Slashdot Mirror


Why ISS Computers Failed

Geoffrey.landis writes "It was only a small news item four months ago: all three of the Russian computers that control the International Space Station failed shortly after the Space Shuttle brought up a new solar array. But why did they fail? James Oberg, writing in IEEE Spectrum, details the detective work that led to a diagnosis." The article has good insights into the role the ISS plays as a laboratory for US-Russian technology cooperation — something that is likely to be crucial in any manned Mars mission.

8 of 324 comments (clear)

  1. Duct tape saves the day! by Cyberax · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...They also decided to rig a thermal barrier out of a surplus reference book and all-purpose gray tape....

    Once again, duct tape saves the day! :)
  2. Re:Redundancy != Safety by 8-bitDesigner · · Score: 5, Informative
    Two nit-picky points here:
    1. It wasn't condensation that felled all three computers, it was a single corroded connector, which shorted and sent a kill-command to all three computers. Technically, redundancy here would've circumvented that issue.
    2. Actually, I believe the article stated that it was a Russian-manufactured component, not a NASA design.
  3. Hmmmm. by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Informative

    The original plans called for the ISS to be finished many years ago. It is not yet, because America has had issues with transportation. In addition, a few modules that were planned to make the ISS very useful were canceled because of us (in particular, CAM). In the end, both sides have had issues, and changes have occurred. That is normal for these kinds of projects. To be honest, I think that all of this has been handled pretty decently.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  4. Re:Rust proof gold anyone? by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 3, Informative

    On a per weight basis Aluminum is about 6 times better than gold. Gold conducts about 20% better, but weighs about 7 times as much.

  5. Here we go again... by LanceUppercut · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, well, well... Here we go again. Jim Oberg. That same Jim Oberg who was almost blowing his gasket a couple of weeks ago when that journalist was asking him questions about alcohol abuse by astronauts (you all remember the story, I'm sure). It was all preposterous nonsense not backed up by any evidence, he said, berely keeping his cool. And what do we see now? He is happily making up stories about Russians accusing US of the computer falures - something that never happened in reality. The power problems caused by some new US installations were indeed considered as intermediate working brainstormed versions of what could have happened. But nobody ever did any fingerpointing or made any acussations before the situation was sufficiently researched and the root cause determined. Of course, Jim Oberg could not refreain from distorting the truth "just a little". Tsk, tsk, tsk... Note, how he refers to the hypothesis as both "blatant finger pointing" and just "guesses" within single paragraph - just to keep his article a little fuzzy, so that he can flip-flop to either when the situation calls for it. Nothing surprising here, though...

  6. The computers are not Russian, but European by hazard · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article is misleading. The computers are not actually of Russian make, they were supplied to Russians by Europeans (EADS). See here.

  7. Superior Terrestial Connector Technology! by Zymergy · · Score: 3, Informative

    I had an 89' Nissan Pathfinder and it had factory wiring harness connectors to ALL of the various electrical connections which were water-tight with one or more ribbed red silicone gaskets.
    The connectors were not always easy to disconnect, however, after 177,000 miles and 11 years of original ownership, I never found any corrosion inside any one of them I ever disconnected for service.
    Additionally, the male/female electrical contacts within the sealed connectors appeared to be made from a tinned Copper and/or Brass metal. This is important to note, as Brass, and to a much larger extent, Copper, have ELECTRICALLY CONDUCTIVE oxide states (as surface corrosion by moisture and/or other aqueous solvents).
    In other words, you corrode a Copper or Brass metal electrical connector, and it will still conduct electricity just fine. It may degrade certain frequencies of network/data signaling and alter the dB loss and impedance, but it will still conduct.
    This is another reason why the top-post Nissan main battery terminal connectors for this vehicle were made from a Copper/Brass strap instead of a traditional Lead connector.
    Lead oxide powders (as found on many old standard Lead top-post automotive battery terminals) are not effective electrical conductors (as anyone who has wiggled/cleaned a corroded connection to allow their car to start could attest).
    Why did the design/production Engineers for the ISS not utilize Gold Plated Watertight industry standard (ISO, etc) wiring interconnects? (Even cheap RJ-45 connectors have gold-plated pins)
    -That is the REAL Question.

  8. Re:The REAL reason they failed by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

    We don't do honest here. We do technically sound.


    We don't do technically sound here. We make do parroting the "common wisdom" and secretly praying nobody who actually knows something will be bothered to respond.

    Good form means getting and informative moderation rating without provoking an informative result. If you do provoke an informatve result, you end up in the penalty box (i.e., spend a few days actually getting work done rather than wasting time on Slashdot).
    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.