Hayabusa Probe Fails Landing Attempt

wschalle writes "Yesterday, at 3:46 PM EST the probe successfully dropped a small object onto the asteroid as a touchdown target. JAXA then apparently lost control of the probe for 3 hours. The probe went to an auto-pilot mode during the communications failure, collecting data about its flight and saving it for later transmission. The probe's exact location is unknown, but it is estimated to be between 10 and 100 kilometers from the asteroid at this time. The mission has been troubled by repeated failures, including the loss of a small robotic lander, and a gyroscope failure that was later repaired."

Comments

I think that 'care factor = 0'....

[demondawn]

...really underscores people's interest in the space program in the United States nowadays. It seems that because Japan is interested in doing -science-, rather than flag-waving, it's not nearly as glamorous. Of course, the same could be said of the U.S. Space Program. George W. Bush said he wants us to go to the Moon again. I haven't heard anything about science in his statement on the topic; merely flag-waving.
Now don't get me wrong, patriotism is a great thing. I think there are many applications that could benefit any nation that goes into space, and I applaud the Japanese for undertaking such an ambitious project (which, if you read TFA, may still succeed!)

Re:I think that 'care factor = 0'....

[Pharmboy]

I haven't heard anything about science in his statement on the topic; merely flag-waving.

I have, but not from GW, who isn't a scientist anyway. Although Steven Hawking would disagree about going to Mars (or the moon), there is some logic to going back to the moon, if we ever expect to do hard core space exploration. We will need a place to launch from, and the moon fits the ticket. It is close enough that we can supply it and rescue from it (remember, we will have many more space crafts at that time). It is also close enough that we can more afford to have crews there. Also, it is easier to capture people's imaginations (and tax dollars) about a station on the moon, especially if it can be seen with a telescope.

It has 1/6th of the earth's gravity, so it will be easier to launch from, and there may be enough raw materials on the moon to use for fuel to begin with, reducing the amount of fuel we have to send to start with. It is the closest and safest place to test theories about space travel, which is not a safe business to begin with. There *IS* commercial potential as well. If commercial space travel seems far fetched, ask Burt Rutan of Scaled Composites, or Sir Richard Branson, the owner of Virgin Galactic, who is investing heavily in the concept of commercial space travel.

I'm not saying this is the best way (because I don't know...), but there is a fair amount of logic *IF* we ever expect to have regular space travel, more than once or twice a year beyond our own planet. Personally, I can't think of a better way for the science communities of all countries to get together, and every country could participate, even if in some small way.

Many people thought JFK was out of his mind for thinking we could go to the moon before 1970, but you don't hear about them any more since we actually did it.

It's Rocket Science

[blueZhift]

This is just another reminder that this is rocket science and isn't an easy thing to pull off. I can't help but wonder how easy or difficult it is for more experienced groups like NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, to share information and expertise with newer groups. For purely scientific missions like this, global collaboration would probably have helped a lot. Not that there wasn't any of that at all, but I do wonder.

In any case, I hope they won't be soured on future missions. Failures are just a part of the learning process.

Re:Perspective

[rewinn]

>if I shot a bullet at a target...

The comparison in inapposite, because bullets can't do mid-course corrections.

I'm not saying that 100 km ain't pretty darn good; it's just that spacecraft are not at all comparable to bullets, at least until the reaction mass is used up.

Public Relations Error: I'd care more ...

[fygment]

... if like Cassini/Huygens, there were regular releases of publicly available imagery (ideally, raw). Look at all the work and publicity that was scored when amateurs were the first to process the publicly released shots of Titan. Instead, JAXA haven't been in the public eye except, seemingly, for the mission's failures! Who's in charge of their public relations?