Slashdot Mirror


Long-lived Mars Rovers to Keep on Roving

An anonymous reader writes with a link to a ComputerWorld article about the ongoing saga of the Martian rovers. They've overcome amazing obstacles and they show no signs of shutting down any time soon. "'After more than three and a half years, Spirit and Opportunity are showing some signs of aging, but they are in good health and capable of conducting great science,' John Callas, rover project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said in a statement. Since landing, the rovers have had to surmount a host of technical issues. Just a few weeks after landing, the Spirit rover had an out-of-memory problem that almost ended its mission before it began, but scientists were able to get the rover back into operation. In April 2004, both needed software updates to correct problems and improve their performance."

23 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. Anyone who gives NASA a bad rap... by rah1420 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    should read the story of these two amazing machines. There's a lot that's wrong with NASA but there's so much that's right, too -- and this is proof positive.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
    1. Re:Anyone who gives NASA a bad rap... by MonorailCat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's really nice to see a story of good engineering getting some play. It seems whenever engineering is in the news it involves a building collapse or something dreadful like that.

    2. Re:Anyone who gives NASA a bad rap... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm a bit curious if the rovers are actually doing anything all that useful at the moment... after all, they move at a painfully slow rate, and the landscape isn't all that varied in the areas they're in.

      Look around the NASA / JPL sites (links not provided, I'm lazy and cranky besides Google needs the ad revenue). Lots of good, albeit plodding research. Much of this is just data collection - it will take years of analyzing the data and cross referencing it with other Mars probes and historical research but just sitting there and acting as a Martian weather buoy yields enormously important information.

      We know so little of anything extra terrestrial that even low hanging fruit is satisfying.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Anyone who gives NASA a bad rap... by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Funny

      The thing is that the engineers predicted that they would fail years ago.

      That's the fun part of being an engineer - you get booed when things fail short of their predicted lifetime. But when you screw up your predictions the other way and underestimate the lifetime... suddenly, you are a hero. No wonder engineers are inclined to be conservative.
       
       

      I'm a bit curious if the rovers are actually doing anything all that useful at the moment... after all, they move at a painfully slow rate, and the landscape isn't all that varied in the areas they're in.

      Welcome to the world of real science - where data collection takes years, and data analysis takes decades. It's also a world most activities are painfully slow and/or boring and things don't happen at any great rate, and that simply isn't very exciting.
       
      This isn't Mythbusters where everything is dumbed down, sexed up, and edited to a pace suitable for the short attention span of the post-MTV generation.
  2. made in...? by bwy · · Score: 4, Funny

    OK.... are we SURE that these things weren't made in Japan?

    Cause they're acting more like a Honda than a GM at this point.

    1. Re:made in...? by Cally · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, most of the robotics comes from New York's own Honeybee Robotics. You can still see their logo on the side of the RAT in some shots.

      --
      "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
  3. Just think.. by jcr · · Score: 4, Funny

    How long would a rover that was actually designed to last for three years keep on working?

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Just think.. by no_pets · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably about a month and a half. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't.

      --
      "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." - Shepard Book Quoting Malcolm Reynolds
    2. Re:Just think.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Such a rover would be so big and heavy, it would never make it to mars. In order to make sure the rover will last for a couple of months given everything that could possibly go wrong, it has to be so over engineered, that odds are it will last many years.

      Or to put it in numbers, a 99.99% chance of surviving for 3 months, could easily translate into a 50% chance of lasting 5 years.

  4. NASA succeeds or fails... by jhines · · Score: 4, Insightful

    in a spectacular fashion. Either extreme, it is rare that a mission is routine.

    1. Re:NASA succeeds or fails... by IceD'Bear · · Score: 4, Informative

      It just seem so to you, because you hear only of the spectacular missions. Routine missions aren't really interesting news.

  5. Repeatable? by thesupermikey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We have been seeing articles like this for 3 years now. That is great, the more positive talk about a NASA project the better.

    The thing that always seems to be missing is: why did these two robots continue to work so well, and, how do we go about repeating their success?

    --
    Mikey
    I've always been the kinda guy to fall for the girl dressed like an eskimo.
    1. Re:Repeatable? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They continue to work so well because they got power, that was the 3mo limit where it was assumed the solar panels would be too clogged up to function. No, it's not as easy as having a windshield wiper. They figured they'd rather get more out of them in three months, and maybe they'd get lucky - which they did. You have to admit that over these three years it hasn't been very many scientific accomplishments they didn't do in the first three months, it's more like "hey, they survived this winter too" or "hey, they got to crater X, which is just like the last crater".

      As for repeating the success, first of all you can't. Now we know you can keep continous solar power working on Mars, and that'll be the expectation from now on. Secondly, you need some luck - they're way past their design life and probably the only reason they're working is because it's massively overengineered with everyone thinking "like hell if it'll be our part that kills it after a week". I'm not sure how good setting a three year design life would help, because I figure they're already using pretty much the best they got. It's not like the cost of metal piece on the rover is anywhere near significant compared to the cost of getting it to Mars.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Repeatable? by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Informative

      You have to admit that over these three years it hasn't been very many scientific accomplishments they didn't do in the first three months

      I think its too early to say that. They still don't know when the water was there, how long, and how much. That's gonna take a lot of time-consuming study of a lot of details. Scientists are still discovering new things in Viking data.

      Now we know you can keep continous solar power working on Mars, and that'll be the expectation from now on.

      The whirlwind effect is kind of hit and miss, though. A device that depends on solar power may have many months of down-time if a whirlwind fails to show up. And as we've learned, big dust storms risk freezing the electronics to death. Thus, solar is still risky.

      I figure they're already using pretty much the best they got.

      I've heard there are known spots that lack redundancy on the rovers. A more expensive mission could potentially have more areas of redundancy.

    3. Re:Repeatable? by boris111 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Now we know you can keep continous solar power working on Mars, and that'll be the expectation from now on
      Except the next rover will use a radio isotope power system. No Solar Panels on this thing.

      It's also a behemoth, and doesn't use airbags to land.
  6. Famous last words. by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 4, Funny

    They've overcome amazing obstacles and they show no signs of shutting down any time soon. Oh, nice work! That's a sentence that's all but guaranteed to result in a story next week about both rovers spontaneously combusting! Remember, Zonk, loose lips cause catastrophic technical failures!

    sheesh.
    --
    P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
  7. Give the Engineers credit... by NoSpamPlease · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but scientists were able to...
    Just a pet peeve of mine. No scientists were involved in rescuing the rovers. Engineers did all the work, and deserve all the credit for the immense success and longer duration of this mission. Scientists deserve the credit for the science that we get from them. The success of the rovers depends entirely on Engineers.
  8. On "scooping" - Re:Keep rollin' by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Informative

    They jus' keeps scoopin',

    They don't have scoopers, by the way, at least not in the Viking sense. They take the instruments to the soil instead of bring the soil to the instruments.

    However, they can and do use their wheels to dig small trenches in order to analyze deeper soil. They do this by holding 5 wheels mostly still and move the 6th wheel.

    It is a remarkably compact yet flexible way to get the most out of existing hardware.

    Spirit cannot do this well anymore because of one stuck wheel. However, by dragging it around, it has become a happenstance "auto-trencher" and because of it they've stumbled upon some soil with high salt content underneath the visible layer that many scientists think is an important clue to the continuing water study (although the pieces to the puzzle still have yet to be all fit together). Now they regularly do spectral analysis on the bum-wheel trenches to see what's below the visible layer.

  9. There can be only one reason for their success... by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 3, Funny

    This project must have had a hundred million managers and task teams!
    Seriously!

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  10. I recently went to see "Postcards From Mars" by dpilot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A talk being given by one of the geologists (Jim Bell) on the Spirit/Opportunity teams. (He was also selling and signing the book of the same name.) A few little tidbits from the talk...

    One of the rovers (Spirit?) has blown a motor on a front wheel. As a result, it's normal mode of travel is now backwards. Also as a result, it tends to drag a groove in the Martian soil. In a recent transit, they were taking photographs of where they'd been and realized that the dragging wheel had exposed a different layer of soil, significantly different from the surface layer. Had the wheel not been dragging, they never would have discovered this.

    Choosing a landing site is a tug-of-war between the engineers and geologists. The engineers want to land someplace safe, so they can make it in one piece and functional. The geologists want to land someplace interesting. Usually "interesting" and "safe" are opposites. It's a compromise.

    Likewise, choosing what to look at is a compromise between safety and interesting. They've recently taken one of the rovers (Opportunity?) into a crater, realizing that they may not be able to get it out. But they've done all of the doable stuff nearby, the crater is compellingly interesting, and if they don't make it out, it's been a good run, and there's more to do in the crater.

    The rovers are really slow. You may hear it, but it doesn't hit home until you've seen a visual demonstration of how slow those things are.

    The rovers had been "wintering over," and they were worried about them getting enough sunlight to keep from getting too cold. While the Jim Bell was on the road for this book tour, and before the engagement I was at, they'd reacquired contact.

    During the early days of the mission, the scientists were on Martian time, living 27 hour days. After the first few weeks, they settled out procedures and policies to allow them to go back on Earth time.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  11. this is why space commercialization is a bad idea by gelfling · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Because a private company would have sucked their profit out a long time ago and shut the whole thing down before it became interesting or enlightening or even heroic.

  12. Re:Manned Exploration is a Waste by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Space exploration isn't just about science or nationalism. It's also about humanity and it's desire for exploration. What's the point of learning all about the cosmos unless we can somehow put it to use for humanity? And part of that science is the effect of space travel and other-world habitation on humans. Eventually, humanity will be living out in space, and we will be better and richer for it.

    I consider that a fine investment of my tax dollars.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  13. Re:this is why space commercialization is a bad id by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you mean commercialization as in "Let's disband NASA and wait for private enterprise" then yes. If you mean as in "Let NASA push the frontiers, but try to make commercial ventures follow" then I disagree. Even though the government doesn't need to have a direct profit, there's very rarely money to do something just for the hell of it. Most of the time, it's to generate new technlogy, improve education or knowledge in a science, create a better understanding of our own culture or history and so on. Sure the Apollo program did a lot to improve ground-based science and technology, but I imagine over time it'll be less and less relevant to surface-dwellers and only relevant to space travel. If we can't find ways to make it profitable, if space travel is a constant money sink forever then it will be nothing more than the odd scientific expedition. So I'd say it's very important, but you can't put the cart in front of the horse - there must be something commercializable to begin with.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings