wouldn't it be better to crash it into a large body of water than the desert? Still a hard landing, but... I don't know. It would probabaly be a wash all of the way around either way. Air capture was the prefered option as well.

One big negative against landing in Salt Lake is that just a little bit further to the east is the homes of about 500,000 people that wouldn't want the probe in their backyard or their living room. That is perhaps the largest advantage for where they did the drop.

In addition, the area where they tried to do the capture (and site of the crash) is very heavily restricted airspace. You can't fly over that area except in space, and the U.S. government would love to stop even that. By restricted that means if you fly over that hunk of land you will very quickly be escorted by F-16 to a lonly bit of runway and arrested, or shot out of the sky. Your choice. Even walking across the desert to get into there is restricted and barred by a huge chain-link fence that is patrolled better than the U.S./Mexico border.

It isn't smart to go walking around in there either if you happened to gain entry, as the area is littered with bombs that date back to WWI (yes, about 1917). It saw heavy use during WWII and the Cold War, and is still used for live bomb testing out of Hill AFB. They are lucky they didn't have Genesis land on one of those old WWII bombs that for some reason or another hasn't detonated yet.

Re:The disturbing thing....

[Somegeek]

They didn't want it contaminted by uncontrolled contact with the planet. Thats why they were attempting to catch it in mid-air. They wanted to have it in a secure containment at NASA within 8 hours of reentry.

Those last few miles are treacherous

[Anonymous Coward]

Kind of akin to walking completely around the world and then getting hit by a bus just as you return home.

Possible Cause

[Anonymous Coward]

According to NASA's NSSDC master catalog:

There was some concern that the sample return capsule battery would fail, jeopardizing the re-entry. The battery was overheating, but ground tests have shown that the battery should be unaffected by the amount of heating it has endured, and should operate to deploy the parachute on reentry.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog? sc=2001-034A

I, for one, welcome...

[Anonymous Coward]

...our new solar underlords.

That happened to me on my bicycle this weekend.

[GrizzBMX]

I lost control, and while trying to decide what to do, the ground came up and hit me.

GRIZZ

Who?

[solarlux]

I recognize that Lockheed Martin was the prime contractor on this project, but anyone know who built the parachute subsystem?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently, Vertigo. From the Genesis website:

Vertigo is a small business that specializes in the development and rapid prototyping of advanced aeronautical and civil structures from inflatable shelters to parachute delivery systems to spacecraft deceleration systems. Vertigo will provide two mid-air retrieval, winch-based systems to mount in two Genesis retrieval helicopters. Vertigo is lead on the mid-air recovery flight operations. Helicopter crew provided by Vertigo are: Roy Haggard - Lead Director of Flight Operations Myles Elsing - Wing Director of Flight Operations Brian Johnson - Lead Payload Master Lynn Fogleman - Wing Payload Master The Vertigo Program Manager is Brook Norton.

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no, no -- Vertigo was responsible for catching it once the parachutes were deployed. Pioneer Aerospace was contracted to build the deceleration system.

Re:Who?

[ray-auch]

Actually that says that they provided the catching kit and that they are in the business of providing parachute systems - not that they provided the parachute system in this case.

Maybe they did - but your quote doesn't state it.

Re:Who?

[strictfoo]

No, no, no.

There is no such thing as deceleration. It is just negative acceleration.

Re:Who?

[lucabrasi999]

but anyone know who built the parachute subsystem?

According to the Project Plan, the responsiblity for the parachute subsystem goes to "those guys in the other building."

Hey, wait, why is there a zero in the Percentage Complete column?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're stupid.

Gee...

[Mateito]

Gee... Who'da thordit!

That this thing hit the deck is about as suprising as finding Paris Hilton's sex video on edonkey.

Why don't they go back to dropping things in the ocean? Sure, hit water fast enough and its like hitting a brickwall, but slow down enough and at least you won't break everybody bone in your leg (figuratively, of course)

Can't believe the 'chute failed tho. Its not like parachutes are a new untested technology.

Space dust...

[metrazol]

... is now just regular dust! Skills, NASA, really.

I mean, come on, they KNOW they have trouble with the whole "probes hit planet faster than we usually plan" thing, look at the Mars missions. Now, before you say, "But this is hard!" think which plan is more failure prone - leave probe in orbit, catch it with the shuttle or a soyuz or hell, have it cruise past the ISS, or just let it sit for a few years, nice and safe in orbit or "Let's have it drop through the sky like a bullet then deploy a chute and CATCH IT MID AIR! It'll be awesome!"

Simple is usually better, and in this case, simple won. Big time. Can't wait for crater pictures!

Re:Space dust...

[TheBurrito]

Snaring a capsule with a shuttle (what shuttle?), Soyuz, or the ISS remains a very dangerous mission. NASA will be treading lightly as it pertains to ANY missions that could endanger the safety of their astronauts, as another catastrophic loss could shelve the Shuttle program indefinitely.

Like it or not, NASA will not be sending people into harm's way for a while as long as safer alternatives exist.

Re:Space dust...

[saider]

Plans
1) leave probe in orbit
- Kinda hard to analyse up there.

2) Catch it with a shuttle
- The same shuttle done in by a few pounds of foam?
- half a billion dollars to catch a capsule?

3) have it cruise past the ISS
- If it cruises past the ISS, where will it go? You'd have to decelerate it, and put it in the correct orbit (incline, velocity, altitude). Not impossible, but you would easily double the cost of the probe.

Returning capsules is an old, well understood process. Even catching things in midair is an old hat (how do you think the old spy satellites returned their payloads?). But nothing is foolproof. Parts are not 100% reliable.

Re:Space dust...

[FortKnox]

It also comes down to cost. Launching a rocket to get the probe vs sending the probe to earth to be caught is a difference of hundreds of millions of dollars (if not billions). You want your taxes raised to be on the safe side of NASA missions??

Re:Space dust...

[gerardrj]

NASA will be treading lightly as it pertains to ANY missions that could endanger the safety of their astronauts ...

More astronauts will die, this is simply unavoidable. ANYONE who wants to claim that there will never be another death as a result of space flight is simply stupid.

If NASA, the government or the people of the country can't deal with that, then let's declare war on outer space and start using the military to explore/conquer.

This also solves the NASA funding issue be using the vast amount of money they goes in to the "national defense" instead of the puny sums NASA has to beg for each year.

Hold off on blame

[FTL]

This was an interesting mission, but not a vital one. Thre was nobody on board, there were no missions that depended on the success of this mission. NASA was right to try to keep costs down and take some small gambles on this one.

I'd much rather NASA send up three cheaper/faster/riskier missions of which one crashes and two succeed, than send up one bullet-proof mission. So don't jump all over NASA for screwing up. If they didn't screw up now and again (on this type of mission), then they were clearly playing it too safe.

Sounds odd, but "Well done NASA". Keep it up.

Re:Hold off on blame

[hkb]

"Small gamble", heh

I know about 52 school districts in the country who would flip over each getting $5 million in desperately-needed funding. Maybe then we'd push out people smart enough to land a little probe successfully.

Re:Hold off on blame

[sevenmonkey]

Yes, cheers to NASA for trying the hard things.

I guess it's taken a bit of the swagger out after the rousing twin sucesses of Spirit and Opportunity, but without failures, the successes wouldn't be so damn impressive.

At least no one got hurt.

Re:Hold off on blame

[gmletzkojr]

I suppose that NASA has done a good job, but don't you think that with all that we know so far about spaceflight, we could have dreamed up a better recovery strategy than this one?

Ok, so when the probe re-enters the atmosphere, we can get these 2 stunt copter pilots to go up there and grab it! And then, they will gently let the probe down to safety!

It's a good thing our astronauts don't return this way...

Re:Hold off on blame

[lommer]

I'd much rather NASA send up three cheaper/faster/riskier missions of which one crashes and two succeed, than send up one bullet-proof mission.

We all know that thats how NASAs relatively new faster-better-cheaper approach is supposed to work, but unfortunately its not. With the exception of the Mars Rovers (and some would argue the their PR value vastly outweighs their scientific value), NASA has seen nothing but catastrophic failure recently. Maybe it's time to take another look at the faster-better-cheaper methedology and realize that space is hard to do, and that even sending many missions that aren't "bullet-proof" is essentially dooming all of them to failure. Basically what I'm saying is that I agree 3 cheap missions with 2 successes and one failure would be better than one expensive mission guaranteed to succeed. But the way things have been going, we're sending up 3 cheap missions and all of them are failing. At that rate I'd rather have my one bulletproof mission.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

No, let's blame.

This mission was NOT cheap, it was infinitely expensive on the cost/benefit scale. That is NOT a good thing, it's a bloody tragedy.

Having accountability is a good thing. How tricky is it to deploy a frikin parachute? Missions been doing this for years on all sorts of craft, I do it a dozen times on the weekend, and NASA can't get this right? I'm frustrated and annoyed. A quarter of a billion dollars down the Swanee because they can't get a frikin pyro to fire. Damned idiots, what happened to checking/testing mission critical systems?

NASA seemse to be continuously outdoing itself these days in it's level of incompetence.

Re:Hold off on blame

[John Miles]

I do it a dozen times on the weekend

After spending three years in space being repetitively frozen, superheated, and irradiated?

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

More funding != better students. Otherwise the District of Columbia would be fielding ubergeniuses.

Blindly throwing more cash at a failing system isn't the way to go.

Re:Hold off on blame

[hkb]

As I said, I know 52 school districts in the country who wouldn't just blindly squander the cash. Better than blindly throwing it at NASA.

You'd think for $260 million, they could afford several plan B's. Although with their history of failures, they don't seem to think too much about them.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

There you go falling for that crap. Space does have it's hardships but in some respects it is quite benign, most of that space time is spend floating around weightless in the cold dark, or with constant radiated heat gains on one side of the craft. They knew what the conditions would be, they've spend hundreds of billions researching those conditions. Don't tell me it's tricky to design a moderately robust package to withstand that, it has been established that it is not. OK we know NASA can't but I'm speculating about what a competent organization could do.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Overzeetop]

So, were you one of the guys who applauded when NASA was foced to outsource as much as possible (incuding engineering) in the 80s and 90s during the "less government is better" years?

If so, then you should lead the charge that the contractors who designed and built this filed mission be required to pony up the $260,000,000 because - let's face it - it's their fault and the taxpayers should be reimbursed for a faulty product. I want my money back.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

Nope not me although a bit of competition is good IMHO.

I find it utterly riddiculous that you can't make a criticism of the monstrous beaurocracy that is NASA without some dingbat saying "were you one of these guys in the 80s and 90s who applauded when..."

The fact is there are many organizational systems that can be made to work when designing a relatively simple mission like this capsule. NASA appears incapable of implementing any of them. All their expensive procedures and tripple anal checks don't seem to stop them screwing up in the most basic and obvious ways. They're just institutionally incompetent. Can I be one of those guys who applaud when NASA is shut down in the 00's, please?

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, now that most of the initial costs of R&D are already spent, how much more would another capsule with a modified parachute mechanism be? Depending upon what percent of $260 million that is, it might make a second try extremely economical on the relative scale that is gov't spending.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Detritus]

A similar strategy was used successfully for many years to recover film capsules from reconnaissance satellites.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Kiryat Malachi]

So you've never heard of vacuum welds, the fact that this craft went comparatively close to the sun and thus experienced high thermal gradients (and no, constant heat gains aren't as nasty as expansion/contraction cycles, but a constant thermal gradient is still bad), heavy solar radiation (or did you forget those massive solar flares that would have wailed all over this craft?), micrometeorites and all the other crap that goes on in space?

Space is a *nasty* environment, and is in no way shape or form benign.

Re:Hold off on blame

[DerekLyons]

How tricky is it to deploy a frikin parachute? Missions been doing this for years on all sorts of craft, I do it a dozen times on the weekend,

You do *nothing* like this on the weekend. These systems have been stored inert for years, and are expected to function flawlessly *without testing*.

Adding up the equivalent NASA missions (Viking I, Viking II, Pathfinder, MPL [1], Galileo Probe, MER A (Spirit), MER B (Opportunity), Genesis) gets a 1-in-8 [2] failure rate, not bad at all considering.

[1] I count MPL as a sucess as the most likely failure mode is in the landing motors, not the parachute. If you count MPL as a failure, you get 2-in-8, still not bad.

[2] I don't count the Biosatellite and other earth orbiter/parachute recovery missions by NASA as they were of fairly short duration.

Re:Hold off on blame

[bani]

not to mention the 3000F reentry and 30g deceleration.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Overzeetop]

And why, I must ask, is there so much beaurocracy?

Well, aside from the one-year funding cycle for multi year missions, there is a whole new layer of management who's sole job is to manage the contracts (both technically and adminstratively) which have been essentially required by the congress. It's a foolish waste of money. How can you add contract manangement (on both sides) and pay the contractors more, and still expect to pay less?

An example? Okay, a fresh-out (BS) Aerospace Engineer will come on as a GS-7. The current salary for a GS-7 is $29,037, according to the 2003 General Schedule. The average salary for an Aerospace Engineer I (i.e.: a fresh-out) is $49,062. (according to salary.com)

While I will be the first to admit that the government is not the most efficient in processing benefits and such, they also get a discount on the benefits they provide, so it's probably a wash. Take the salary differentials and expand that by the extra layer of management on BOTH sides of the contract, and I fail to see the economy. Of course, it's a great boon to the industry which lives off the contracts, and there are many rich folks as a result of the contracting. And they will find a way to purchase the continued support for NASA from their congresspeople.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

Yes I do, however to pretend that these are the enormous challenges that make parachute deployment impossible is frankly, pathetic.

The crafts whole function was to sit in those solar flares collecting particles. The way you're talking about this you'd think it had all come as a surprise.

I said some aspects are benign, don't misquote me. There is no oxygen and no corrosion and for the most part there is absolutely no load on any components for the *vast* majority of the misison.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't you are squandering valuable time that you could be spending helping others?

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope not me although a bit of competition is good IMHO.

Splendid, then go start your own private space research corporation. That might give your opinions a bit more weight.

The fact is there are many organizational systems that can be made to work when designing a relatively simple mission like this capsule.

Care to name any organization, public or private, that has returned samples of material from interplanetry space successfully?

Or an organization, public or private, that has succesfully sampled and returned extraterrestrial material since the end Apollo Program?

How about just any organization, again public or private, that has been launching robotic probes and not had any failures?

If you can't answer these questions, why do you use the phrase "The fact is"? Other than to try disguise your opinion as fact.

All their expensive procedures and tripple anal checks don't seem to stop them screwing up in the most basic and obvious ways.

So by this I take it you know exactly how and why the cute failed to open, right? Can you please explain to the rest of us exactly what you would have done to prevent the problem? Given your posts, you must make these type of probes in your garage and fly interplanetary missions on the weekend for kicks.

Unlike like you, some of us appreciate that building an interplanetary probe (it went to interplanetary space) maybe more difficult than what you see on Monster Garage. There are those of us who also understand that we sometimes can't predict everything that can go wrong in an unfamiliar environment.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

Oh the irony, I think that 30g would have been pulled had the drogue deployed so it's a bit rich to suggest it as a cause. Moreover it was designed to pull 30g, that was a *conscious decision* a choice made by the designers to impose a load of 30g. As for 3000F pfftt big deal, every craft that's reentered has tken similar thermal loads and modest shielding can comfortably handle it, in fact NASA is the only institution that seems to have issues with reentry these days having perfected it decades ago they're now unable to reliably deliver a manned or unmanned vehicle to the surface.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

I said some aspects are benign, don't misquote me. There is no oxygen and no corrosion and for the most part there is absolutely no load on any components for the *vast* majority of the misison.

This is called being disengeneous, you didn't make false claims only used them to imply false conculsions. It is like saying that an 100% nitrogen atmosphere is breathable because it contains no posionous gases. Don't get bent out of shape that someone called you on it.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

And all you have is some blind faith that these failures are doing a good job, because space is a scarey unknown. I'm not saying it's like monster garage, and at a quarter of a billion bucks it shouldn't be. I'll tell you what, let's split the difference, fire them all and give me my frikin tax dollars back. I'd rather see a few more X Prize developments than waste money with these dolts embarrassing the country. You're quick to point out how strange and scary space is but with your philosophy we'd accept failure ad nauseum. This is NOT some exotic unforseen crap that went wrong, they never got their frikin parachute to deploy, that's just one critical system you work on and review to death guaranteeing that that system works. Yes I'm frikin pissed at yet another NASA screw up.

Your scarey space excuse is exactly the problem with continuing to fund NASA. If Burt Rutan worked there with all the middle management dopes that run the place he'd never have done what he has at scaled composites, not even with 10 times the funding. NASA is an institutional albatross around the U.S. aerospace industry's neck.

I've SEEN how NASA operates and how the subcontractors work. If there's a moribund slow assed expensive way to do something, that's how they do it. Layers of middle managers build empires internally and suggest that a reduction in their head count or reassignment of staff might be a good idea because they don't happen to be doing anything relevant 10 years after their groups primary mission has been completed.

It's time to put down this sick hairy dog.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

It is utterly disingenuous to suggest that these systems are expected to work without testing. That's like saying car airbags are stored inert for years and are expected to work without testing. The obvious answer to that is yes, big deal, car airbags work reliably every day. And while I'm not equating the two I'm using my example to illustrate how riddiculous your argument is.

Geeze, there are people lining up to point out how difficult every single aspect of mission design is, as if when they screw up there's always an acceptable excuse. Your "stored inert and work without testing" nonsense is just another example. I could look at the daily operation of a baseball and describe the enormous forces it is subject too, or do the same with a car tire or the blades in a jet turbine, but ultimately these things work because they have been correctly designed and tested. These missions are designed at great expense and NASA seems unable to get even simple systems to work, and I'm SICK of hearing specious arguments about how difficult the environment is and how NASA should be excused for screwing up yet another design/mission.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

It's not disingenuous, go read my earlier post, where I even mention temperature gradients, it was exactly my intent and the text makes it clear. I *still* stand by my assertions. Go read my other posts for additional thoughts on all this extreme environment nonsense we get fed every time NASA screws up. Space is rather predictable at this stage, it's just NASA's engineering that's unreliable.

Re:Hold off on blame

[bani]

I do it a dozen times on the weekend

so do tell us about the dozen spacecraft you did this weekend which survived reentry and landed safely

NASA is the only one having reentry problems these days? are you absolutely sure ?

Re:Hold off on blame

[Vellmont]

Having accountability is a good thing. How tricky is it to deploy a frikin parachute?

Probbably a lot harder than you think when you've been exposed to the intense heat and radiation of the sun, the near-absolute zero of space, and then re-enter the atmosphere at thousands of miles an hour.

Sorry buddy, but this just isn't pulling a rip cord after a short airplane ride at a few hundred miles an hour. There's no semi-intelligence human with eyes, ears, and a brain to easily determine when to do it. Space is HARSH. I'm sure I don't really full appreciate how difficult this is, and even I know that this just isn't as simple as you'd like it to be.

I'm tired of people not understanding the value of money and how much things cost. This mission cost 260 million dollars.. sounds like a lot right? But then how much do you think it costs to introduce a new brand of toothpaste?

260 million dollars is about a dollar from each US citizen. Try to put things into perspective.

Re:Hold off on blame

[hkb]

No. Aren't you?

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

You're quick to point out how strange and scary space is but with your philosophy we'd accept failure ad nauseum.

Never did I say or imply we should accept failure ad nauseum. However, if you are doing things that haven't been done before it stands to reason that their might be unknowns involved. Also, I realise that parachutes have been used on earth re-entry capsules before, but never one that has been this far out or for so long. For example, the Corona missions were only Earth orbit for a few months.

This is NOT some exotic unforseen crap that went wrong, they never got their frikin parachute to deploy, that's just one critical system you work on and review to death guaranteeing that that system works.

Again I ask, how do you know this? Why is it impossible that the parachute failed because of unforseen circumstances and not simply incompetence? Make accusitions with such certianty implies proof not just suspisions.

Yes I'm frikin pissed at yet another NASA screw up.

I'm sure NASA, especially JPL, isn't happy about it either.

Your scarey space excuse is exactly the problem with continuing to fund NASA.

It is not my "scarey space excuse", that is the product of your preconcieved notions.

My point is that the Genesis mission was doing something difficult and for the first time. So failure in that context doesn't automatically mean incompentence. What's more, even highly skilled individuals doing things they've done hundereds of times before sometimes fail. An example Tiger Woods doesn't hit a hole-in-one each time he is at the green. However, this in no way means that either he is incompetent or that he shouldn't play golf.

If Burt Rutan worked there with all the middle management dopes that run the place he'd never have done what he has at scaled composites, not even with 10 times the funding.

What he did achieve is the same thing as NASA's X-15s did decades before, for about the same investment (factoring in inflation). No doubt, he is a good aerospace engineer and he designed many great vehicles. However, what does the X-Prize have to do with sample return missions? In debate this is called a "red herring" agurement.

NASA is an institutional albatross around the U.S. aerospace industry's neck.

Actually I see it as a gadfly pestering a lazy mule. The U.S. aerospace industry wouldn't be doing more than designing and launching satellites if it wasn't for NASA.

I've SEEN how NASA operates and how the subcontractors work.

Care to clarify this further?

Layers of middle managers build empires internally and suggest that a reduction in their head count or reassignment of staff might be a good idea because they don't happen to be doing anything relevant 10 years after their groups primary mission has been completed.

So you are saying NASA's middle managers are empire builders AND they are trying to arbitrarily reduce head count? Maybe I am mis-reading this line, but it seems you just took two common, but often incompatible sterotypes and tried to merege them.

Re:Hold off on blame

[DerekLyons]

It is utterly disingenuous to suggest that these systems are expected to work without testing.

No, it's a simple and basic fact.

That's like saying car airbags are stored inert for years and are expected to work without testing. The obvious answer to that is yes, big deal, car airbags work reliably every day.

Yes. And they also fail to deploy every day. And every once in a while they deploy unexpectedly.

I could look at the daily operation of a baseball and describe the enormous forces it is subject too, or do the same with a car tire or the blades in a jet turbine, but ultimately these things work because they have been correctly designed and tested.

Baseballs, car tires, and jet turbine blades all fail regularly. They don't "simply work" as you imply. (They also have something else the NASA probes don't have... Millions and millions of installed examples and decades of repeated use and engineering experience between them.)

I'm SICK of hearing specious arguments about how difficult the environment is and how NASA should be excused for screwing up yet another design/mission.

I'm sorry that facts make you sick, but that's your own problem. Your ignorance doesn't change reality.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

There's no reasoning with you if you're going to continue with specious examples. Air bags may occasionally malfunction but the *vast* majority operate just fine, Let's say the failure rate (and it's probably an exaggeration) is 0.1%, and this is for a range of impacts under varying unpredictable conditions not designed and determined conditions, the failure rate with a single sample admittedly of NASA's pyrotechnic parachute deployment on this craft is 100%, suggesting it is at very least unlikely to be reliable. The point is that extreme conditions are encountered and designed for just fine on a daily basis and sitting inert for years and then just working is a common everyday occurence contrary to your specious argument.

Let's face it reguardless of your hyperbole, you started by implying it's an amazingly difficult thing to sit inert for years then just work untested, without even going into how inaccurate your 'untested' assertion is I've shown that you, like others in this thread are throwing any old specious and unsupported arguments up.

Your new assertion to cover the fallacy of your original point is now that there are millions of everyday items made and tested through trial and error, that may be so however an air bag doesn't cost tens of millions of dollars. That kind of money is paid for bespoke spacecraft components to cover competent design work and testing, not half assed failures.

Your claims of my ignorance do not make your case. Examples like Burt Rutan show NASA for the moribund dysfunctional organization it has become. So much talk about the difficulty of the task does not excuse NASA's inability to get a simply pyrotechnic device to fire after reentry. It's the zenith of incompetence and instead of pointing this out we have apologists citing 'scarey space' jibberish. Using unsupportable assertions about the incredible difficulty of certain magical things the amazing NASA had to do to get this right. That's all just garbage and under other ciscumstances the conditions encountered by this craft are mundane and encountered every day in other design domains, some of them without thousands of trial and error examples. NASA has become plain bad at it's job.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

It was a typo, it should have read "never suggest".

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

The parent poster you reply to may make his point in an abrasive way, but he _does_ have a very good point. Time after time hundreds of millions of dollars are wasted because NASA failed to get the basic engineering right, or even fail to deal with metric/imperial units right!

Instead of pouring that money into a drain, we could use it for, oh, say, educating, or feeding, or clothing people.

I know that if I routinely screwed up at my job and wasted hundreds of millions of dollars each time, I would be out of a job in short order. But somehow, the same rules don't seem to apply if you're in the government :-/

Re:Hold off on blame

[slew]

I'm pretty sure most of the cost of a nasa program these days goes into paying employees (either directly by nasa, or by nasa paying contractors which pays their employees). This is why delays cost so much (haven't you wondered about that).

My guess is to tool back up and build another one of these babies would be at least $270 million since it probably won't get built any faster (since these are all 1-off custom tooled projects), and you have to use all the same materials, and the mission would have to last the same amount of time.

By the time you factor in inflation, the fact that nobody remembers how it works anymore (try to remember what you worked on 29 months ago), and the fact that they'll have 3 extra supervisory committee to make sure that the same thing doesn't go wrong again, I'll bet that $270 million is a conservative estimate...

Re:Hold off on blame

[Anonymous Coward]

All their expensive procedures and tripple anal checks don't seem to stop them screwing up in the most basic and obvious ways.

What was the basic and obvious way they screwed up? What went wrong? I bet you don't know. You need to take a reliability engineering course. How are they supposed to make sure it works for certain before they send it up? Even if they simulated the conditions on earth they would have to do it so many times with so many test units to get a good measure of reliability that it would cost hundreds of billions before it got off the ground. Simulating the conditions is hard enough and they would have to mass produce test units just for one real one. In the long run it isn't that much money. It took a lot of time because we waited for it to come back hoping it would work. But by the time they do it succesfully it won't cost that much.

Re:Hold off on blame

[DerekLyons]

There's no reasoning with you if you're going to continue with specious examples.

You'd have a point... If I had provided specious examples. But I didn't. I provided on point engineering and economic examples.

Let's say the failure rate (and it's probably an exaggeration) is 0.1%, and this is for a range of impacts under varying unpredictable conditions not designed and determined conditions, the failure rate with a single sample admittedly of NASA's pyrotechnic parachute deployment on this craft is 100%, suggesting it is at very least unlikely to be reliable.

It suggests that to those who don't understand statistics. Those who understand statistics know that your potential error is 1/sample_size, or 100% in this case. It takes at least 100 samples to make a prediction with a 99% confidence rate.

The point is that extreme conditions are encountered and designed for just fine on a daily basis and sitting inert for years and then just working is a common everyday occurence contrary to your specious argument.

The point that you refuse to acknowledge is that those 'everyday occurences' are utterly unlike the example at hand. Those 'everday occurences' work because there are decades of development and hundreds of millions of dollars of engineering behind them. That reliability didn't 'just happen'.

Let's face it reguardless of your hyperbole, you started by implying it's an amazingly difficult thing to sit inert for years then just work untested, without even going into how inaccurate your 'untested' assertion is I've shown that you, like others in this thread are throwing any old specious and unsupported arguments up.

You've done no such thing. You've tossed a few utterly nonensical arguments about, while I present solid and well known engineering and economic principles.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Kiryat Malachi]

The crafts function was NOT to sit in solar flares; it was to sit in the nominal solar wind and collect particles. Saying its function was to sit in flares is like saying that a tidal energy generator's function is to sit in the path of a tsunami - sure, they may have to do it, but that is by NO means the function. Do you even understand the magnitude of a solar flare? The particle flux of the solar wind during a flare or a CME can increase by many orders of magnitude.

There is no oxygen, there is no corrosion, but to think that that makes space benign is totally wrong. Loading on the components includes thermal cycling (the heat it absorbs from the Sun has to go somewhere; many spacecraft rotate to even out the thermal loading, though this one might not have, but those that do have expansion/contraction cycles), vacuum effects (any contacting surfaces can have vacuum welds occur), and radiation. Remember - we have satellites that die inside of the magnetosphere from radiation effects. That's even with the protection afforded. You can build to withstand what you think is out there, but Genesis sat through a period of *major* unexpected solar activity (no one predicted the violence of the sun these last couple years).

I didn't say impossible. However, they aren't easy, and you implied that anyone who can't design to meet those challenges is obviously incompetent. Being that I can pretty safely assume you've never done it, and being that NO ONE HAS EVER DEVISED A RETURN SYSTEM for an unmanned capsule that survived the same kind of trip Genesis went through (60's spy sats don't count, as they were generally up for less than a year, were in LEO and thus protected by the magnetosphere, and the return path was much shorter/easier). So put your money where your mouth is, or admit you don't know shit and sit down.

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

I understand statistics very well that is why I said it suggests it is less than reliable, I quoted no percentages so quit trying repeatedly to misrepresent what I've written. Reading your text you are clearly a dishonest scoundrel who can't hold a reasonable discussion. You have consistently misrepresented what I have written.

Suggesting you're only quoting reliable engineering principals and I'm writing nonsense is utter hogwash and you know it. It is exactly the kind of B.S. I expect from a NASA shill. Tell me do you count failures as safety margin during your day job?

Re:Hold off on blame

[Performer Guy]

No, YOU try putting it into perspective. Your argument is exactly what is wrong with profligate spending in America. "A billion dollard here, a billion dollars there and pretty soon you're talking about big money". 260 million bucks is 260 million bucks and toothpaste has a significant health benefit and a return on investment. The spending in this case was pure money down the drain.

This thread is full of sheep willing to blindly accept this failure as a difficult job well done. That frankly is F#@&*ing unmitigated *bullshit*.

NASA could screw up all day long at the most trivial of tasks and these sheep would sit around pumping money into their coffers patting them on the back.

There are plenty of examples of this working better elsewhere, just look at Burt Rutan, now admittedly that doesn't scale, but you don't have to scale it, what's the point of scaling it if you end up with a frikin boondoggle like NASA?

Re:Hold off on blame

[DerekLyons]

I understand statistics very well that is why I said it suggests it is less than reliable,

ROTFL. Making the statement that a single example suggests anything shows utter and complete ignorance of statistics.

I quoted no percentages so quit trying repeatedly to misrepresent what I've written.

I am misrepresenting nothing. You stated that the failure of Genisis indicated that the design was unreliable. Such a statement is not supportable as you cannot draw a trend line through a single point, nor can you make a valid statistical arguement based on a single data point. You simply *can't*.

Reading your text you are clearly a dishonest scoundrel who can't hold a reasonable discussion. You have consistently misrepresented what I have written.

Hmm.. Someone who has consistently pointed out the same set of facts despite your shifting claims and nonsense is 'dishonest'? It's interesting that I can present solid arguments, and have, and you can do nothing but sling mud, and *I'm* the scoundrel. As I said above I haven't misrepresented anything, the problem is that you simply don't comprehend that the terms and concepts you toss around so freely don't mean what you think they mean.

Suggesting you're only quoting reliable engineering principals and I'm writing nonsense is utter hogwash and you know it.

ROTFLMAO. My first two responses of this message indicate quite well who is tossing hogwash and who is working with well known principles.

Genesis Failed

[Jack Comics]

BREAKING NEWS: The Genesis Device failed. Investigators believe that the illegal substance, protomatter, was improperly used in creation of the Device, leading to an unstable core. The investigators believe this was the ultimate cause of its failure. Dr. David Marcus, head of the Genesis Project, has gone into hiding.

Re:Genesis Failed

[orthogonal]

...Dr. David Marcus, head of the Genesis Project....

Mod parent +5 Great Big Nerd for being able to remember the fake technology of Wrath of Khan after all these years. ;)

Re:Genesis Failed

[milesbparty]

Dr. David Marcus, head of the Genesis Project, has gone into hiding.

Wasn't Dr. Carol Marcus the actual head of the Genesis project?

Re:Genesis Failed

[shawnce]

The Genesis device and effect was fake?

Hey smart guy if it was fake how the hell did Spock get reborn., hummm?

Me thinks you are lying and trying to cover something up.

Re:Genesis Failed

[metlin]

Mod parent +5 Great Big Nerd for being able to remember the fake technology of Wrath of Khan after all these years. ;)

Mod parent +5 Greater Big Nerd for being able to recognize the fake technology of Wrath of Khan after all these years, coming from a fellow nerd ;)

Re:Genesis Failed

[Bearpaw]

Wasn't Dr. Carol Marcus the actual head of the Genesis project?

Yeah, and apparently she can't cook. Sure, you could say the probe is truly cooked, but it fell rather badly in the process.

Maybe she should stick to making pancakes.

Re:Genesis Failed

[Jason One]

Both of you need to be modded down for failing to recognize that the parent's post refers to events in The Search for Spock, not The Wrath of Khan. I believe I've out-nerded you.

Re:Genesis Failed

[orthogonal]

Both of you need to be modded down for failing to recognize that the parent's post refers to events in The Search for Spock, not The Wrath of Khan. I believe I've out-nerded you.

Yes, you... win...

...a lifetime of being alone, in your mother's basement...

...text messaging Comic Book Guy while he pretends to be a cheerleader named "Tyffani".

..in an unrelated story...

[HaeMaker]

Helicopter pilot's blood completely coagulates in seconds...

Oops!

[mariox19]

"Oops, I did it again!" is basically the reaction from Microsoft everytime a new security issue is found regarding InternetExplorer. Maybe NBC gave responsibility for this headline over to its partner.

Re:Oops!

[mariox19]

"Flamebait," huh? Sorry! I meant it to be funny.

Extension of the Mars Curse Conspiracy

[prgrmr]

There are, evidentally, certain things we are not going to be allowed to know.

Another grand example...

[bigirondawg]

... of the fallacy of the "faster, better, cheaper" policy that NASA had started to implement in the past. I mean, designing a spacecraft where multiple stages of parachutes were all single points of failure? That's just not thinking ahead. Something always goes wrong on every mission, and if that something is even one of the parachutes, then your mission fails.

I'm all for being more efficient, but there are some corners you just shouldn't cut.

Re:Another grand example...

[Overzeetop]

I expect Lockheed Martin to reimburse the governemnt for the failure of their engineers and fabrication plants to perform satisfactorily, or to provide a zero-cost replacement for the lost probe.

And if not them, then CalTech can pony up the benjamins. The fact is, NASA (goverment employees) neither designed nor fabricated the components. They simply let the contract and paid the bills. Then again, that's about all NASA does nowadays anyway...no engineers, designers, or trades are left - they've all be outsourced.

What to expect...

[jvollmer]

Now that the Genesis probe has impacted, it will begin seeding our planet to create a life-sustaining environment on Earth.

Take that, Bush Administration!

If it's not Consolidated Lint, it's just fuzz!

Funny and weird

[Neurotoxic666]

I was just reading on an online newspaper about the capsule and the stunt NASA was going to perform in order to catch it.

Then, I look at today's userfriendly.org cartoon showing our heroes about to land in the south pole with a ski-less plane.

Then I switch to Slashdot and see the capsule just crashed.

Oh well... :P

From the Genesis' black box

[Anonymous Coward]

"And wow! Hey! What's this thing coming towards me very fast? Very very fast. So big and flat and round, it needs a big wide sounding word like... ow... ound... round... ground! That's it! That's a good name - ground! I wonder if it will be friends with me?"

Like deja vu for the Brits

[whoda]

Except the fact that we built this one, this is what the Beagle lander looks like on/partially under the surface of Mars.
Now you don't have to actually locate it.

NASA has received logs...

[Burgundy Advocate]

There may be something wrong here.

15:55:26: And wow! Hey! What's this thing coming towards me very fast?
15:59:14: Very very fast.
16:00:42: So big and flat and round, it needs a big wide sounding word like... ow... ound... round... ground!
16:01:03: That's it! That's a good name - ground!
16:01:52: I wonder if it will be friends with me?
16:02:31: ***ERROR NO SIGNAL***

Re:NASA has received logs...

[idontgno]

Aah, yes, HHTG reference, and I just used up my modpoints. Sorry. +1 Funny virtual mod for you!

Re:NASA has received logs...

[daehrednud]

Oh no, not again.

Re:NASA has received logs...

[Burgundy Advocate]

Woohoo! That'll go nicely with my virtual girlfriend.

Re:NASA has received logs...

[ByteSlicer]

You mean your inflatable sperm whale, no? Make sure to give her a nice bowl of petunias...

Re:NASA has received logs...

[ByteSlicer]

Actually Agrajag was the bowl of petunias in that story, and it was his first incarnation, so he wouldn't think Dent killed him again...

Re:NASA has received logs...

[pgpckt]

Is it sad to this day I get slightly sad whenever I read this quote?

The Whale was unable to be friends with the ground! All it wanted was to be happy and liked!

Re:NASA has received logs...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the Troll, mods? This is a valid reference to the HHGG scene the grandparent was talking about. You really should read the books. And besides his somewhat obscene name, that whale really exists.

No redundant safety mechanism?

[Anonymous Coward]

Everything else going more than 100 mph seems to have at least a spare parachute.

Ob. Futurama Ref.

[hopemafia]

You win again gravity!

Re:Ob. Futurama Ref.

[kalidasa]

Gravity ALWAYS wins.

Re:Ob. Futurama Ref.

[BobSutan]

Actually, it lost to the electrons holding the earth together.

I'm sad now...

[doublebackslash]

Man, that was a great thing we coulda had. I hope something survived. The aerogel should have survived (I think that the fracture strength is enough to survive 100mph impact, if they put it in a safe spot in the capsule, someone with engineering know-how look at the numbers).
At least this foley didn't kill anyone, or hurt any property to my knowledge. Hope we still get some data. If not at least we have a crater.

Re:I'm sad now...

[ReciprocityProject]

At least this foley didn't kill anyone, or hurt any property to my knowledge.

Um, the $260 million space probe counts as "property."

I don't know what it could have hit on the ground or in the air that would have constituted a more substantial property loss.

Pictures of it happening?

[smooth wombat]

While CNN and others are now posting pictures of the mangled capsule partially buried in the Utah soil, does anyone know if there is footage of the whole event? By that I mean seeing the capsule hurtling through the atmosphere and then impacting?

Would be interesting to see from a physics standpoint how something looks impacting the earth when travelling at high speed.

And please, let's dispense with the "It looks like a blob going SPLUT! How do you think it looks?" comments.

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[TehHustler]

Yeah, NASA TV viewers saw it unfold live, and its already been show on news networks.

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[Anonymous Coward]

The footage exists, as BBC World was just showing it. :)

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it looks like a blob going SPLAT!

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[el-spectre]

Yeah, check nasa TV, they've got the whole reentry. The actual impact is missed, I guess the cameraman was panning and zooming, but 100mph straight down is hard to focus on.

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

I watched it on nasaTV's webcast, and there wasn't a shot of the ground as it hit, more like this:
Shot of sky. They're saying there's a dot in the sky, but it just looks like sky to me.
Shot of sky. One of the static bits seems to stay put more that the rest of the static.
Shot of sky with dot.
Dot becomes triangle thingy, looks like it's spinning
Spinning thing gets bigger, more in focus.
Spinning thing has a saucer-ish shape, is now seen to be tumbling, not just spinning. (voice over at this point is saying something to the effect that the parachute hasn't deployed.)
Bigger, better focus.
Even bigger, still better focus.
Ground.

It was obvious that the camera operator was focused on the craft, getting the best shot possible of it for as long as possible. As a result, the ground was very surprising when it flashed into the frame. :(
--
GMail invites for iPod referrals

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[farmgeek]

Well, I watched it on NASA TV, and they had a hard time tracking it. It's possible that one of the cameras got footage of the impact, but I doubt it.

They did have some nice shots of the capsule tumbling through the atmosphere though.

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[Teancum]

They just got a quicktime link on the main NASA page This page also has a really good photo right on the front that shows the crater and the remains of the probe. It may just be an illusion, but it looks like it may even be a steroscopic photo. I think that is just the mud that got kicked up.

Re:Pictures of it happening?

[Yehtmae]

Definitely saw it "unfolding"!

condition of the space dust

[zdzichu]

The capsule became regular, earth dust.

Space.com coverage

[jdray]

From my journal:

Space.com is carrying this story about the Genesis return capsule that returned to Earth today in a big way. I guess there won't be any trophies for the stunt pilots.

Re:Space.com coverage

[TehHustler]

You need to RTFA's. They didnt even get a CHANCE to catch it, because the chutes didn't open.

Re:Space.com coverage

[Rei]

It was worth it, though - the headlines were just great.

MSNBC.com: "Oops!"
FoxNews.com: "Splat!"

Re:Space.com coverage

[hazem]

I thought that was coverage of Clinton's operation!

Re:Space.com coverage

[Anonymous Writer]

I thought that was coverage of Clinton's operation!

I thought that was from Kenn Starr's report on Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky :P

Re:Space.com coverage

[fenix down]

I thought that was coverage of George Bush's presidency.

Re:Space.com coverage

[jdray]

I did RTFA, thank you very much. What did I say that was incorrect?

Re:Space.com coverage

[TehHustler]

Shit i would appear to have taken your post the wrong way. I thought it meant no trophies for the pilots because they failed to catch it, but you meant because they didnt get their moment of glory so to speak. Apologies, im a prick.

Re:Space.com coverage

[glitch23]

Maybe the actual coverage but not the actual presidency. The media is biased and some people like it that way.

Re:Space.com coverage

[Hatta]

Yes, the actual presidency is a fair sight worse.

Re:Space.com coverage

[truesaer]

Maybe the actual coverage but not the actual presidency. The media is biased and some people like it that way.

Jesus, it was a fucking joke...chill.

Re:Space.com coverage

[sumdumass]

Actually if you take your hate for bush or bush himself out of the picture, the presidency is one of the better ones in recent history. By recent i mean in the 1900's not just clinton's term.

There is alot of non-biased information availible and looking at it through a non-particin eyeglass it is easy to see. Of course this doesn't take anyhting away with what you dislike about the Bush. Every grood president had factions of people that disliked them. That usually means they are doing somethign worth while.

Re:Space.com coverage

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got to tell us what you have in mind that qualifies this administration for (positive) distinction out of the past century.

Mars Sample Return?

[DumbSwede]

Ummm, I think we can rule this out as a model for a Mars sample return mission.

I've said repeatedly the ISS should be billed as sample returns first destination. Gives it a mission, makes the public feel fuzzy warm about containment safety (justified or not).

Re:Mars Sample Return?

[TehHustler]

Braking back into orbit and rendezvouing with an orbiting station will require shitloads of fuel, so this way was more economical. Your understanding of spaceflight physics is a little bit off...

Obligatory.

[merdaccia]

1. Spread space dust over the Utah desert. 2. ??? 3. Profit!

Yeah right

[jayhawk88]

"The capsule broke open on impact. It was not yet clear whether the $260 million Genesis mission was ruined."

Any time the press in mentioning the price tag in their headlines, you know you're screwed.

Re:Yeah right

[jafac]

Any time the press in mentioning the price tag in their headlines, you know you're screwed.

Score another victory for the "liberal" press, again bound and determined to discredit anything the government does that costs taxpayer money, and especially anything that could be construed as blasphemy against the Bible.

Re:Yeah right

[Jugalator]

I prefer not censoring the price of things (or other information) just because a government has anything to do with it.

Re:Yeah right

[smooth wombat]

Score another victory for the "liberal" press, again bound and determined to discredit anything the government does that costs taxpayer money,

So Fox News is now the "liberal" press?

Re:Yeah right

[Overzeetop]

If the press is liberal, they'll call for Lockheed Martin to pay the costs of the failed mission (as they are the ones who both designed and built the craft).

If the press is conservative, they'll question if the agency is truly relevant and capable. They'll also follow the story with a blurb about private companies now having nearly-ready-to-fly, return-to-earth capable vehicles.

When the stories come out...see which one actually happens.

Mass die offs to start from a space borne virus

[Anonymous Coward]

Film at 11

Hilarity ensued.

[AtariDatacenter]

I have to say, this has all of the elements for a funny story. You've got NASA, you've got a probe named Genesis [for your Star Trek Genesis Device reference], you've got sand [for your Star Wars reference -- sand people, probe looking like Luke's home from a distance, etc]. You've got space dust [for your Andromeda Strain reference]. You've got helicopters [for a military reference]. You've got an impled "mission accomplished!" presidental reference.

I think the people at fark.com have all the angles covered.

Re:Hilarity ensued.

[contagious_d]

*Damn* those farkers! Why don't we have ultra-softcore pr0n on the left side of every page?

Re:Hilarity ensued.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sand. I hate sand.

Re:Hilarity ensued.

[Gharlane of Eddore]

Pre-crash post on FARK: 2004-09-08 11:49:26 AM Fool_Marquis Okay... i'm taking bets: bets this will go off withoiut a hitch: odds are 1-1.2 Bets he dosn't catch it: 1-12 bets black copter behind him catches it: 1-35 bets it slams into the ground without the 'chute even deploying: 1-100. place 'em now.

"Genesis" projects...

[BTWR]

"Genesis" projects... they always seem to fail...

NASA's attempt this morning

Star Trek II

Re:"Genesis" projects...

[Anonymous Coward]

• The creation of the earth...

Re:"Genesis" projects...

[toriver]

Mind you, the Star Trek movies' Genesis project really didn't fail until Star Trek III: The Search For Plot. Spock, I mean.

Re:"Genesis" projects...

[FirstTimeCaller]

"Genesis" projects... they always seem to fail...

You forgot one - God's original Genesis project. The jury is still out on whether that one was a success or not...

The Strain!!!

[LilMikey]

Hopefully the townsfolk didn't take it to the local doctor where he opened it and the whole towns blood turned to dust! I loved that movie.

If Hollywood had planned it...

[SiliconEntity]

...the helicopter pilot would have seen the problem, matched courses with the probe, and sent his chopper into a 100 MPH dive parallelling the probe. Someone on board would have tied a rope around his waist and leaped out, freefalling, and grabbed the probe. All the time the pilot would have been shouting out the altimeter readings... 10000 feet! 9000 feet! 8000 feet!

They would have gotten the probe on board just in time for the pilot to pull out of the dive one foot above land. Then as soon as they brought the probe back to base and got it out of the copter the charge would have gone off and the chutes would blast into the air, leaving the scientist member of the team covered with soot, while everyone laughed.

Re:If Hollywood had planned it...

[nfk]

You should write movie scripts.

Re:If Hollywood had planned it...

[gjbivin]

And you could use the same stunt pilots that were going to do the recovery...

Re:If Hollywood had planned it...

[Merovign]

Dialogue:

"Don't Jump!"

"He's Got it!"

"Oooo! Owww! Hot! Oww! Oooo!"

Re:Hmmmm

[LnxAddct]

What an asshole. What happened to America on 9/11 was horrible, and what happened to Russia was equally as horrible, especially considering that the terrorists took over a school. Make fun of our policy here in the US as much as you want, but what happend to Russia recently should not have been mentioned, show some respect. My condolences go out to the Russians. Its a shame these problems didn't end with us.
Regards,
Steve

It's not like it's their money.

[glrotate]

They're playing games with the taxpayers dollar.

We shouldn't joke, but ...

[Tewley]

That picture looks like something out of a Warner Brother's cartoon. Either a Wlie E. Coyote experiment gone wrong, or Marvin the Martian crashed his saucer.

Let's hope something can be salvaged...

Who's laughing now?

[Anonymous Coward]

And to think they totally mocked my proposal for an Estes and some Swiffers as a travesty of faster, better, cheaper.

Where's Ducoveny when you need him

[mykepredko]

Along with a fire truck full of "Head and Shoulders".

myke

Press conference

[keiferb]

FYI, there's going to be a press conference at 2:00PM EST. I know at least CNN will be covering it, for those of us who don't get NASA TV.

I knew they should never...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

Should never have made the Genesis probe using unstable protomatter :-)

(Ref: Star Trek, Wrath of Khan- hey this is News for Nerds!)

Always begging for trouble.

Genesis renamed ...

[shallow monkey]

... Icarus as it flew to close to the sun and crashed and burned on re-entry

Obligatory SCO jokes - reply here

[Anonymous Coward]

There's plenty of material here -

First off "Linux powered spaceship misses SCO!"

So that's what that UFO I saw was....

[elwing]

And here I thought it was another UFO...

Re:So that's what that UFO I saw was....

[bizpile]

And here I thought it was another UFO..

Can you say cover-up?

A knock at the door

[Ackmo]

There's a fire, sir.

wonderful NASA response

[carn1fex]

We were watching it live in the NASA cafeteria (GSFC) at lunch time on the tvs.. silence.. camera follows, follows, follows.. then the best collective "OH SHIT!" ive heard yelled in years. Then the cooks came out to watch and gave the best "Damn y'all dun fucked up huh?" look ive seen in years.

Re:Hilarity ensued. #2

[AtariDatacenter]

And the post-crash thread, too.

Did I forget the Peter Gabriel, Genesis reference?

Possible Cause...

[lostOnEarth]

According to NASA's NSSDC master catalog:

There was some concern that the sample return capsule battery would fail, jeopardizing the re-entry. The battery was overheating, but ground tests have shown that the battery should be unaffected by the amount of heating it has endured, and should operate to deploy the parachute on reentry.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog? sc=2001-034A

You mean they went to all that trouble

[Mordant]

just to get some Space Dust?

Utah eh? How far was it from SCO headquarters?

[koa]

Man, I can dream can't I?

Re:Utah eh? How far was it from SCO headquarters?

[Jaywalk]

Well, let's see. It was supposed to land at the Utah Test and Training Range and this map shows the restricted airspace as a rough hexagon, which seems to match NASA's description of the landing area as a "hex marks the spot" (halfway down the page). But if you go to this map (you may need to zoom out three notches and scroll a bit to the east; look for the Dugway Proving Grounds) you'll see that even the easternmost parts of the range are still a good ways off from Lindon. Besides, Lindon is in a pretty well-populated area and a miss could cause a problem.

I propose that the Air Force approach Darl and ask him to participate in a modified mid-air capture program. One that involves Darl out in the middle of the desert with a baseball glove.

Re:Utah eh? How far was it from SCO headquarters?

[koa]

Imagine by some freak stroke of luck it had smashed into their headquarters..

Assuming Darl and Co. survived, how long do you think it would have taken before they put out a press release stating that the "Linux Hackers" hijacked the command and control of Nasa and changed its trojectory for impact? (and disabled the parachute while they were at it.. heh)

Makes me think of Office Space

[suso]

Damnit, I must have misplaced a decimal point or something. I always do that I always mess up some mundane detail.

Oh, this is not a mundane detail, Michael!!

Re:Makes me think of Office Space

[Anonymous Coward]

(NASA scientist in drunken stupor) "I did all the calculations in feet.. but *snicker* I programmed the lander in meters! *snicker* Whoops!"

--Robin Williams (from the Live on Broadway special)

Sad...

[GillBates0]

From TF CNN A:

This daring retrieval method will protect the samples and sensitive instruments during reentry. A crash landing, even at the capsule's relatively slow speed of 9 mph, could ruin some of the data collected during the mission.

Considering the fact that it hit the ground at about a 100mph, when a crash landing at even 9mph was considered dangerous, it is very likely that most of the instrumentation and data is ruined.

Hopefully the canisters (or the like) containing the samples survived the ride. The helicopter "snatch" strategy sounded hit-and-go to me anyway, but then I'm just an ignorant computer scientist.

Re:Sad...

[Viceice]

IIRC, this is a very tried and tested way of retriving telemetry.

When spy satellites were first launched, they had no way of getting high resolution photography shot from space back to earth wirelessly.

So instead, satellites used to eject a canister at a preset time and location with actual exposed film in it. The canister would enter the atmosphere and deploy a small chute, where a waiting plane with a fishing hook/cloths lines like attachment would catch it in mid air.

Took some skill to catch a small falling object in midair before it hit the ground, but they managed it.

The first Genesis photoshop

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.asrm76.dsl.pipex.com/genesisowned.jpg

Re:NASA is batting about 50%

[Plutor]

This may be difficult for you to grasp, but this wasn't a sh

Why not use a shuttle?

[Samurai Cat!]

I'm admittedly largely ignorant of the Genesis project and the issues recovering it, but...

Couldn't they have possibly gotten that probe into an orbit that a shuttle could have matched, and recover the probe that way?

Granted, it could be a while before a shuttle could be tasked to such a recovery, but one could think they could put the probe into a reasonably stable orbit to wait until that time.

Re:Why not use a shuttle?

[deglr6328]

Considering that it was travelling back TOWARD earth at 25 thousand miles an hour and the shuttle ORBITS the earth at 17 thousand miles an hour 300-400 miles up, what do you think?

Re:Why not use a shuttle?

[rtaylor]

Couldn't they have possibly gotten that probe into an orbit that a shuttle could have matched, and recover the probe that way?

Of course, but then the cost would have been closer to $1B instead of $260M.

I'm sure their second attempt (total cost including $260M attempt still under $600M) will be better.

Re:Why not use a shuttle?

[Anonymous Coward]

The fuel needed to slow something down to orbital insertion speed would have made the thing so freaking heavy, it would never have gotten off the ground in the first place

Re:Why not use a shuttle?

[surprise_audit]

Yeah - the next one will be a sphere covered in big springs, so the helicopter pilots get more than one shot at catching it...

It Was In!

[Anonymous Coward]

And Serena WIlliams (pointing at the impact crater) loudly protests that it landed inside the line...

Those pictures on cnn...

[Frank of Earth]

... of the crash scene look vaguely familiar.

Oh yeah...

Re:NASA is batting about 50%

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, if you consider that 98 out of 100 flights (actually more than that, but I'll try to keep the math simple for you) were successful, they're batting about .980 if you're only talking about the shuttle. It ain't no nine-nines, but not a failure by any means, and certainly not 50%.

Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

This thing is really well coordinated. Stories on WSJ, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, Slashdot, etc. Whoever did the scam is really good.

In another corner of Utah

[cOdEgUru]

in a shady bar near the local airfield..

"I swear it was armageddon when me in my beat up single engine crop duster saw those little martians in their flying saucer trying to make it to the good ole US.. I didnt think twice before blasting their damn little chute as it opened sending those tiny bastards to their desert grave.. Muuuaaahhhahhh!"

Gravity is to blame.

[camusflage]

I heard Sir Isaac Newton is wanted for questioning..

Re:Gravity is to blame.

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no such thing as gravity. Earth just sucks.

Re:Gravity is to blame.

[Orne]

"It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end."

Nick Burns, the company computer guy

[Steve_Jobs_HNIC]

NASA: "DAMN IT!! The studpid chute didn't open"

Nick Burns: "Yeah, it's the chute that's stupid, right. Yeah it's the chute's fault. ...... MOVE!!!"

Re:Nick Burns, the company computer guy

[Anonymous Coward]

LMFAO!!! that was great I needed that laugh today.

Not a total loss

[Ced_Ex]

If you look at the picture, the top half sticking out of the ground still looks good.

"It's just a little airborne, it's still good, it's still good!" - Homer

Still no word:

[Frank of Earth]

From the official website though:

Phil Collins News

But always remember...

[baywulf]

Genesis does what Nintendon't

Understatement of the Day

[joshuao3]

This from MSNBC: "It picked up speed rapidly as Earth's gravitational pull brought it closer, reaching velocities of 25,000 mph or 11 kilometers per second. The capsule's descent was then slowed somewhat by atmospheric re-entry." They then forgot to mention that it hit at only 100mph. I'd say hitting the ground at 100mph was just barely a "slowed somewhat". No one could ever accuse the media of overexagerating the facts!

Re:Understatement of the Day

[frank249]

Actually NASA just said it hit at 193 mph. Terminal velocity varies according to the density, weight and area of a falling object but I thought 100 mph that everyone else was quoting seemed somewhat slow for something coming in from space.

Re:Understatement of the Day

[Teancum]

It was NASA TV that said 100 mph, and that was mentioned just after it crashed into the desert. If that estimate was revised, it wouldn't surprise me, although 200 mph still is quite slow compared to what it could have been.

Still, that was a real neat classic impact crater it made in the salt flats.

As I rush to the US PTO

[DisasterDoctor]

I have just filed paperwork patenting everything on board the spacecraft!

If the probe was stolen:

[Anonymous Coward]

In Capitalist America, you abduct the UFO!

Ok, that was terrible.
I'm going to go sulk now.

Real Sad

[rf0]

They spent all the time and effort and it failed due to prehaps the simplist bit of machinery. As the old saying goes something is only a strong as the weakest bit

rus

Just Great!

[Jedi Holocron]

All our base are now belong to them!

Prepare for the invasion of the space bug!

Wrong mission -- Genesis doesn't use aerogel

[StupendousMan]

> I hope something survived. The aerogel > should have survived ....

Wrong mission. You are thinking of Stardust, which will return samples from a comet.

Genesis allowed solar wind particles to slam into polished slabs of metal; some of the particles stick and can be recovered afterwards.

Re:Wrong mission -- Genesis doesn't use aerogel

[LemonFire]

Mission
- Step 1: allow solar wind particles to slam into polished slabs of metal
- Step 2: allow polished slabs of metal to slam into earth

Smacking into the ground at 109mph should at least have made some of the Utah desert sand to stick to it.

I just watched the video.

[ARRRLovin]

Is anyone else surprised at how slow the probe was traveling when it hit the earth. That "tumbling/rotating" did a good job of slowing it. Maybe next time they can try an airbag system or something else that is less problematic than a mortar fired parachute system.

Space Made Easy

[ackthpt]

Let's say it again, class... "Space Ain't Easy."

It's not space is difficult, we just don't have enough experience with it. When we become complacent is when we're surprised. Making calculation errors (feet instead of metres), wrong kind of glue on foam, etc. And sadly, many errors occur because NASA is ambitious, but funding is somewhat limited (you can go to Mars, but we'll cut your budget and you'll have to make do.)

Star Trek

[jlebrech]

cant nasa come up with names that arnt relevant to start trek.

Re:Star Trek

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank god Kirk was able to destroy this one before Kahn got ahold of it. Ingenious of him to neutralize the explosives on the deployment shutes. Perhaps he used berthold rays from the main deflector.

Genesis

[Anonymous Coward]

For some reason I read this as "Sega Genesis Capsule Crashes; Chutes Blamed". I couldn't figure out what kind of super nerds would send a Sega Genesis into outer space.

routine for film spy satellites

[peter303]

In the old days before video spy satellites, film canisters were recovered by helicopter snatching of parachutes. Its a well-tried technology.

Re:routine for film spy satellites

[Anonymous Coward]

Project Corona
IIRC, fixed wing aircraft were used, not helicopters.

Re:routine for film spy satellites

[Darth_brooks]

You're thinking of the old Corona missions, Story which used C-123 cargo planes as a means of recovery. They were run from 1959 through 1972, and you can order copies of the images taken through the USGS.

Re:routine for film spy satellites

[MyHair]

I have a mental image of one of those plastic 35mm film canisters w/decelleration thrusters and a ceramic heat shield cap.

Re:routine for film spy satellites

[Anonymous Coward]

or "Ice Station Zebra" http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0063121/

Re:routine for film spy satellites

[Anonymous Coward]

**cough,cough**KarmaWhore**cough,cough**

I saw...

[wpiman]

I saw this thing crash on TV- as it was tumbling to the ground- all I could think to say to myself was "fair catch".....

Harder, faster, better, stronger...

[Chagatai]

Well, at least we know that the "faster" portion of NASA's program seemed to work right, as the probe crashed at over 100 mph.

sb

[wpiman]

"a parachute failure occurred"

This is very reminiscent of the superbowl actually- first we have a parachute failure here- in the superbowl- we had a wardrobe malfunction. And the thing tumbled down like a football.

nasa footage

[psykopotat]

Taken from the cnn article - "NASA footage shows the craft tumbling rapidly through the air before hitting the ground with enormous force."

anyone know if that footage is available for download somewhere

Re:nasa footage

[Buran]

I'd like to know too. MSNBC's site doesn't want to work for me. Or maybe someone can get the direct URL for the file so I can sic wget on it? As long as OS X has a player for whatever format it's in, great.

Awww...

[davidsyes]

CHUTE!

Why couldn't Project Genesis JUST CHUTE ME?!?!

DOH!!!!

Maybe in the desert, Genesis "will bring LIFE from LIFElessness".

Maybe someone told the solar wind, "You were trying to IRRADIATE and KILL us, but you're going to HAVE to COME down HERE. You HAVE to COME DOWN HERE!!!"

JUST CHUTE ME!!!

Spacecraft tumbling -- old mistake?

[Dr. Zowie]

The reports that the re-entry vehicle was seen to be tumbling rather than spinning properly makes me wonder if sloppy thinking about rigid body kinematics came into play yet again? Spinning objects often behave in tricky, counterintuitive ways, and even in a mission of this scale it would not be too surprising to find that the spacecraft tumbled when the engineers intended it to spin smoothly.

If true, it would not be the first time -- by a long shot -- that the strange behavior of spinning objects caused trouble for a spacecraft. Some of the early three-axis-stabilized satellites were made into inadvertent spinners after their launch stabilization spin made them flip upside down (so that their de-spin rockets made them go faster instead of slowing them down!). SOHO was nearly lost in 1998, in part because rotational precession rotated the craft so that the solar panels were in long-term twilight.

Here's hoping there's something left for the team to analyze. Three years in space plus ten years of planning and lobbying is a long time to wait.

Re:Spacecraft tumbling -- old mistake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Very unlikely that it was the rigid body kinematics - assuming there was no physical damage during reentry. The inertia properties can easily be calculated within a tiny fraction of percent, and I'm sure it was spin-balanced as well. There hasn't been any signifcant problems with this for a long time (last I know of was DSCS II block one back in the early 70's, and that was a pretty stupid design feature that was quickly corrected).

The "upside down flip" - actually, a sign ambiguity in a spin axis transfer from prolate to oblate, combined with a sun sensor failure (that made it impossible to determine the which of the two possible spin directions in the body frame), and the most famous kinematics issue of them all, Explorer I (spun up around minimum MOI axis for "stability" (i.e. prolate) which quickly dissapated the energy through the antennas and wound up end-over-end) are both examples of errors in assessing the *flexible body kinematics*. In other words, they include energy dissipation from flexible bodies like either a damper or flexible antennas, respectively.

If it's anything along these lines, it's most likely to the the result of aerodynamics. But it appeared to have too much spin rate to be a simple proper operation followed by unstable aerodynamics. 15 RPM is not very fast at all and it looked to be at least 2-3 times that. The extra angular momentum had to come from somewhere.

All speculation, of course. But I've been down similar roads, and the very first place to start is how it got it's tumble rate.

I though Genesis crashed and burned in 1997?

[Jedi Holocron]

From here:

Genesis resurfaced in 1997 with Calling All Stations, which recalled their art-rock roots. Neither the critics nor the fans warmed to the album -- it sold poorly and the tour was equally unsuccessful.

Look on the bright side

[John Harrison]

Soon Spock will come back to life, and in Utah no less. Maybe he will bring logic to SCO.

Re:Look on the bright side

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget... at the end, Utah rips itself apart.

Shouldn't there be a creater?

[Belial6]

Maybe I have this wrong, but shouldn't an object of that size and velocity hitting the ground make at least some kind of creater?

Re:Shouldn't there be a creater?

[Jedi Holocron]

No...you're thinking of VGER.

Redundant

[hopemafia]

This post is just a copy of an earlier AC post.

Re:Redundant

[lostOnEarth]

Sorry - I posted the info twice. I got excited, and accidentally posted as AC, then hit the stop button, but apparently not in time. Maybe I should look into the benefit package... or more coffee.

call me paranoid....

[m2bord]

but is there anything that this vessel has come in contact with that could harm us since the integrity of the capsule itself was breeched?

Re:call me paranoid....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, these "sun particles" sound evil.. like they might give us sunburn or something!

Re:call me paranoid....

[CrudPuppy]

the collectors are some of the purest plates known to man. these things would make a clean-room look like a sewage dump.

solar particles will have embedded themselves into the plates which would be analyzed after recapture, so no, there is nothing harmful. naturally occurring terrestrial compounds are far more deadly than anything that could be on that probe.

wormwood?

[Anonymous Coward]

isn't that the stuff used to make absinthe, which btw, tastes bitter?

I've seen this movie!

[Anonymous Coward]

Space probe crashes on contact, all the little space organisms and diseases get unleashed upon the earth, rather than kept safely inside their man-made prisons.

I can almost picure Joel and Crow heckling the onscreen characters...

That's bad news...

[mikael]

When I first heard that helicopter pilots were going to catch the probe, I imagined they would be flying in formation with a huge net.

And failing that, there would have been a large number of cardboard boxes or a large airbag in case they missed.

Can't WTFV for free?!?!?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Any hints as to where we can see the crash video for free (yes as in beer) unlike Spaceflightnow and preferably one that works (AKA doesn't use crapomedia 7 like MSNBC).

Update:

[Anonymous Coward]

Since the solar dust is apparently useless for scientific research, an as of yet undisclosed ink manufacturer has offered to use the 15 micrograms of material as a low grain component of inkjet printer ink. NASA hopes to recover half the project cost through this deal, the ink manufacturer is rumored to come out with a slight profit.

Re:Update:

[Anonymous Coward]

NASA should sell it on Ebay. Lots of people would pay big bucks to have some solar dust sitting on their desk.

Re:Update:

[out_of_ideas]

I have some, wanna buy it ?
Yes, the crumbs are from alien bread.

awwwww CHUTE.

[TheLittleJetson]

eom

I thought you made the chutes? Oh darn...

[Anonymous Coward]

The beauty of too many contractors! I can just see the project meeting:

Team A
"What do you mean we were to make the chutes, I thought it was you guys"

Team B
"Uh, no, we weren't making the chutes, we just stored our lunches in the chute bay, because someone kept stealing our sandwiches from the fridge."

Team A
"Oh shit, we thought you were packing the chutes!"

Team B
"We wondered why we always had room for 12 lunches in there"

Team A
"This is not going to look good on the company letterhead"

Team B
"Someone call flight and see if my Tuna on Rye survived re-entry, will you."

and at Fark...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your capsule ASPLODE!

Admiral Ackbar: It was a trap

And various pictures of mustard man, big-nut squirrel, Icy Hot Stuntaz, etc.

Do you want karate?

NASA vs. ESA, Quake II-style...

[HEMI426]

Beagle cratered.
Beagle2 cratered.
Spirit captured the flag!
Opportunity captured the flag!
Genesis cratered.

I think NASA is still in the lead. :)

Re:NASA vs. ESA, Quake II-style...

[HedonismBot]

Uhm, techically speaking neither Beagle nor Beagle: Reloaded have cratered.

For all we know, they're just experiencing a rather nasty case of lag.

Re:NASA vs. ESA, Quake II-style...

[Swarfega]

Just how far do you want to go back? Beagle2's namesake predecessor launched in 1825!

(Beagle2 was not the second mission in a series - it was named after a famous other ship that went on a voyage of discovery.)

Re:NASA vs. ESA, Quake II-style...

[CaptainAvatar]

Yep, and it didn't exactly "crater" either, considering that data collected on its voyages helped Darwin come up with natural selection ...

Re:NASA vs. ESA, Quake II-style...

[6th time lucky]

At least one of the Beagles found life...

Dear NASA...

[korbin_dallas]

I just saw the news, and as 1 of 260 million taxpayers "I want my dollar back!"

Re:Dear NASA...

[gerardrj]

The money I want back is my $6 Bush just gave to Florida to rebuild after the hurricanes.

If we can give $2B to morons who continually build non-hurricane-proof structures in an area known to have frequent and severe hurricanes, then surely we can scrounge up another $5B for NASA?

250 Million Dallar Lawn Dart

[HangingChad]

The real question is were they closest to the target?

Ob: Douglas Adams Reference

[goldmeer]

Heard From The Capsule During Freefall:
"Oh no, not again"

Re:Ob: Douglas Adams Reference

[linuxtelephony]

And lest we forget, "I wonder if it will be friends with me?"

Re:Ob: Douglas Adams Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

"Oh no, not again"

I thought that was SpaceBalls.

If we all know whats going to happen...

[kcb93x]

...Then could we just please fast forward to the end, where it DOES rip itself apart? /me ducks

We all know who really did this....

[martinjd]

And all i have to say is,

"KHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!!!!!!!!"

(lower case letters to avoid being lame)

Re:We all know who really did this....

[martinjd]

don't bother moderating parent, boss came in and i was too slow to post it.. :(

Re:We all know who really did this....

[jakob_grimm]

Khaaan!

Re:2 words:

[networkBoy]

whoever modded this redundant should look at the posts oldest first!

there goes my grant...

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess now no one will be interested in my research on what happens when a VW bug is dropped from a low earth orbit....

Flashing light in the video?

[Vatara420]

In the MSNBC video, after it has crashed you can see light coming from the capsule. Is this a fire or some sort of light? Anyone know?

Re:Flashing light in the video?

[WildCode]

it was a fire, but no official comment on it has been made

Appropriate Quote

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, normally, I read the quotes found down at the bottom of the page on slashdot for their entertainment value. Imagine my surprise when I read what I assume to be a random quote at the bottom of this story:

"Endless the world's turn, endless the sun's spinning Endless the quest; I turn again, back to my own beginning, And here, find rest."

So, what are the odds that that was random, and if it was, do I need to play the lottery today? :)

Re:the dead

[Ianing]

Anyone else having a hard time keeping the dead in there graves right now? Darn things just got up and started biting people.

Haven't you heard of "northern lights"

[d41d8cd98f00b204e980]

We get solar dust every day, it's called aurora borealis, or the northern lights.

One small step for man

[Mr. Cancelled]

One giant "D'oh!" for all mankind...

OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Thalia]

Well, it failed. The entire project, >$200M may have been toasted. What are the options?

1. Find a scapegoat. Claim the entire waste was due to some employee, subcontractor, part, etc.
2. Claim success. Claim that the real mission was accomplished, that all the data was salvaged, and that nothing particularly went wrong.
3. Claim providence. Show uncertainty. Emphasis on how hard the problem was to accomplish. Use big numbers. Ask to try again.

And then you have to think of the correct response:

1. Penalize NASA. The project failed due to NASA error, and NASA must figure out how not to fail. Error causes less funding. Success good. Failure bad.
2. Reward NASA. There is now more work to be done than if the probe were caught. Time to build another one, just like the last one. There is no fear in failure.

Is there a correct answer?

Andromeda Strain?

[moojin]

Isn't this similar to the beginning of the movie, Andromeda Strain? Any of the chopper pilots experience cystalization of their blood?

Re:Andromeda Strain?

[arose]

Isn't this similar to the beginning of the movie, Andromeda Strain?

Next you'll talk about the 3 laws of robotics from the movie "I, Robot" and the magic rings from the "The Lord of the Rigs" movies...
<br><br>
Please hand in your geek card on the way to Logout.

Re:Andromeda Strain?

[arose]

Isn't this similar to the beginning of the movie, Andromeda Strain?

Next you'll talk about the 3 laws of robotics from the movie "I, Robot" and the magic rings from the "The Lord of the Rigs" movies...

Please hand in your geek card on the way to Logout.


P.S.: Slashcode sucks.

Re:Andromeda Strain?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Please hand in your geek card on the way to Logout"

I'm not sure what you're complaining about. This is almost exactly how the story starts...

Re:Andromeda Strain?

[moojin]

There seems to be some confusion about the movie, Andromeda Strain. Here is the (poor) plot summary from IMDB, but the similarities to the current NASA Genesis mission:

A U.S. Army satellite (Scoop VII) falls to earth near Piedmont, New Mexico. The recovery team experiences difficulties as it becomes clear that the satellite has performed its intended function all too well, and has brought back something from space. A team of scientists is assembled in a high-tech, underground facility to identify and defeat the "enemy" before it is too late.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066769/plotsummary

It seems that Michael Crichton wrote the novel while in medical school.

Fire up the Ion Cannon.

[JakiChan]

BTW, folks, a huge fleet of Star Destroyers just came out of hyperspace in Sector 12. Not to worry y'all or anything.

"What's a nubian?"

QT Videos anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Doea anyone have QT Videos of the event? Of course I cannot afford to pay for the "spaceflight now" subscription.... are there any other vidios acailable?

Cheap Shot?

[switcha]

Diebold?

Imagine...

[Anonymous Coward]

a beowulf cluster of....oh wait

oh, and in mother russia the ground hits probe...

It pretty standard

[budgenator]

The guided missile I worked on used a S and A Safety and Arming, device not unlike what is described. The "warhead" is only armed after the missile achieves a classified amount of acceleration for a period of time. This is needed to insure that the "warhead" doesn't detonated at an unsafe distance from the launcher.
It is preferable to have a spacecraft auger into the dirt, than have a parchute deploy on launch and possibly pulled the launch vehicle into a populated area.

Re:It pretty standard

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people can nonchalantly start a sentence with "the guided missile I worked on.." ? Hmm..

Re:It pretty standard

[GeckoX]

What, it's not rocket science now is it?

[ducks]

Re:It pretty standard

[HokieJP]

My question is: should we be concerned that he worked on a guided missile but doesn't know the difference between the past and present tenses?

Re:It pretty standard

[Anonymous Coward]

He's a time traveler, so cut him some slack!

Re:It pretty standard

[budgenator]

sorry, should have been past tense, my bird used electron tubes and only one transistor. It always amazed me that the elements inside those little tube could take near double digit g's and still work.

This was deliberate

[taktheredelf]

ok, so this thing travels in space for months, was $260 million to make and the parachute fails? they should have known if there was a parachute failure before it hit the ground; seems very deliberate to me. Probably analyzed some of the debris on the way back to earth and saw something; most recovered devices are not returned to NASA with an ARMED escort.

"Chutes Blamed"

[Performer Guy]

I love that title, "Chutes Blamed". Unless Chutes is the name of program manager or the guy who designed the parachute deployment system, there's something off teh mark about this.

Never overestimate your chances

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/events/lectures/sep04.cfm

From the link:
This presentation will include images of the dramatic helicopter mid-air capture of the capsule containing the delicate solar wind samples, status reports about the pristine samples collected by the solar arrays, and a discussion of how the scientific community will benefit from this historic mission.

Changed to:
"This presentation will include a video of the crash! With added laughter and officials grumbling"

Ahhh, damnit

[roswelljw]

That sucks sooo much. I saw the practice runs, oh well, fate has a sense of humor

Bomp bomp bomp

[Anonymous Coward]

Another one bites the dust...

really bad ...

[Anonymous Coward]

put maybe some smallish particles survived and
they can grow some crystals from those surviving
solar-dust particles ... wonder what they'll look
like? good luck with the disks anyway!

Re:Makes me think of the Simpsons

[chameleon3]

Oh, silly me..forgot to, uh, carry the one. hoyven glaven!

Scientists Screw up Again

[Anonymous Coward]

Film at 11

Cover Up!

[Anonymous Coward]

From the pictures of the crash, it looks like a crashed ufo.
I bet this whole genesis mission is just an elaborate cover up!

Designed by the same folks as Beagle 2 ...

[Dark$ide]

Clearly the Genesis probe was designed by the same folks as the Beagle 2 Mars probe.

Shame!

Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

"Utah. You will rarely find a more treachorous hive of scum and villiany. We must be cautious."

$260 is cheap for space dust !!

[iMaple]

The $260 Genesis mission was bringing back to Earth a set of fragile disks containing billions of atoms collected from solar wind, the first cosmic samples to be returned to Earth from beyond the moon.
MSNBC - Genesis space capsule crashes to Earth
I ca lend $260 to NASA for another mission (as long as it does not fall on my house). But why pay so much just for some dust , They could buy a new video card and play Doom 3 all day.

Utah?

[adeyadey]

Damn you, Darl McBride! Damn your eyes!

I know how it ends

[StrandedOrg]

I know how it ends, saw The Andromeda Strain a long time ago...

Problem Suspected!

[sciop101]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ battery_genesis_011102.html/

The battery affects the capsule's re-entry into the atmosphere. If it fails, scientists might not get their hands on solar wind particles.

This was a typical NASA mission. NASA is not the premier science/engineering organization anymore.

Maybe selling the particle catchers for jewelry can be profitable!

Re:Problem Suspected!

[DerekLyons]

This was a typical NASA mission. NASA is not the premier science/engineering organization anymore.

Right. That's why MER A and MER B are both in extended missions... That's why Cassini is happily beaming back tons of information... NASA simply can't get a mission right.

LockMart owes me a dollar

[Overzeetop]

From the medial package:

"Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Denver, Colo., designed, built and operates the spacecraft, and is overseeing the capture and return of the Genesos sample capsule."

I say that, since we're all about accountablity, that Lockheed Martin pony up the cash they lost through insufficient engineering. It doesn't matter whether is shipped on time, in budget, with purple wings, whatever - the fact is that it failed. If we pay L-M, it will be an indication that the Federal Government is simply handing checks over to corporations.

On a side note, I happen to know both Alphonzo Diaz and Orlando Figueroa, though I was sufficiently separated from them by management layers that I'm sure they don't remember me. They were both pretty nice guys. It's a shame this didn't work out for them.

99% of all the material in our solar system

[masman]

Even if the chute had deployed, it seems like the package might have been a tad heavy for it to support...

If the package survived, the solar particles -- a storehouse of 99 percent of all the material in our solar system -- would be parceled out for analysis to the University of California at Los Angeles and the University of Chicago's Argonne National Lab.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[BrodyVess]

Oh really? So how much can the average Enron employee expect from Lay, Skilling, et al?

Utah eh?

[Cyno01]

Couldn't they have aimed it at Daryls office "just in case" the chutes didn't deploy...

genesis crashed or

[Anonymous Coward]

misile defense shield works

It was a simpler time back then....

[Thud457]

Hey, you're being too harsh judging ST:III by today's standards!

It was worth the $3.50 ticket price just for the line : "Don't mind him, he did too much LDS in the 60's."!!

Re:It was a simpler time back then....

[kaitou]

damn it that was ST:IV

really sad day

[CrudPuppy]

I personally worked side by side with some of the key researchers on this project, including the PI. I cannot imagine how they must feel seeing 7 years of their life go down the drain when this thing slammed into the ground. =(

A lot of people will wanna play the blame game, but in the end the scientists just really wanted their data. really sad.

Re:really sad day

[Anonymous Coward]

Well if they'd done a better job, this might not have happened. Leave it to unionized goverment workers to foul it up.

Re:really sad day

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, I've seen this happen several times, and the common thread has been Lockheed's involvement. I know it is probably unfair to make this generalization, but they were responsible for the Hubble debacle (as integrator), the lost science on Galilleo (stuck HGA, low data rate), Mars Polar Land, and several other failed unmanned probes. If you look at the string of failures, it makes one wonder if the NASA/JPL administrators that evaluate contractors' proposals for these missions actually look at the track record of the contractors. It sure doesn't look like Lockheed knows how to build unmanned science platforms that get the job done.

Re:really sad day

[CrudPuppy]

What a fucking ignorant post. I worked with the researchers you moron, not the people who physically built the thing. Last time I checked, studying solar dust is a little different than building rockets.

At any rate, the people who physically built it have lost nothing today (maybe a little self-respect), only my friends who have spent the last 6-7 years of their lives working on this to gain knowledge of the dust composition for their calculations and those of other scientists.

Re:really sad day

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you need to remember this was one of the "faster cheaper better" missions...

This spacecraft was launched in 2001... and was designed at the hight (and arguably the decline) of "faster cheaper better".

In 1999 we Lost Climate Orbiter and Polar Lander, which reshaped the way NASA did business... Problem was, they already had this craft designed and ready to build, money was committed, etc, so they could look at redesigning things, but for the most part those designs could not alter it signifigantly, or the craft would have visited the Smithsonian, not the Sun.

Secondly the re-entry design based itself on tested technologies, so they would have not placed as much emphasis on the deployment of the chute, but rater the unfirling of the parasail chute (Not as tested, and to my knowledge, NEVER tested on a space mission)... Pyros are very reliable, but they do fail... Mariner 3 was a victim of such a failure. My guess is one of the pyros failed, or it shorted the circut board when it fired, and as a result, the chute diddn't open.

If you saw the Tomes of engineering paperwork required to build such a craft, you'd be surprised what considerations are taken and how mechanically complex these craft can be considering their minute size.

The engineers at JPL are some of the most brilliant gearheads out there, but despite that they are human, and for sure, there's always a better way to do something... Problem is, you don't know its wrong until it shows itself to be wrong. If it worked before, it was "good", right?

Maybe not, but that's Murphy's Law, not Gov't bloat.

Re:really sad day

[Anonymous Coward]

"The engineers at JPL are some of the most brilliant gearheads out there..."

In my experience the guys at JPL are morons. They promise things they can't deliver and can't tell pounds from newtons. They get WAY to much credit for things that they usually have little to do with on top of all that. They have been making stupid mistakes and failing to deliver on stuff way before the "faster, better, cheaper" era. JPL Blows!

Talk about Deja Vu...

[syntap]

We just witnessed the fall of man in Genesis.

My best sig is this one.

THERE HAS BEEN A WILDFIRE

[Anonymous Coward]

Attention Alpha Team
There has been a wildfire - I repeat - There has been a wildfire

Report as previously arranged

$260 million bucks

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd think for that much, they would have been able to park it in orbit to be retrieved by the Shuttle or (in a pinch) the Russians or the Europeans.

A little showboating, and they had to try to snag it out of the air.

Should have hired Pacific Scientific. They build 'chute modules for nuclear weapons. At least theirs would have worked.

Re:$260 million bucks

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that a shuttle mission would have cost about 5 billion, yeah, that would have been "smart".

For Hire

[tjstork]

One Parachute Engineer. Responsible for designing parachute systems.

Re:If Hollywood filmed it

[Anonymous Coward]

The someone on board would have leaped out over the protest of the pilot, free-falled to the capsule and

1) opened it, reattached the clips to the battery and jumped out of the way just as the probe's chutes deployed. Deploying his own chutes, he floats down to earth, fade in musical score... or
2) opened it up, removing the precious cargo out, deploying his own chute, pulls safely away from the doomed probe. Fade in musical score...

The esuing investigation reveals that the probe was sabotaged by the manufacturer, who donated heavily to the Republican party. Sun dust turns out to be a key component in the cure for aids. Everyone else is either gay or a Democrat plus the one token vegan. Oh, yea. John Kerry gets his 4th Purple Heart.

Re:Shouldn't there be a crater?

[Belial6]

Oops. Crater

And in an apparently unrelated story....

[AJWM]

The inhabitants of the nearby(*) town of Piedmont have apparently all succumbed to a mysterious illness, with the exception of an old man and a crying baby.

* (Okay, Piedmont, Arizona, probably isn't "near" Dugway -- but they did do some biowarfare research at Dugway way back when. Maybe they wanted the landing site closer to the Wildfire Project.)

Re:And in an apparently unrelated story....

[Teancum]

It crashed into a county the size of Conneticut with a total population of 40,000 people, and most of that in the extreame eastern end of the county to boot. It also borders Idaho and Nevada, so no, Piedmont AZ isn't anywhere near.

Re:And in an apparently unrelated story....

[gatkinso]

I take it you have never read the Andromeda Strain.

Wait for it..

[rov4416444]

Wait for the NASA Executives For Honesty ad: In 1998 Kerry voted NO against new chutes for our spacecraft!!

Chute was packed by.:

[stkpogo]

Wily Coyote and a beep beep was heard by SETI..)

Re:2 more words

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't click. Porn you don't want to see.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[georgewilliamherbert]

Should also fire all these quack jobs that think parachutes are the answer to everything. This isn't a freaking $260 million egg-drop contest. Kinda sad that these engineers would lose to most 4th graders. If it is landing in the desert, use thrusters, sheesh.

No.

Historically, parachutes are about an order of magnitude more reliable in practice than landing thruster rockets.

Parachtues just have to fire the deploy pyro and not get tangled up, and you can have more than one in case one gets tangled up.

With rockets, you have to control the orientation so you're thrusting down, you have to measure the altitude so that you slow down to land softly, the rocket motors have to start and run reliably, etc.

Please leave spacecraft design to people who actually study it. Knee-jerk uninformed reactions aren't going to help. It broke, but why it broke and the implications and possible lessons are important. Read some more.

missing money

[rkanodia]

The organization hemmorrhages millions of dollars and they don't know where.

Compared to the 2.3 trillion dollars that the Pentagon can't find, I'd say NASA is one of our more efficient agencies.

Pure cost not only consideration

[DumbSwede]

It's not my understanding of physics that is lacking; it is your understanding of public perception that is lacking.

Sure more expensive.

More likely to engender public interest, allay public fears, garner funds for follow up missions.

reference point

[nusratt]

what a hare-brained idea.
And for $260 million.
Can you imagine suggesting to your boss, or a VC, or in a foundation funding proposal, that they spend even $260 THOUSAND on such a high-probability-of-total-failure scheme?

From "Young Zaphod plays it safe"

[infolib]

"It's breaking up, is that it?" he shouted. "It's got a hold full of epsilonic radiating aorist rods or something that'll fry this whole space sector for zillions of years back and it's breaking up. Is that the story? Is that what we're going down to find? Am I going to come out of that wreck with even more heads?"
"It cannot possibly be a wreck, Mr. Beeblebrox," insisted the official. "the ship is guaranteed to be perfectly safe. It cannot possibly break up."
"Then why are you so keen to go and look at it?"
"We like to look at things that are perfectly safe."

Where the hell is my catcher's mitt?!?!

[hadesan]

Where the hell is my catcher's mitt?!?!

Impact Velocity

[MacGarnicle]

According to the NASA news conference I'm watching, the science team gave 190 MPH as the new estimate for the speed at impact.

In plain view

[virexmachina]

Whats the best way to hide a secret mission? Tell everybody about it. And whats the best way to make sure nobody thinks twice about it? "Fail" to recover it. Hmmm....

"We're going to have a..."

[thrill12]

"We're going to have a lot of work picking up the pieces."

Look at the bright side: at least you have work.

Message from the Beagle team.

[raidient]

"We are so terribly sorry, to hear of your disaster."

Capsule breakup was really silly!

[Anonymous Coward]

When I first heard of a launch to grab particles from a comet that has existed probaly for a long time. I was kinda skeptical. But I knew the idea of flinging a satelite half way across the universe, gathering particles from a comet and crashing it into the atmosphere for a few stunt men to catch would work.

However, as I can see, I was wrong. Maybe it was a totally bad idea to not simply leave it in orbit for later retrieval no matter how much extra that would cost. Maybe next time we should hire the Power Puff girls to catch it.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Anonymous Coward]

$200 megabucks!? Doh! we could of bought 1/2 of B-2!

Parachute, shmarachute

[cschmidt]

They should have used a truck full of pillows driven by Chuck Norris.

They'll get their dust

[anser]

I'm willing to bet that they will recover at least some of the sample material despite the crash. When you have your spacecraft on the ground and human ingenuity to spare, results usually follow.

I wonder if they ever considered an airbag system. Of course if you're not going to deploy your deceleration hardware in the first place, it hardly matters which kind you don't deploy.

Batteries

[Teclis]

Watching the press conference on NASA TV, It appears they were having problems with the batteries that fire the chutes overheating. The guy in charge of return said that they tested the batteries to be safe for 5 degrees hotter than the probe experienced on re-entry. I'd say that that's a mighty small margin of error.

It was also said that the Hyugens probe due in January, of older design, doesn't use batteries and will not be faced with this problem. When will NASA learn?? Keep it simple and don't fix it if it isn't broken.

Because...

[Anonymous Coward]

"They" don't want us to know!

No one mentioned the fire

[WildCode]

Immediately after impact, the image from the long range camera showed a small fire within the crack on the left. I saw it even better in the Nasa TV replay of the crash, but no-one else seeems to have noticed or mentioned it. I would assume that a fire as a result from impact is a bigger threat to the sample than the impact itself. Looking at the wreckage they still might get some good science from it, but how much more damage did the fire cause.

You don't need parachutes.

[heroine]

As they say in US, why waste time deploying parachutes which can just as easily be deployed in China when you can study marketing trends instead?

Neat concept

[Zapdos]

The collector arrays were super pure metal, silicon and sapphire semiconductor wafers. A particle colliding with the material may get stuck or leave a trail. Each array itself was very fragile. It is most likely that 99% of the data collected was ruined due to exposure to our atmosphere or broke to a million pieces.

Velocity at Impact Question for you Engineers.....

[sampson7]

Okay, so IAAL, not an engineer/science person. But why was the velocity at impact so low? If something falls from space, isn't it going to crash at a speed faster than I can drive? 100 mph is fast.... but not *really* fast.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[dgatwood]

Yes, commercialize NASA since there is no such thing as accountability in the government.

That may perhaps be the most completely backwards logic I've ever heard. NASA is able to do what it does precisely because there is no accountability. It is pure research, for the sake of research. If it were corporatized, everything would have to turn a profit. So exactly why would they be flying this sort of mission at all? A: They wouldn't.

Now it would be a good idea to commercialize some aspecfts of NASA. Putting satellites into space should be entirely private. If/when we build colonies on the moon or Mars, travel between those locations should become privatized. But putting corporations in charge of scientific discovery is the surest way to ensure that no progress is ever made. There is rarely profit in explorational science.

For the Deus Ex fans

[rd_syringe]

Yeah, the Illuminati just *want* us to think the capsule crashed. Meanwhile, the real capsule is out there and has discovered evidence of the original alien greys that we captured and tamed into mindless mutants.

Nothing to see here, folks, Helios is in control.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Mysticalfruit]

Your wrong.

Their solution of a parasail was perfect. The problem wasn't with the parasail, the problem was with the explosive device that was supposed to deploy it. If blame is to be placed, place it on the person who poorly designed the chute deployment mechanism.

Your solution would have intailed taking a relatively simple sample return canister and attaching solid state thrusters, a gyroscope and either an altimeter (which could survive the riggers of space) or some type of radar. Also, now, you need a computer to watch the radar and keep the capsule pointed thrusters down during the descent, etc. Now, since you need some way to keep the capsule oriented, your going to have to install some sort of yaw and pitch controls, probably cold gas thusters. Now you need tanks of compressed gas, plus the valves to turn the gas off and on. With all this your going to need a power supply that can survive the riggers of space for the whole thing.

Absolutely!

[Glytch]

After all, the money that NASA spends doesn't go to paycheques for highly-educated engineers, scientists, and technicians. The real secret is that rocket fuel is 100% cash! All the money spent on space development is lost forever and wasted!

Wilmaaaaaaaa

[chromeangel23]

The crash has diminished these hopes as fears of terrestrial contamination bring doubts to the integrity of the solar samples. Some scientists remain hopeful. One such person who has asked to remain anonymous claims to have had observed the capsule and its contents at the scene of the crash noted, "Our preliminary findings are very exciting. We have observed from the solar sample that the composition of the sun is identical as the West Desert right here in Utah. "Its really amazing". He went on to continue "that dinosaurs once lived on the Sun". Courtesy http://jamitch.merseine.nu/archives/2004/09/08/gen esis-probe-crashed/

almost got it

[Anonymous Coward]

genesis capture

Thats why they call it "Project Wildfire"

[Anonymous Coward]

...do we have to explain these slashdotters everything ?

Re:Velocity at Impact Question for you Engineers..

[thebigmacd]

Um, the atmosphere isn't a vacuum...

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Anonymous Coward]

This mission was done by JPL, which IS A COMMERCIAL ENTITY. JPL is essentially a national lab. NASA subcontracts to CalTech to run JPL. NASA supplied the money, CalTech, JPL, and industry ran the mission. Not sure how you can get more commercial than that.

Sad News...

[Anonymous Coward]

Genesis Crashes - Phil Collins Blamed.

Who designs this $%^?

[Anonymous Coward]

A space craft designed to require a stunt pilot to capture it? And it went wrong? No! Surely not!

A New Beginning

[n6kuy]

Now that the Genesis Device has been crashed into our planet, can we expect to renew intelligent life?

Worse pictures than from mars...

[Lispy]

I find it disturbing that the official picture of the crater is worse than what we get from mars.

Actually this looks like the pictures of the rebel alliance hideout the empire got from the Hoth probe.

Re:Worse pictures than from mars...

[Teancum]

Keep in mind that photo was a quick grab from a telephoto television camera. Take a look at this photo if you want to see something of a little better quality, and even that was a quick camera shot by the chase helicopter with a hand-held digital camera.

The optics on the Mars Rover were of a much higher quality, so the comparison isn't really all that accurate. It is too bad that some photographer from Associated Press or Newsweek wern't on the PR helicopter to take a really good still photo of the incident.

An expensive demonstration

[FraggedSquid]

Of what could have been the final moments of Beagle II.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Kinda sad that these engineers would lose to most 4th graders.

I would like to meet a 4th grader that can design a de-orbit of a spacecraft after three years in space that never fails.

You were modded to -1 for a reason. Use thrusters indeed.

Try nasawatch.com

[jhesse]

http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/000193.html

Re:Andromeda Strain - "me too"

[seven of five]

it's amazing how fast some obscure thing comes up on /. ...

this Andromeda Strain thing occurred to me too. shee...

"Sir, there's a fire..."

And so...

[The Master Control P]

Here is the nasty me speaking:

And SO, we see why it is a BAD idea to take your quarter-billion dollar genesis capture device, and try to catch it in midair with helicopters flying over hard dirt in formation rather than splash it into the OCEAN. Or try to capture it over the OCEAN. Either of those options would probably have left SOMETHING intact if it crashed rather than the most expensive artificial metor in a long time...

Re:And so...

[Jedi Holocron]

Doubtful. Water, a liquid, unlike the dirt it landed in, is not compressible. So hitting the OCEAN would likely have resulted in more damage to the probe. It quite likely that landing hard in the dirt was softer than hitting water under the same conditions.

Unless, of course, it was DESIGNED to dive into the water...then the results might be different.

Not yet

[code_rage]

If 100% of the contract value were on the line against mission success, no contractor would bid with the modest ROI built into NASA contracts. Although parachute entry systems are far from cutting-edge technology, the systems integration needed to build a one-off space probe is far from simple. I'm disappointed that Genesis failed the final test, after having passed every one so far. But this is not easy stuff, and NASA's space sciencce program is trying to do it on a fraction of what the manned program costs.

There is some motion towards "completion form" contracts, on smaller increments of work. This means that the contractor is paid for some discrete delivery under some set of conditions (schedule, passes QA tests, etc).

Under the proposals of the Moon-Mars Commission, NASA may begin offering contracts under some sort of "bounty" arrangement. But any contractor undertaking it would need to build the odds of failure into the bid -- just like a Vulture Capitalist.

From the Moon-Mars Commission Report:
"Recommendation 5-2
The Commission recommends that Congress increase the potential for commercial opportunities related to the national space exploration vision by providing incentives for entrepreneurial investment in space, by creating significant monetary prizes for the accomplishment of space missions and/or technology developments and by assuring appropriate property rights for those who seek to develop space resources and infrastructure."

Re:Not yet

[Overzeetop]

If you're not going to hold them accountable for mission failure (if I engineer a building and it falls down, I'm liable for the whole thing) then why not just elimiate all the expensive contract administration and corporate profit and hire the engineers and machinists directly?

As it is, there is simply no accountability anywhere in the system.

Re:Not yet

[code_rage]

I think I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think I managed to explain my point.

The contract is between the customer (government) and the contractor performing the work. If the contract is written such that payment is contingent on mission success, then the contractor must monetize the risk (more financial risk means more financial reward must be present). That's how any free market operates: more risk means more reward. I suppose the most obvious examples would be Lloyd's of London, any hedge fund, or commodities futures such as fuel contracts bought by airlines to hedge against price shocks. You can trade money for risk, or you can just assume the risk.

To give a concrete example: Genesis was a $264M contract according to the news coverage. If 100% of that is contingent on a successful conclusion, then the contractor would bid a price based on the anticipated costs plus a profit, and then divide the bid by the estimated probability of success. So if 1/3 of these probes are successful (let's say), a $264M contract would turn into a $792M contract. There is no way that any contractor would take on the risk without being compensated for that risk. The same goes in Vegas.

Assuming that the penalties are low, it amounts to the customer (govt) having assumed the risks, which is how most NASA and military projects work. They are doing complex, risky things, and the govt seems to think it's better to assume the risk of failure instead of paying more for success.

That does not mean there is no accountability in the awarding of contracts. I suspect that some award fees were at stake for a lot of mission milestones, possibly including successful landing. Also, this failure will reflect on those involved, to their discredit. Since this is a government contract, you could probably get a copy of the contract under FOIA and satisfy your curiosity.

As to hiring the engineers directly -- I don't think that having a LockMart badge automatically makes you a better engineer than a NASA civil servant, or vice versa. JPL is not really part of NASA (it's a Federally Funded Research & Development Center, similar to the Dept of Energy labs). But JPL has built and operated probes, and not always successfully.

"if I engineer a building and it falls down, I'm liable for the whole thing" -- do you know for a fact that buildings are contracted this way? Also, buildings are designed and constructed more conservatively than spacecraft. You can't afford that kind of conservatism on spacecraft -- it would weigh too much.

Re:Velocity at Impact Question for you Engineers..

[Jedi Holocron]

Enjoy the magic of terminal velocity.

Questions

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not a space engineer, so please excuse my questions as they may seem silly:

a) if the probe was so important as to need helicopters for a gentle catch, why not pop it in orbit for retreival later by shuttle or what have you?

b) why rely on some automated acclerometer when you can see it coming in - why not just send a radio signal to it when its in visual range?

cheers

Khaaaaan!

[DigitalEntropy]

http://www.khaaan.com/

They should have named it 'Evolution'.

[Anonymous Coward]

Then atleast they can claim darwinism as a reason for crash. Now what are they gonna say? God didnt like it?
-or-
Genesis failed?

Neither would float with half the senators. *wink wink*

Gravity 1 Nasa 0

[Anonymous Coward]

What a bomb, I can see the face of the pilots wondering were is that damn shute all I see is an UFO coming to us.

Reason of failure found.

[Anonymous Coward]

Shute manufacture was outsourced to India a label in punjabi clearly says don't use for space crafts re entries, there you go.

Way to hide an alien spacecraft

[Anonymous Coward]

Media manupulation never have been better.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[taktheredelf]

Well, you know what, when people screw up at work in Corporate america, they have to own up to it and fix the issue. I am really getting tired of seeing the money I pay for taxes literally going up into flames (Mars probes, Shuttles blowing up, and now this) and all that happens is "well, we will investigate it, release a 1000 page summary, and still screw up saying that this is all an experiment" Grow up and actually care that these bozos are wasting people's time, money and lives.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[taktheredelf]

In regards to: Your wrong. Their solution of a parasail was perfect. The problem wasn't with the parasail, the problem was with the explosive device that was supposed to deploy it. If blame is to be placed, place it on the person who poorly designed the chute deployment mechanism. First of all, it is "you're". Secondly, since the explosive device is PART of that solution, it was flawed.

Common thread

[Anonymous Coward]

the common thread has been Lockheed's involvement

not at all. the common thread has been GEORGE BUSH. the shuttle burn up in re-entry, the mars lander failures, and now this latest debacle are all proof that bush is wasting dollars on a space program that could instead be given to better causes.

but you know halliburton is behind nasa somewhere (don't they own lockheed and boeing? oh, wait, that's George Soros that has investments in those. damn this gets confusing). cheney must know theres oil or something on mars and that's why they're wasting billions of dollars and american astronaut lives.

it is time to bring our astronauts back home. kerry will get us off of the space station in under six months or within four years. no more american boys will be killed in foolish space venture. maybe the united nations can launch a mission or two if the need is really demonstrated to be there in the future, but WE AMERICANS WILL NO LONGER GO IN SPACE ALONE!

"W is for Wombat"
Kerry/Edwards 2004!

Re:Common thread

[cshotton]

not at all. the common thread has been GEORGE BUSH. the shuttle burn up in re-entry, the mars lander failures, and now this latest debacle are all proof that bush is wasting dollars on a space program that could instead be given to better causes.

Your ignorance is showing. You clearly have no clue about how long it takes for these projects to come to fruition. The actual fact is that most of the projects you cite were started under Clinton's administration. Why don't you just crawl back under your left-wing rock and come out after you've found a clue?

Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend to

[Teancum]

No, I havn't. I havn't even had a real desire although I've seen the movie on network television. Yeah, I know that Hollywood tends to ruin good books (like Starship Troopers, as a good example), but even then there have been many other books that I've rather wanted to read first.

Still, I do see the relationship here to the basic story, but I also consider it to be totally bogus that any DNA life form from space is going to have any real impact on the Earth. I think the Earth would be considered the harmful biological hell hole that you would want to avoid, avoid, avoid if you were from another world. Most forms of DNA from outer space would be eaten alive (litterally) by most of the critters on this planet. The climate zone you landed in would only specify the length of time that it took.

While it would seem like a good SF, there are a number of reasons to believe that life forms raised on this planet would be much stronger, faster, swifter, and smarter than just about anywhere else. I won't elaborate here at the moment.

My only question...

[syukton]

My only question is: why wasn't there a backup system for chute deployment? If the thing is plummeting towards the earth at terminal velocity (~135 miles per hour?) then you should still be able to get a ground-based radio signal up to it before it makes impact. I'm incredibly surprised that there have been no mentions of a ground-based effort to deploy the landing chute. I mean, I've got a little remote for my garage and it didn't cost much, why can't I have a little remote for my two hundred and sixty MILLION DOLLAR SPACECRAFT? heh.

Re:My only question...

[Teancum]

There were two parachutes, a drogue and a main parachute. It was presumed at least through preliminary analysis that the drogue chute was sheared off during reentry (at least some telemetry that would indicate that occured). I did see something like a chute open up during the decent, but the camera was a telephoto image.

Keep in mind that more backup systems also require extra weight during lanuch (and that is dead payload weight that must be accounted for the entire mission). That is not as cheap as you indicate, plus you have to have extra systems to deal with those redundant systems, testing equipment, and the possibility that the extra parachutes might prematurely detonate deploying while it was in solar orbit during the collection phase...not something you would particularly care for in that position. I dare you to take your little garage remote into space, keep it there for many years exposed to solar flares, and have it get triggered exactly on schedule after communications blackout due to reentry. I don't think that remote would make it.

Still, the parachute deployment should be something that NASA has plenty of experience at doing. The only really unique aspect of this mission was the retreval before it hit the ground.

Have you been to Utah?

[SuperKendall]

You're hard pressed to find *A* river, much less a third of all of them.

Airbags are way more complex - still need chute

[SuperKendall]

But if you'll recall, the Mars probes used a chute first to slow the craft down to a speed the airbags could handle (with a complex system of rockets to do the final slowing and ditch lateral speed in relation to the ground)! The Mars probe never had to leave the wrapping of airbags, whereas this probe was out and working until it returned.

There aren't many easier ways to slow down than a chute!

Re:Velocity at Impact Question for you Engineers..

[frank249]

Nasa updated the impact velocity to 193 mph.

Ocean is hard, salt water worse than dirt.

[SuperKendall]

I would think that with some painstaking effort, they could isolate a little of the space dust from the crash - even if it were more mangled than it appears to be.

A landing in the ocean would have smashed it just as well (ever tried hitting water at 100MPH?), and then dispersed the contents across the whole OCEAN. Don't you think it's just a little better to have it be at one spot on the ground where they can carefully collect bits?

Ocean or ground landing, you still have to have parachutes work or it's game over. At least here they can get to the parts.

Re:Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend t

[AJWM]

totally bogus that any DNA life form from space is going to have any real impact on the Earth.

Well, the Andromeda Strain wasn't DNA based.

there are a number of reasons to believe that life forms raised on this planet would be much stronger, faster, swifter, and smarter than just about anywhere else.

Due to our higher gravity, no doubt, and related geochemical and climate effects of having lost half our crust in the event that formed the Moon.

Overheard in the PHB office of Mission Control

[sl4shd0rk]

PHB: "264 Million Dollars shot in the ass - goddamit Tidwell, we should have outsourced!!"
Tidwell: "We did."

my free advise :)

[cheekyboy]

1. detect air presure, fire shute
2. failing that, check oxygen in the air
3. or check to see if the sky is blue, light sensor, DUHHHH!!!
4. or as a 4th backup, install a $300 GPS system to check your altitude, DUH!!!!

Can I say DUHHH! again!

But probably their failure was mechanical not operational logic.

100 mph is slow

[PsiPsiStar]

"There was no drogue chute or parafoil," said a JPL spokesman. "Under those condition, the Genesis capsule hit the ground at about 100 mph."

Anyone know why it was only going 100 mph?

Re:100 mph is slow

[dignome]

196mph is the quoted estimated speed from the news conference today.

Hah!

[Solokron]

Sounds like a sci-fi movie. Space dust hits the earth by accident. Dead bacteria comes to life with contact of water from rain and spreads like wildfire across the planet.

Note to self...

[MerkX]

...Never allow anyone at NASA to pack your chute...

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the spraying of hypergolic rocket fuel over downtown SLC. If it undershot and crashed into a schoolyard you'd get one dead kid. A hydrazine tank rupture would be spectacular.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Grow up? Is that you, pot?

Honestly, do you really believe what you're saying, and if so, do you realize pretty much all U.S. government space travel is handled by Corporate America? Wonder who built Genesis?

Why, pray tell was it deorbited?

[sokoban]

It makes very little sense to me to deorbit something so fragile. I know that the fate of the shuttles is a little uncertain now, but why not just wait for some trip to orbit or the ISS to pick up the capsule?
Once again, it seems like rushing to get the job done has bit the space program in the ass. I know doing anything space-related is not a trivial matter, but should it really be that hard when you have years of experience, millions of dollars, and some truly brilliant people at work? I'm not saying I could do any better, but I think there is someone who could.

Re:Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend t

[Cid Highwind]

"...there are a number of reasons to believe that life forms raised on this planet would be much stronger, faster, swifter, and smarter than just about anywhere else."

That's quite possibly the most depressing thing I've ever read.

Talk about...

[Moonchen]

Talk about dropping the ball...

Dumbest Option Possible?

[Wes Janson]

Is it just me, or does anyone else here find themselves asking: why on earth was this package designed for a highly risky re-entry and capture with dozens of possible points of failure, causing a complete failure of the mission as a result? Consider: we have a Space Shuttle that makes semi-regular flights into space and to the ISS. We have a permanently manned space station. The Space Shuttle has more than enough room to store the Genesis probe in the cargo bay, and return it safely. G's aren't going to be very much of an issue (certainly less than that 100 mph instanteous deceleration). So why wasn't the probe put into a stable orbit, or captured by the ISS, so that it could be retrieved and brought back by the Shuttle? Depending on the schedule, it might've well been possible to shoehorn the recovery into a pre-existing mission. Was there perhaps some sort of rivalry going on at NASA, that caused them to preclude use of the shuttle? Or were they just stupid?

Re:Dumbest Option Possible?

[rtboyce]

Slowing the craft into orbit would've required a rocket and propellant, and therefore a much bigger and more expensive spacecraft. Fetching it from orbit would've required an expensive operation, with risks. Far cheaper and simpler to have the craft bring itself straight in. And that worked except, critically, for the chutes.

I wonder if someone forgot to remove a safety device? It could be something as absent-minded as that. What's worrying is that that the Stardust mission has the same chute system...

The only thing to do now is to build Genesis II. It will cost less than the first.

Probable Cause

[sbszine]

MSNBC is saying that it probably was the battery. Also, the capsule isn't as badly damaged as they feared, due to rain softening up the impact site.

Famous banner...

[TWX]

Hmmm...

When I wrote it, it was a joke...

[bairy]

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=120688&cid=101 63237 Half joke, half serious question. It's all my cursed fault!

All you people who laughed at Beagle 2....

[BigBadBus]

UP YOURS!

They should have named it 'Windows'.

[Anonymous Coward]

We are all used to that crashing.

BBC News 24's non-coverage

[rtboyce]

I was watching Nasa TV's coverage of the descent via the internet when I found that BBC News 24 was showing live pictures on TV, so I switched off Nasa.

Big mistake. Just as the BBC showed camera pictures of a spinning craft, they interrupted coverage to tell us what channel I was watching and to play the channels brain-dead countdown to the top of the hour.

When coverage resumed, it was to show the craft on the ground and a recording of what had happened. Utterly infuriating.

It seems BBC News 24 has a human director with the intelligence of a cuckoo clock.

Re:OK, so now what? Repurcussions?

[dgatwood]

True, but that's not the same thing as commercializing NASA. It was still paid for by public funds. When JPL goes out and does a mission like this on their own because the company thinks it would be "cool", I'll consider the possibility that a privatized NASA could make sense. :-)

Re:Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend t

[Teancum]

I'm not suggesting that I'm chauvanistic regarding the Earth (thinking we are better than anywhere else), but that life forms, after having gone through evolutionary development and competition pressures here on the Earth, once on places like Mars or Europa would be essentially competing against evolutionary lightweights. I have no doubt that there is life on Mars right now, but the real question is if it was brought to Mars by American taxpayers or if it was there prior to the 1950's (when the space programs began for Russia and America).

It is also suggested that the Earth may be one of the most mineral dense and most massive planets that would be capable of having a rocky surface (even if it is just partially above water). Planets not much larger than the Earth would end up keeping most of their primordial atmosphere and turn into Gas Giants (like Jupiter, or more likely like Neptune and Uranus).

In reality, you need to consider just how special this planet is that we live on. It is a rare and precious gift, and it will be interesting to see how many "Earth-like" planets will be discovered over this next century. This is going out on a limb somewhat, but I predict that at least one substantial Earth-like planet (with oxygen atmosphere and water vapour being detected) will be discovered by the year 2100. Not an alien civilization, but merely a planet worth sending an interstellar probe to go visit.

Re:Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend t

[Teancum]

While it may be possible for some "life form" to exist that is not base on CHON (Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen), any such life form would look at us and what we call "living things" (fish, incects, amoebas, mushrooms, etc.) as background noise.

The reason why virii are so effective is precisely because they take over the genetic reproduction mechanisms in cellular division and use if for their own ends. This involves DNA.

Prions admittedly "reproduce" without DNA, but the total number of potential Prions is rather small in comparison. To be able to become an effective disease that is highly adaptable (and generally deadly in the course of just a few days as opposed to months and years in the case of Prions) it would simply have to be DNA-based. A real interesting treat would be if you could have DNA codons besides the typical CATG bases if it came from beyond the Earth.

Greetings...

[6th time lucky]

Greetings and welcome to our humble gravity well we call Earth. Please remember to decelerate before disembarking *WHAM*

Dear Pentagon...

[6th time lucky]

IANAA (I am not an american), but i want the $8000 that the Pentagon has lost.

Re:Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend t

[Cid Highwind]

I didn't mean to say you were being chauvanistic, just that the idea that humanity is the top of the evolutionary ladder not just here, but in the entire universe is pretty sad.

Re:Nope, I havn't read the book, nor do I intend t

[Teancum]

I didn't say anything about humanity, just life on the Earth in general.

For life forms to be able to compete against life forms from the Earth, it would have to have come out of some extreame Darwinian ecological development process that is at least as competitive as what you find on the Earth. That would involve a biosphere that is at least as large as the Earth, involve as many survival niches as are possible on the Earth, and substantial energy gradients like you also find on the Earth. This is not all that common throughout what we've seen elsewhere in the Solar System, and I would call the 100+ planets and moons that are fairly accurately mapped by the Mariner/Voyager/Gallileo/Casinni/Venera missions to be at least a good representitive sample of what we will find in other solar systems when we start looking.

Philosophically, the viewpoint that we may be one of the early "intelligences" in this universe is one that has been proposed by several modern philosophers armed with recent discoveries in cosmology. This may explain in part why we havn't heard anybody with the SETI programs, which have certainly put a lower limit on the denisty of intelligent races capable of radio communication described with the Drake equation. Our sun is one of the first generation of stars capable of advanced elements in large quantities (ie not Hydrogen and Helium exclusively) and there are other factors that may play out in the future that show some more uniqueness to the Earth.

There are also several "tops" of evolutionary lines among Earth life, including Dolphins, Orcas, Oak trees, and Portabello mushrooms (pretty good sized for a mere fungus, and tasty too).

The point here is that if you were to come across an Earth-like planet with your trusty Bussard RAMJET spaceship and your anti-matter powered landing craft (to give a power source to be able to land and take off from said planet), I would be very scared about what I'd find there, assuming that you found life-forms. A mere space probe that went to the asteroid belt is not going to find virii or other biological nasties accidently and return them to the Earth, as any biological life form would be lunch for any one of the millions (or billions?) of species of critters on this planet. Unless it could reproduce in a real hurry or have some other defensive mechanisms, it wouldn't make it at all. Ebola is considered to reproduce and spread too rapidly, as it kills the host usually prior to being able to spread the disease. I can't imagine a space virus much nastier than that one. HIV is such a nasty virus because it keeps the host alive for many years, allowing the transmission of the disease to many other folks before the host dies.

I would mod that as funny if I could

[gatkinso]

That is halarious (and quite insightful).

Well, Andromeda Strain was set in Piedmont AZ

[gatkinso]

was all I was trying to get at.