Slashdot Mirror
ISS Computer Failure
A number of readers wrote us with news of the computer problems on the International Space Station. Space.com has one of the better writeups on the failure of Russian computers that control the ISS's attitude and some life-support systems. Two out of six computers in a redundant system cannot be rebooted. The space shuttle Atlantis may have its mission extended until the problem is fixed. A NASA spokesman was optimistic that the problem can be resolved; worst-case scenario would be for the shuttle to evacuate everyone onboard the ISS. Engineers are working on the theory (among others) that the failure may have been triggered by new solar panels installed earlier in Atlantis's mission.
In Soviet Russia, computers control YOUR attitude. Oh, wait... nm
~Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
They need the russian guy from armageddon to bang on the side of the computers!
Moscow we have a problem...
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -Albert Einstein
I know all of my Windows computers were anxious to reboot yesterday.
Maybe NASA didn't pay for Soyuz Ultimate Edition, with support for additional solar panels.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
"...control the ISS's attitude..."
So the ISS is throwing a temper tantrum? Just put it in time out
Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
Two out of six computers in a reduntant system cannot be rebooted.
NASA should have invested in a redundant system, rather than buying a cheap grey-market knockoff.
Like many Slashdotters, when the computers at my job fail, my attitude tends to become uncontrollable as well.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Hopefully they're starting with their DFMEA documentation... "guessing" at the problem and having "theories" is probably not a good way to go. Also, it's apparently a common-mode failure, which you shouldn't have in a safety-critical system; generally this is avoided by having different computer hardware and/or completely different code to do the same tasks.
Quite unfortunate that it seems like systems engineering is lacking in more and more disciplines recently, although I suppose it makes good systems engineers more valuable.
My list for this would be something like: "Computer doesn't boot." Possible reasons: "No Power", "Insufficient power", "Corrupt memory", "Broken circuits", etc. Then you go down that tree further and find the root cause. The most disturbing thing is that they had such a major common-mode failure...whatever happened to the "no single points of failure" mantra?
* sigh *
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
Yeah, I can see it now:
"Turn the gyroscopes ISS."
"I'm sorry comrade, but I'm afraid I can't do that."
No, no--I know is sounds crazy. But hear me out. Maybe we could actually pursue something NEW--you know, dare to violate that 30-year-old sacrosanct NASA policy of just repeating themselves over and over again and wasting trillions of $ on contractors and grandiose promises which never amount to squat.
Just a thought.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The stated worst case scenario is that the ISS will need to be evacuated, but if the remaining gyros are being overwhelmed, might the station enter an unrecoverable spin state before the problem is resolved?
What do you mean they cut the power? How can they cut the power, man? They're animals!
Really, does the fact that the computers are Russian matter? Broken software is broken software, and broken hardware is broken hardware.
It's not like the Russians would send crappy stuff up to the ISS anyways, they would put all their best into it. And the Russians have a history of having some excellent mathematicians.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
For reports on the INTERNATIONAL Space Station I find it really disturbing how much emphasis is placed on the failure of 'Russian' computers, and the ability of 'U.S.' equipment to save the day. It would show a lot more gut to report in a country neutral manner about the issue at hand.
I wish all people up there (Astronauts and cosmonauts alike) the very best in fixing this problem.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
They're all made in Taiwan!!
What Microsoft Could Learn from ISS and Linux
It's obvious they are not running Solaris.
Well it is NASA's website, there's bound to be some bias.
If you went to the Russian's space website, it probably says something like "Russian software fails after Americans install new solar panels, thought new ploy to embarrass Russian pride" or something of the like.
From TFA:
"The lights, the fans and, thank God, the potty, all those things are working," Suffredini said.
Well at least he has his priorities in order. God knows you don't want anyone looking into the Hubble to see the ISS going by with your ass hanging out of the window.
From the article: The computer failures have left the station without the use of its Russian attitude control
I guess the liquor cabinet door in the ISS is computer controlled.
Dewey, you fool! Your decimal system has played right into my hands!
Lets not forget all the problems the american space shuttles have had recently, while the russian soyuz capsules have been working well for many years.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
You are reading way too much into that.
I've been waiting for this story to hit /. - didn't take long... I have to admit that using the ISS as an excuse to hide the real issue(s) and buy time is creative, tho :)
o s/070610/070610_tear_bcol_11a.standard.jpg - photo of hole/tear in thermal blanket
...the real information comes out and we find that something bad did indeed happen; they knew about it all along, and they were/are once again clueless as to how to deal with the situation, claiming the shuttle is sooooo complicated or sooooo old or soooo expensive, when all they really want to do is CYA.
When the shuttle launched last week, the headline quoting NASA was 'perfect launch'.
Then, we heard this: "NASA says shuttle damage is not serious"
Huh? I thought it was 'perfect'...?
'NASA studies gap in shuttle's shields' - "not appearing to be an urgent problem" - "Other than that, the vehicle is very clean. NASA's Shannon said." http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Phot
"The first shuttle launch of the year helped put NASA back on track after a run of bad luck and scandal on the ground during the first half of the year."
Next, we get this: "NASA checks into potential hit on shuttle"
"Sensors on the shuttle Atlantis have recorded hits on the leading edges of the wings, around the area where Columbia suffered fatal damage four years ago, NASA officials said Tuesday. However, they emphasized that the hits probably did no damage to Atlantis."
"What we have seen does not indicate that we have been hit by anything," NASA's Shannon said."
Huh? Do we have a hit or not...? Shannon has quite the golden tongue.
My point is that NASA always says "perfect launch", even when they are sitting on data that suggests damage or problems. And - here we go again.
NASA does everything they can to shine up their process and actions to avoid even hints of trouble. They are more worried about bad press and how the public views their capabilities than they are for the short term. This story about a computer glitch on the ISS is a smokescreen to cover their asses while they try to fix whatever is wrong on the Shuttle. Hit or no hit, something is amiss.
Sooner or later... Always
The mindset-climate at NASA has always been the same and always will be the same. Hubris.
I don't disagree with you - the blatant nationalism gets kinda old -
though a little engineering/science competitiveness certainly beats lobbing missiles at each other, right?
I suspect the current mood also has something to do with the months of reading about the 'failure' of American space shuttles, and the saving grace of Russian resupply missions. Next year it'll be something about the failure of the German-built communications systems, and thank God for the British-built semaphore flags.
A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
Were they running Safari for Windows?
I know you're joking but I'm a sucker so here goes: attitude means, "which direction is it pointed" They use big gyroscopes to keep the station oriented so that the solar panels can track the sun.
Maybe the new solar panels are a new input to the attitude program - "I am a new solar panel, I need to be pointed this way so that my 1 axis motor can track the sun"
Doncha know that US solar panels provide 60Hz DC and the Russians take 50Hz DC..or is it 440Hz.
I blame Radio Shack.
AT&ROFLMAO
Hello, my name is Narinda and I am your technical support representitive, now just insert the recovery disk and call me back in two hours.
..
Tech Support in Space
davecb5620@gmail.com
No.
On NASA's manned space equipment you will find no software that is not controlled by NASA. These folks don't just run a few tests. They spend thousands of dollars per SLOC in testing. They actually mathematically prove their software's correctness. Perhaps the Russian agency's quality isn't quite as high, but I still doubt their (or anyone else's) systems onboard the ISS have any OS at all. Most likely they are all custom embedded systems.
I'd council against jumping to conclusions about the cause of this solely based on the Russian origin of these systems. I remember a lot of people did that with the early Ariane crash based on it being written in Ada, and ended up looking pretty silly when the problem turned out to be some ported code that wasn't rewritten properly for the new platform.
where was the "in soviet russia" joke? I mean I would have thought something like "thanks to the soviet era mind control beams space station controls you" kinda thing...
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
...the spacecraft crashes the computer.
--I'm so big, my sig has its own sig.
-- See?
The question is what benefit we currently expect to derive from the station (as it will exist through the remainder of its troubled assembly and expected lifespan). If our estimate of that benefit, made today, is valued less than our current estimate of the cost of completetion, then completing the station is just throwing good money after bad. To say that we've already spent too much to stop now is just silly. Of course, with a situation like this, it's tough to argue that you could really accurately estimate either side of the equation, so speaking as an economist, it beats the hell out of me.
The first piece of the space station was Zarya, the Russian control module that was launched into orbit November 20, 1998. A few weeks later, on December 4, 1998, the U.S. module Unity was launched into space. On December 7, 1998, the two modules were connected.
That makes the ISS just over 8 years in service.
How old is Atlantis?
Space Shuttle Atlantis has completed 27 flights, spent 220.40-days in space, completed 3468 orbits, and flown 89908732 miles in total, as of September 2006. Atlantis visited visited MIR in 1997!
Atlantis is 23 years old as of last April. 21 years in service. More than twice as old as the ISS.
Now, tell again - which is the real bucket of bolts? ISS or Atlantis?
ISS getting ready for a new computer system
..
a dy-for-a-new-computer-system/
e -station-may-soon-get-computer-upgradations/
Filed under: Desktops
The International Space Station crew is doing some spring cleaning this week to get ready for an upcoming computer upgrade. Related and unrelated novelties include 10 times faster networking and a brand new window and camera combo which was installed last week
http://www.engadget.com/2007/03/19/iss-getting-re
http://www.spacescan.org/entry/international-spac
davecb5620@gmail.com
This is an incredibly silly line of reasoning.
First of all, every shuttle mission since Columbia has had a bunch of little problems reported by NASA. Remember when they did a spacewalk to pull out gap fillers? Remember freeze-frames showing foam impacts?
So your first "point", that NASA always claims a perfect launch, is simply false. But besides that, the ISS problem is WAY more serious than your supposed shuttle wing impact conspiracy. If the ISS is abandoned due to this, and they can't fix this problem from the ground, they'll never be able to dock with it again -- throwing the last decade of the manned space program out the window (except for the Hubble, of course).
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
It's probably graphite shavings from all those pencils the Russians use in space. They should use the billion-dollar space pen we developed! Go USA! (I think they really all use a china marker-type writing utensil anyhow)
stuff |
Many of NASA computers on spacecraft use a long-tested version of realtime UNIX called VxWorks from Charles River. It doesnt nexcessarily have the fancy stuff in modern *nix's, but is fairly reliable. Even that has been known to fail. The flash memory driver in the Martian Rovers had a bad free-list routine which shut them down for several weeks near the beginning of their mission after the flash memory filled up. A fix was uploaded. Flash memory was relatively new and hadnt been tested as much as the rest of the system.
well we all know those russians were using bootlegged copies of windows vista.. :P
Those 2 machines probably didn't have the activation crack installed correctly and failed the Genuine windows validation test.
Badass Resumes
I suppose as long as the don't turn off the containment to the Martian paddock, they'll be okay.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
In this case one must think of "ground" as being a reference level of zero volts.
From Wikipedia:
Circuit ground versus earth
In an electrical circuit operating at signal voltages (usually less than 50 V or so), a common return path that is the zero voltage reference level for the equipment or system.
Voltage is a differential quantity, which appears between two points having some electrical potentials. In order to deal only with a voltage (an electrical potential) of a single point, the second point has to be connected to a reference point (ground) having usually zero voltage.
This signal ground may or may not actually be connected to a power ground. A system where the system ground is not actually connected to earth is often referred to as a floating ground.
At least somewhat:
u ttle.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/06/14/space.sh
We'll stop claiming to be heroic when we get to stop paying for the whole damned thing.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I just hope they remembered to take out the extended on-site warranty!
Engineers are working on the theory (among others) that the failure may have been triggered by new solar panels installed earlier in Atlantis's mission.
You'd better listen to Scotty when he says, "I canna give her any more power cap'n."
It's like an increment of 0.5 degrees Kelvin.
Yow!If it's the truth, then I have no problem with the gloating.
"There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
Wait a Minit !
First about the "all software is NASA controlled" assertion.. Well.. While I was watching NASA TV, I caught a glimpse of one of the astronauts obviously attempting to retrieve some e-mail from his laptop.. And then complaining over the com that he was getting a "you can only have one instance of Outlook running" - ground control advised for a laptop reboot, but the guy upstairs wasn't too keen on doing that (apparently, to him, this meant it was a server problem !) - the capcom person at that time then seemed to be taking the diplomatic side and answered : "lemme check" !
Second, you claim that NASA mathematically prove software correctness.. However, it is a known fact that this is an impossible thing to do (Rice's theorem)..
The fact that these system have no OS is debatable ! They at least need some system oriented code to interface between the hardware and the software (call it OS, library, firmware, whatever !) - but it seems that even getting the thing to initialize is failing..
Last, everyone is talking about the 'russian' computers.. Well, this guy last night in the press conference did state these were actually "western style" *european* computers !
--Ivan
Is abandon ship and let it crash and burn? Yeah I'd say that's a worst case scenario. Thanks for the tip Captain Obvious.
A) they don't always say it was a perfect launch.
B) When they do they are talking about the launch specific details. Firing of the rockets, attitude control, good roll, and ship control, to name the main points.
So the problem here is you have no idea what they are talking about so you filled your ignorance in with wild ass theories handed to you by the monkeys living in your ass.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Try here.
I caught a glimpse of one of the astronauts obviously attempting to retrieve some e-mail from his laptop.. And then complaining over the com that he was getting a "you can only have one instance of Outlook running" - ground control advised for a laptop reboot, but the guy upstairs wasn't too keen on doing that
The personal communication laptops the astronauts have are windows machines. The machines that run both ISS and Shuttle are **not**. They are derivatives of UNIX, and, as grandparent said, have many eyes and many thousands of dollars poured into each line of code. There was a good article not too long ago in Fast Company about the shuttle coding team.
From the article: the last three versions of the program -- each 420,000 lines long-had just one error each. The last 11 versions of this software had a total of 17 errors. Commercial programs of equivalent complexity would have 5,000 errors. That's impressive. The same care went into the ISS computers, at least from the US's side. I can't speak for Russia as I don't have that level of familiarity with them.
Last, everyone is talking about the 'russian' computers.. Well, this guy last night in the press conference did state these were actually "western style" *european* computers !
The Russian computers failed. The US computers have 'taken over' temporarily. Why? Because we have this nice little satellite network called TDRSS (Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System) which lets us relay communications with shuttle over the vast majority of the orbit. Russia does not. They can only communicate over line of sight, which is a few times each day for about 8 or so minutes.
The IBM Thinkpads they use on the shuttle do run Windows. I'm not sure which version though (I've heard '98). I believe the Thinkpads on the ISS run Solaris. Not sure about the flight systems though.
I agree with the assumption that the new solar panels could be corrupting the systems. With the new solar panels, the systems are given more power. And as we all know...
POWER CORRUPTS!
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
All the russian computers are down again. There is a suspicion that the magnetic field generated by the new solar rays is interfering with their operation. If that's true then the ISS is in a bit of a pickle, since without the new solar arrays there's no power for the additional science modules that need to be added to the ISS, which means no need to fly the shuttle (or anything else) there anymore. Disconnecting the power from the new arrays may allow the computers to operate, but you're left with an ISS that close to useless.
If disconnecting the power doesn't fix them problem, then the situation is even worse... the station will have to be evacuated next Wednesday, and would no longer have attitude control. It is likely that it would tumble out of control before any new mission could be made, making it impossible to dock the the ISS and probably resulting in its eventual re-entry.
Things are not looking good.
So, do you suppose that somewhere, someone as a test environment on Earth, where they can test how components will interact on ISS before we spend millions of dollars to send it up there? A little investment on the front end could save us money on the back end with issues like this, I would think.
:-/
And hey, I'm all for NASA and having an orbital station. But a little common sense could go a long way. (Yeah, I know there were probably lots of engineers who wanted a test bed, but an administrator/politician nix'd it.)
Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
oh really...wow...so when the US does something right we have to be all "international"? Bet when something goes wrong we go back to being "US".
Yeah.. But the original comment was that "(...) all manned spacecraft equipment (...)". So yeah... I know, it was a point of detail (does/doesn't astronauts personal computers account as spacecraft equipment ?) !
t ref/orbiter/avionics/dps/gpc.html describes fairly extensively the system and the fact that they were '70 era computers, the use of the word IPL (for boot), the fact that modules are stored on tape, would seem to substantiate the TOS/360 theory.. It also seems the AP-101s architecture is backward compatible with the AP-101 !
Anyway.. Now.. I'm not criticizing the quality of NASA produced software.. I'm fairly sure it is extensively tested ! But claiming that it is "mathematically proved" that a program is bug free (or at least works as intended under all conditions) was going a bit too far.. Hence my comment about Rice's theorem !
PS : At the time when the Shuttle's GPCs were IBM S/360 derivatives (the AP-101), it seems more likely that the OS controlling module loading (OPS1, OPS2, OPS3, etc..) was a TOS/360 derivative.. But that changed in the mid '90s (AP-101s).. The article at http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/shu
Finally, again, it seems the computers on the Russian side are NOT Russian "made" computers, but european built machines (c.f. last night's press conf.). And the US computers didn't take over.. The only thing that is happening is that the Shuttle is taking over the ISS' propulsive attitude control should the CMGs (Control Moment Gyroscopes) overload.. (note that the CMG computers seem to be OK so far !).. I very much doubt the Shuttle GPCs are equipped to perform the tasks of the ISS bound computers (that control Propulsive attitude control, the Elektron, humidity scrubbers, etc..)
The problem, of course, is that once Atlantis undocks, should the LANEs not be fit, the ISS won't be able to do its necessary attitude changes following the shuttle's undocking and *THAT* is a major concern !
--Ivan
I interpret this to mean the following:
XJS*C4JDBQADN1.NSBN3*2IDNEN*GTUBE-STANDARD-ANTI-U
where was the "in soviet russia" joke?
If somebody cannot get at least one "4" mod from an in-soviet-russia joke out of *this* topic, then slashdot has major a problem.
Table-ized A.I.
'...shuttle wing impact conspiracy.'
:)
:)
You're saying NASA faked the photo of the hole in the wing??? Oh...my bad
Lord - If you're right, timmie, this could be the biggest thing since Bush had his USD$50 watch lifted by an Albanian pickpocket!!!
Look, bud - you can call me a trans-gendered duck for all I care, but 'labeling' your target is weak debating at best, so unless you've got something more, you are only mildly entertaining - good for a few laughs. Very few.
Thanks for taking a run at me Mr. T, but better luck next time
For the person with the itchy moderation finger. It's a joke that references an old story about the American and Russian space programs.
p
http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.as
My twitter
I'm not sure the English/Russian speaking engineer that I heard earlier during the first false smoke alarm due to a software glitch (they've had more after that) would agree with you.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
And elsewhere your attitude controls computers? Like via a brain implant? :-o
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
The press is so bad you actually accused NASA of making up a story about computer trouble.
The press is bad.
It is damned unfortunate that people actually believe the press, when year after year story after story is revealed to be fiction from lede to -30-.
That the hard work of thousands of smart people gets shat upon by fraudulent airheads.
That it doesn't matter how great a job they do every tiny issue becomes a real threat to funding.
Because the press is bad.
Or colimate the tachyon beam... or assert a graviton pulse? I'm sure any of those would work.
Wanna fence that spacey thing to Sol, eh?
...Meh, not shiny enough!
"Nae Kin! Nae Quin! Nae laird! Nae master! We willna be fooled again!"
Soyuz would bring down the Expedition 15 crew, and the Shuttle crew would return on their own craft.
TheHustler
http://www.elmarko.org/ - Useless bilge
http://www.asylum-games.co.uk/ - Co-Founder
If our estimate of that benefit, made today, is valued less than our current estimate of the cost of completetion, then completing the station is just throwing good money after bad.
The cost of abandoning the station might just be the whole manned space program, not just losing a station. The world isn't just a few columns of expenses and benefits. How do you calculate an intangible cost in terms of dollars like the cost to reputation and worldwide public opinion of the space program? Abandon the project now, and IMO the likelihood of another station to replace it goes down by 100 fold, and manned space exploration goes down the toilet for another 30 years. Personally I think those are bad scenarios, and few billion dollars is a really cheap price to pay to avoid that situation.
Maybe you don't see any benefit in manned space exploration, and that's a valid answer. But then you really aren't in this cost/benefit argument to begin with.
AccountKiller
Further exacerbating the situation is that tech support for the systems has been outsourced to India.
"Yeees sir, I understand that you are loosing ahlteetude but I neeed for you to reboot the computer as we have seen this work for our other customers..."
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
I know that the Shuttle's and ISS' avionics systems are essentially custom made systems. And man, they should be ! for one, they're basically operating on the fringe or outside the Van Alen belt, so cosmic/solar radiation is a concern, and then in some aspects they are operating in life & death situations.. For example, the shuttle being a fly by wire flying machine, the loss of all GPCs while running OPS-1 (during ascent) or OPS-3 (descent-reentry) is a no-no (during OPS-2 (orbit coast), it's not THAT critical)
The older AP-101 were core based memory system (which is less influenced by radiation hits than CMOS or BiPolar semiconductors), but memory CRCs are a must anyway (although this is something usually available on off the shelf "server" class systems anyway).
--Ivan
We can't just abandon it. the toilet seat will kill someone else and we'll just have too many grim reapers. Then we will be in a downward spiral....
Oh Crap, I'm an optimist.....
Perhaps. However, that's not quite what I said. I just said they run mathematical proofs on their software. If you know anything about formal methods (no shame in not knowing. Few CS graduates even know a lot about it), then you'd know that proofs should only be a part of a verification (testing) regimen. There can still be bugs in an implementation (or its compiler!), even after its algorithm has been "proven".
Mention you use FreeBSD, get modded into oblivion!
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Ah. ThankyouThankyouThankyou. I'd been looking for this article. Calling 1996 "Not too long ago" might be a bit of a stretch, at least for Slashdot, but its a great article for the layman on NASA manned software methodoligies. Anyone still confused by all this, please read the article, and then decide for yourself how likely it is that something important in there is running Windows.
Hey, geekster ~ howzit it been? Please. I've asked nicely before and you just don't seem to get it.
Leave the monkeys out of this...ok?
They've never done anything against you or your half-sister and there is no need to continue with attempting to marginalize them the way you do. They're just monkeys. Tiny, brindle-brown, Macedonian temple anus-monkeys, sure...but as soon as the rescue lady calls with a good home for them, every last one is staying where he is.
You could do with a little animal kingdom respect display yourself, you know. I'm sure you could find a lonely sheep from, say, Montana, that needs a good foster home. Just remember, the only thing wrong with screwing 'em is you have to run around to the front to kiss 'em.
point taken and all my apologies.
--Ivan
Could these computers have MicroSoft's Windows as the OS?
OK, it failed the WGA and they could not update it in time to have relatively bug free solar drivers.
That's the skinny, but keep it under your hat. We don't want another row like this when Bill G finds out there's a problem with licensing. They will throw the IT head in jail and confiscate the rest of the machines.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Evacuating ISS is always a last resort, because should something happen to it while unoccupied, it'd be a total loss.
As opposed to the "total loss" suffered with crew on board? Men are more important than equipment and experiments. New equipment can be built and experiments can be repeated.
If the equipment can't sustain the men, it's time to bring them home. There will always be risks and facing them is brave. Wishful thinking in the face of known problems is foolhardy and irresponsible. It's better to risk the equipment for a month than the equipment and the men. If they can't fix it in a few days, all they will be able to do is sit for a month as things get worse.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Sounds to me like NASA has created the "perfect" problem -- something that can explain the need to abandon the ISS and letting it burn up in the atmosphere so it will stop sucking NASA's dwindling funds and let them concentrate on their moon and Mars missions.
Hmmm - the hardware and primary software are in fact German made:
"The German-built computers, which operate in pairs, went out Wednesday morning, and several attempts to reboot them were unsuccessful...The computers normally operate in three pairs, where one computer (called the central unit) specializes in overall commanding and the other (the terminal unit) handles guidance, navigation, and control functions. The three pairs provide redundancy, via a special control software developed by the German aerospace firm DARA, which is now part of the European Astrium consortium." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19228925/ has a good summary of the issue.
The computers have been very reliable to date too. So while they run within the Russian part of the ISS, and may have some Russian code on them, to call it Russian hardware is not exactly correct.
And for them to be running OK for years - until a new power source was added into the ISS - suggests the cause is not the computers per se, but some new element in their environment introduced by the new power infrastructure.
or they changed the Zone once to many times on that DVD they boot from.
Only thing i could think of was as a return point on a mars (and possibly moon) mission. It might make sense not to pilot a vehicle with a reentry shield all that way and back. With all the current fuss of the shuttle shield, would you want to take a shield to mars and back? Come back to the ISS and hop in one of the capsules to land or wait for your ride :)
;)
Downside seems to be that we might have to add an economy parking lot
I assume you are the same A.C. that has posted similar sentiments today. You have contributed nothing to the topics except calling someone a "karma whore". Why does that chafe your little behind so badly? Karma is like money. You can live without it, but it makes life easier.
Maybe a nice walk around the block will turn that frown upside-down?
Just spotted this news link: 'Space station glitch puzzles experts' - have to say the reason why the experts are scratching their skulls over the supposed ISS issue is because it didn't occur...simple.
Service restart isn't the problem. The problem is copying kernel state.
The kernel holds a lot of information, such as which processes are running, memory allocation, drivers etc. For a true in-place switchover to a new kernel (i.e., all programs keep running as if nothing happened), all that information has to be copied over.
The other option is to load the new kernel image to memory, shut down all processes and unload drivers, jump to new kernel and start a standard initialization. That would be the same as doing a 'shutdown -r', except that the new kernel is loaded by the old kernel instead of by the BIOS.
If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
Also, the mission control computers (at least in Huntsville, the payload control center) are most definitely running Windows.
WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
the computers in question were made 4 years ago by a german company Daimler-Benz, problems with them were because of noise in electrical system lines of the ISS, this problem is being troubleshooted right now, so its probably a wire somewhere thats generating this noise.
... before you go off ur crazy ideas at least look up the equipments thats actually on board, if you know nothing about the subject just sit back in the corner and blow spit bubbles.
the fire alarms are also caused by these computer reboots.
Dont Judge The situation by the Misfortunate. Goga.
you work/coop there? I work next door ...
No, just visited :-)
WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy