Slashdot Mirror


Robotic Telescope Installed on Antarctica Plateau

Reservoir Hill writes "Antarctica claims some of the best astronomical sky conditions in the world — devoid of clouds with steady air that makes for clear viewing. The very best conditions unfortunately lie deep in the interior on a high-altitude plateau called Dome A. With an elevation of up to 4,093m, it's known as the most unapproachable point in the earth's southernmost region. Now astronomers in a Chinese scientific expedition have set up an experimental observatory at Dome A after lugging their equipment across Antarctica with the help of Australia and the US. The observatory will hunt for alien planets, while also measuring the observing conditions at the site to see if it is worth trying to build bigger observatories there. The observatory is automated, pointing its telescopes on its own while astronomers monitor its progress from other locations around the world via satellite link. PLATO is powered by a gas generator, and has a 4000-litre tank of jet fuel to keep it running through the winter. The observatory will search for planets around other stars using an array of four 14.5-centimetre telescopes called the Chinese Small Telescope Array (CSTAR). Astronomers hope to return in 2009 with new instruments, including the Antarctica Schmidt Telescopes (AST-3), a trio of telescopes with 0.5-metre mirrors, which will be more sensitive to planets than CSTAR."

128 comments

  1. Lots o' jet fuel by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

    Wow. 1000 gallons of jet fuel to run on. Hopefully they're using it efficiently, and not just running the generator non-stop.

    1. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by gotzero · · Score: 1

      Better than a reactor... I think the concept is neat as long as they treat the surrounding environment well. Hopefully we will get some groundbreaking research and nice pictures for the rest of us!

    2. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Tribbin · · Score: 1

      Luckily the Dutch found a robot that can handle the gass-pump.

      --
      If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
    3. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, I think I'd prefer an RTG reactor like they use on long-range satellite probes. No CO2 emissions, lasts longer, and any heat you don't use to generate electricity can be used to warm the equipment.

    4. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm one of the 4 UNSW scientists who designed PLATO. We certainly are using the fuel efficiently. When the sun is up we get over 1kW from solar panels, and we run one diesel generator at a time with just enough heat output to stop the fuel from getting too cold and turning to gel. Interestingly, the solar panels are considerably (about 30%) more efficient than you would expect from temperate site measurements - the colder temperatures (-50C at the moment) help, as does sunlight reflected from the snow.

    5. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2

      Hazah! I'm really surprised to get a response from a project participant, and thrilled with your answer. I wish you best of luck with the project!

    6. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      during the antarctic winter there is no sun shining, which will be several months out of the year = (june thru december without any sunshine?) the antarctic summer gets sunshine 24/7...

      i have family living in Alaska so i hear about the land of the midnight sun, (and no sun in winter)

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    7. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by pipatron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why did you not consider wind power? I'd imagine it would be quite strong and even winds there, and no neighbours to whine about the ruined view.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    8. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by syousef · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Getting the scientists there and back uses more jet fuel than this.

      Environmentalism is a noble and necessary cause but if you're going to make cost savings try ellminating things like Christmas lights before you decide to object to science like this on environmental grounds. We wouldn't know about environmental impact if we didn't do good science.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    9. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      I'm one of the 4 UNSW scientists who designed PLATO.
      Lets hope you did a good job.... and are nice to your boss.

      Nothing worse than overhearing a conversation in the hallway " um', yeah, ok, well it looks like we're sending Michael down there to sit with PLATO, and um, you know, push the red button once a day at 8am...and yeah, we'll be wanting him to be there all winter. ok?"
    10. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by syousef · · Score: 1

      I have an Astronomy masters from UWS which I never have and never intended to use in any professional capacity. (I found my niche in IT, and basically making a living doing science was too big a risk).

      Let me just say it's fantastic to hear some real Astronomy still being done in Australia. I studied the history of Aussie Astronomy and found it quite depressing that we were once at the forefront especially in Radio astronomy, whereas now, not so much.

      Also don't let the criticisms here get to you. If you're a regular here you'll know the quality of the comments on /. has been in steady decline for a couple of years now, and that sometimes the trolls rule the roost. I'd love to see some of these people making comments about environmentalism actually design something better under the political and organizational conditions and challenges you face.

      That's not to say that I don't believe the environment should be considered. I just think that any project in Antarctica is going to need to go through some environmental checks and balances before being permitted by several governments in any case. I'm sure there will continue to be improvements as well as teams get more experience working under such requirements.

      What you're doing sounds fantastic, and it is to be applauded not criticized. Keep up the good work.

      I do have questions: What constraints dictate that you work with such small telescopes? Are they primarily financial or technical in nature?

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    11. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think I'd prefer an RTG reactor like they use on long-range satellite probes Yea, but do you want to leave that lying around unattended? I imagine it's worth quite a bit more than some diesel generators and jet fuel.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    12. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, Dome A is one of the least windy places on Earth, typically just 2-3 metres per second. Dome A is the highest point in the centre of the Antarctic plateau, and this is where the katabatic winds start from. The winds accelerate as they head towards the coast, and that is where they can reach 100's of kph.

      So, unfortunately, wind power was not feasible.

    13. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Ioldanach · · Score: 1
      Was wind not viable? Or is this just the pilot, with installed instruments monitoring wind to determine what parameters you'll need for a permanent wind turbine? As a pilot project, I can see going with simpler tech such as a generator in the early phase and adding wind turbines at a later date. You'd have to find some extremely durable maintenance free wind turbines for that location, but with 1kw wind turbines in the $3k range, you could easily place several around the site to handle the inevitable failure of one or more units. Plus, you could allow the fuel to turn to gel if you contain the fuel in multiple tanks and use a resistance heater (or two, for failure modes) in each tank and just turn it on when you need to melt the fuel to run it through the generator. You really don't need to keep all the fuel melted at once, just one tank.

      Of course, all this is probably already addressed, I'm just full of $0.02 like everyone else here. :)

    14. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      From the article, it said the telescope is located in Dome A, a hard to reach plateau in Antarctica. If someone has the resources to get to the plateau, I doubt they're going to care about stealing the small RTG.

    15. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by shadow349 · · Score: 1

      Nothing worse than overhearing a conversation in the hallway " um', yeah, ok, well it looks like we're sending Michael down there to sit with PLATO, and um, you know, push the red button once a day at 8am...and yeah, we'll be wanting him to be there all winter. ok?"
      Silly ... the red button once a day is so passe. Now you have to type "4 8 15 16 23 42" every 108 minutes.
    16. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I agree with your point, and I'm not saying it's a worthy cause. I'm well aware of how much Jet A it takes to get a Hercules to that side of the world with the necessary equipment and people. All I said was that I hope the kerosene they're using was being used efficiently. Don't mistake that for "Oh noes! Save the treez! They be burnin' fuels for star findin'!"

    17. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by UseTheSource · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I think I'd prefer an RTG reactor like they use on long-range satellite probes. No CO2 emissions, lasts longer, and any heat you don't use to generate electricity can be used to warm the equipment.

      IANAA (I Am Not An Astronomer), but I would think there would be less distortion if the optics were actually at the same temperature as the ambient air temperature.

      Also, if you're doing any sort of spectroscopy, you'd want your detector to be really, really cold and that would be easier to attain in the Antarctic winter. I remember a buddy of mine at NASA/GSFC who worked on a spectroscopy apparatus, and their detector was vacuum insulated and cooled using liquid helium, IIRC.

      --
      "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer." -Adolf Hitler
      "We are one Nation, we are one People." -The One 'leader'
    18. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Ioldanach · · Score: 1
      I don't think people question the use of jet fuel for this project so much on environmental grounds as on maintainability grounds. 4000l of fuel will eventually need to be replenished. Installing more solar, wind turbines, and gyroscopic batteries designed to be maintenance free over a long life could reduce the need for service from semiannual or annual to once per decade. Obviously, everything will at some point need service but if you can install sufficient spares then you'll only need to go out there when power plant failures reach a particular threshold.

      Also, I'm thinking that such a desolate place would be a great location for an entirely airdropped system. Drop different components as autonomous units from a high altitude with a guided parachute system and gps and give each device its own backup power source with enough power to run on its own for maybe 24 hours. When they land have them figure out where they all are relative to each other and design a system where the power plants actually beam power via microwave to the power consuming units and each other, making a self-correcting power grid. As a bonus, if a gadget like a wind turbine gets frozen up, redirect a power beam to the freeze and melt the ice off!

      Ok, I know, I'm just dreaming now, but it does sound cool!

    19. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by OddThinking · · Score: 3, Informative

      IAAAA (I am an amateur astronomer) and yes, you want the equipment at the same temp as the surrounding air. Otherwise, the equipment will create a local air current, which would cause optical distortions.

    20. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Agreed. You're going to want to keep the optics as cold as possible. But I would think you'd want to keep the batteries, satellite communications, equipment, and other support systems warm.

    21. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
      I'm one of the 4 UNSW scientists who designed PLATO. We certainly are using the fuel efficiently. When the sun is up we get over 1kW from solar panels, and we run one diesel generator at a time with just enough heat output to stop the fuel from getting too cold and turning to gel. Interestingly, the solar panels are considerably (about 30%) more efficient than you would expect from temperate site measurements - the colder temperatures (-50C at the moment) help, as does sunlight reflected from the snow.

      Wow, that's great! You see, this work is relevant to the script for a sci-fi movie I'm currently working on. Maybe you could give me some details about the project to help make my screenplay more realistic?

      See, the premise is this: arrogant scientists, in their hubris, invent a high-tech robot telescope and install it in the remote reaches of Antarctica where no one is around. And then the robot telescope becomes self-aware, and goes insane and wants to kill everyone. That's the first act. However, I'm having a little trouble figuring out what happens in Act 2... I mean, the robot can't move, and there's nobody around to kill. So right now, in Scene 2 the robot just sits there and sulks, and sends spiteful emails to the research team, and muses on the nature of existence. So it's sort of existential, I was hoping for something very "Terminator"-like and it's coming out a bit more like "Waiting For Godot".

    22. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Ioldanach · · Score: 1

      Fascinating, and with clear skies that would aid your telescopes as well by lessening atmospheric disturbances. Sounds like you'll just need a whole lot more solar panels, then. Though I'm curious, without much wind, how do they stay free of snow? Heating systems installed in them?

    23. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by cymen · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like it would work real well to do a lot of start stop cycles in the COLDEST FREAKING PLACE.

    24. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by cymen · · Score: 1

      Of course, I could be wrong.

    25. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Intron · · Score: 1

      The closer you get to the poles the less wind you get. You have less heat differential and less rotation of the Earth to circulate the air.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    26. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    27. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by dargaud · · Score: 5, Informative
      No more RTG in Antarctica since the last signup of the Antarctic Treaty. There used to be automated weather stations (AWS) on the high plateau using RTG of the same generation as what is currently powering the Voyager spacecrafts, but they had to be removed over a decade ago and replaced by large batteries and a combination of wind and solar power.

      As for astronomy, the team running this automated experiment at Dome A did it previously at Dome C. I was on the first winterover team in 2005 and monitoring the turbulence for astronomy was one of the main goals. Bigger telescopes are being installed as we speak in time for the start of the 4th winterover in a few days.

      Dome A is 1000m higher than Dome C (4200m vs 3200m) but is even harder to reach and the temperature in winter borders on the insane: we had -78C during our winterover so I'll let you imagine at Dome A...

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    28. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by char70ger · · Score: 1

      I belong to another discussion group who says that antartica is a govt conspiracy and does not exist. I am not one of the disbelievers however. I posted links to three articles about this to the board and also this discussion. http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19756.0

    29. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if it runs non-stop, generators throttle themselves down. Like a cruise control on a car. They only use as much fuel as the electrical load demands (+ some overhead + inefficiency losses).

      A smart system would employ batteries, and would only start and run the generator at highest efficiency periodically to recharge the batteries.

    30. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Tangent128 · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, Antarctica is largely a desert. The little accumulation it does get simply never melts.

    31. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by geekoid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      So how do you feel when some jackass on /. questions your decisions even though they have no information to base their opinions on?

      Heh, maybe you could stop the wind and hold the world hostage for more funding! MUAHAHAhahahah..*coughwheeze*

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    32. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by narthollis · · Score: 1

      The interesting thing about Antarctica is that it dost actually snow. IIRC Antarctica has one of the lowest precipitation levels in the world. When there is snow in the air in Antarctica it is just show that has been picked up off the ground by the wind.

    33. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by NateTech · · Score: 1

      That would have been better as, "Um, Michael? Yeah... um, I'm going to need you to stop by PLATO on Saaaaturday, mmm-kay?"

      --
      +++OK ATH
    34. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      Do not underestimate the will of someone who badly wants some very nasty radioactive materials.

      Still, a lot of radioactive stuff can simply be stolen from the average medical facility (years ago, here in Brazil several people were killed in a mishap with Ce 137 when an abandoned - IIRC - radio-therapy machine was found by some very dumb people). I bet those are the low hanging fruit we should worry about.

    35. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Actually, Dome A is one of the least windy places on Earth, typically just 2-3 metres per second. Dome A is the highest point in the centre of the Antarctic plateau, and this is where the katabatic winds start from. The winds accelerate as they head towards the coast, and that is where they can reach 100's of kph.

      So, unfortunately, wind power was not feasible.

      So then it seems like there are two choices: (i) put the wind power elsewhere and run a cable from there (inefficient and could cause lots of problems), or (ii) build the turbines to work with vertical winds instead of horizontal windows or some angle thereof as determined by the site. It's not that wind power is not feasible, just that it needs to be harnessed differently.
      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    36. Re:Lots o' jet fuel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they so badly want the material in an RTG, I'm sure they're quite aware of where to find dozens of them rotting at various places around Russia, and it would be a lot easier to get their hands on there as well.

  2. Now that's cool by smooth+wombat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I'm a big proponent of not buying goods made in China due to their human rights abuses, but this most certainly falls under the cool category (literally). Dragging all that equipment and fuel across what is probably the most barren landscape on the planet, with weather conditions subject to change at a moments notice, is a feat. Unfortunately, the generator will now be polluting this area but I don't think solar panels would do the trick.

    Something else though. With the recent flyby of an asteroid last month, wouldn't this location also be a good place to look for asteroids or other objects coming at us from that direction?

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Now that's cool by dasbush · · Score: 1

      I don't think pollution would be a huge factor. There wouldn't really be a global warming problem in North America (or anywhere) if there was only one coal plant in the entire continent and no other green house gas emitters (cars, factories, etc) anywhere else.

    2. Re:Now that's cool by TurinPT · · Score: 1

      I'm a big proponent of not buying goods made in China due to their human rights abuses.
      The US are not that fond of the Geneva Convention themselves. Slashdot is based in the US.
      What are you doing here?

    3. Re:Now that's cool by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Funny
      What are you doing here?


      Goofing off for the last 20 minutes or so of the day. ;)

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    4. Re:Now that's cool by oldhack · · Score: 1

      Why you so afraid of Bush?

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    5. Re:Now that's cool by giorgist · · Score: 1

      Damn your good, do you also not buy stuff from the US for the same reasons ?

  3. But... by Tribbin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Amazing and all, but is it able to fill my gass-tank?

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
  4. Really cold by professorguy · · Score: 1

    I've started a car at -44 degrees (not wind chill--that's a mythical concept) and let me tell you, it's not pretty. I think at the really cold temperatures in the antarctic, you really do want to run the generator non-stop. Also, it was litres, so less than 300 gallons.

    1. Re:Really cold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're right, it was liters. 4000 of them.

    2. Re:Really cold by LMacG · · Score: 1
      --
      Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
    3. Re:Really cold by s20451 · · Score: 1

      Parent was correct -- 1000 gallons is roughly 4000 litres (the amount specified in the summary).

      To put this into perspective, the fuel capacity of the Boeing 737 is between 4700 and 7800 gallons (18000 to 30000 liters), depending on the model. So compared to the 737's range, you'd burn around 4000 litres flying from, let's say, Los Angeles to Denver.

      --
      Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    4. Re:Really cold by PitaBred · · Score: 1, Informative

      The reason they use jet fuel instead of gasoline is just because of that. At cold temperatures, gas starts getting more viscous. Jet fuel needs to get MUCH colder to start getting thick and hard to use. They probably only run the generator when necessary.

    5. Re:Really cold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The problem with gasoline in those temperatures isn't so much that it gets more viscous--jet fuel gets much more viscous, in fact... The thing is, at those temperatures, gasoline isn't volatile enough to readily burn in an engine, and the compression stroke of a gasoline engine doesn't provide enough heat in those temperatures to elevate the atmosphere in the cylinder to a high enough degree to let the fuel normally burn.

      Diesels engines are what make power down there, because 1) the compression stroke does provide enough heat to ignite diesel-like fuels. 2) they're more efficient.

      They use jet fuels because they're compatible with icing inhibitors--and proper diesel engines don't mind.

  5. 14.5 centimeters? by murrdpirate · · Score: 1

    If they're going all the way to Antarctica, can't they bring some bigger telescopes?

    1. Re:14.5 centimeters? by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, you have to start somewhere! Remember that Dome A is completely remote. There is no station there, and PLATO is running without human intervention for as long as a year. The amount of fuel we could take in dictated the available power, and that in turn limited the size of telescope we could take in. Still, we have four 14.5cm telescopes, a 1.5m sonic radar, two sky cameras, 4 webcameras, a 15-m tower, and a 450 micron wavelength telescope, several terabytes of disks, a dozen computers, about 64GB of flash storage, two Iridium satellite modems.

    2. Re:14.5 centimeters? by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Let me guess, the United States is not giving you access to TDRSS? ;)

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    3. Re:14.5 centimeters? by decsnake · · Score: 1

      TDRSS is below the horizon at their location. You can barely hit TDRSS from McMurdo

      They might be able to use one of the retired birds they use for south pole comms. Once they run out of station keeping fuel they drift into a slightly inclined orbit you can see from pole for part of every day. By using several of them you can have 24 hour comms

      BTDT

    4. Re:14.5 centimeters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is TDRS-1 still operating? It was a sick bird from the start twenty-four years ago and I'd be surprised it it were still alive.

      NASA used TDRS-1 for proof of concept for GRTS in Canberra co-located with the DSN in the early 1990's to save the science data from GRO and later to close the zone of exclusion before NASA moved the third string of equipment from STGT to the GRGT in Guam.

      I know TDRS-1 was being used ten years ago to communicate with the South Pole Station because it had enough eccentricity in its orbit to be above the horizon for 3.5 hours per day. It didn't have much fuel left and NASA stopped doing stationkeeping.

      NASA used to do stationkeeping to keep the rest of the TDRS satellites right on the equator so I doubt it they would do much good close to the South Pole - at best they would be right on the horizon or a degree or two above it.

    5. Re:14.5 centimeters? by The+-e**(i*pi) · · Score: 1

      If I were you I wouldn't be advertising on a tech oriented site where you left a shit load of computer equipment just sitting outside on the ground, it may just walk away.

  6. Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by deft · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I find it interesting that they decided (probably pretty intelligently) that the eaeiest way to do this project was robotrically, instead of trying to man a mission to antarctica through the winter.

    i wonder if the same theory was applied to space travel would a mars mission be logically manned or not?

    My guess is just to prove we can, rather than actual practicality, which I'm all for because it pushes out the boundaries of what we know, and sets a goal.

    That said, i couldnt help thinking of the similarities of hostile environments. (without the distance issues)

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    1. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by dasbush · · Score: 1

      Uhm, most of our space exploration to date has been unmanned. Mars rovers, the probe that just flew by Mercury, et al. Actual time spent in space has to be greater on the robot side than on the human side. Humans can only take so much, machines are... well.. machines.

    2. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by Telvin_3d · · Score: 2, Informative

      A robotic mission makes sense in a situation where the variables are known. A robot can be designed to take care of almost any fixed situation. As long as you know where you are going, roughly what you will find and what you will do once you get there, robotic missions are a really great idea.

      Where human missions are useful is where the variables are not known. If you are not sure what will need to be done, or if depending on your initial finding the rest of the mission will change unpredictably, you need people in the loop. While the resources needed to get them there and keep them alive are initially higher than most robotic missions would be, having humans on the scene gives you far greater flexibility.

    3. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Informative

      But, um, we have had manned missions to Antarctica. And there are plenty of practical reasons for a manned mission to Mars. Like when you don't know exactly what you're looking for, for instance.

    4. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by moderatorrater · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Robotic missions make a lot of sense at first, and then it becomes more and more practical to send humans. It's a lot easier and more cost-effective for them to just send a robot to antarctica, and they're not sure if it's even worth sending that much. If they send equipment and it turns out to be a lot harder and more worthless than they thought, it's a lot easier to just leave the equipment there for recovery later, if at all. With actual humans down there, they need to send more initially to keep them alive and then they have to get them out.

      However, if it turns out to really be the ideal place for an observatory, then they'll be more likely to build the facilities out and actually send a team of people. Since we've already done the robotic exploration of mars, we can now send humans and expect a reasonable rate of return on the risk.

    5. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by Kandenshi · · Score: 1
      I'd rather not risk human life on a mission where we're basically saying

      "whoop! We're not really sure what things will be like once you get there... Not really 100% sure what we'll have you do upon arrival either... Good luck!"
      For that, I'm all in favor of some general purpose robots, followed by more fine-tuned robots :P
    6. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      I find it interesting that they decided (probably pretty intelligently) that the eaeiest way to do this project was robotrically

      Well, this isn't exactly a robot - not in the normal sense. (Compared to Spirit and Opportunity.) When you get down to it, PLATO is really just a fancy webcam. Scientifically very useful, but very limited in what it can do.
    7. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by NateTech · · Score: 1

      "Limited in what in can do" = KISS principal.

      There's absolutely nothing wrong with that either. All the so-called Software "Engineers" could learn a lesson from these guys in building purpose-built things that are simple and work!

      --
      +++OK ATH
    8. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      "Limited in what in can do" = KISS principal.

      Not true at all - a device can be limited in what it can do, and still be a fairly sophisticated design.
       
       

      There's absolutely nothing wrong with that either. All the so-called Software "Engineers" could learn a lesson from these guys in building purpose-built things that are simple and work!

      I seriously doubt anything about PLATO is 'simple'.
    9. Re:Interesting that robotic was the way to go here by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      "i wonder if the same theory was applied to space travel would a mars mission be logically manned or not?"

      Manned missions are unbeatable for inspiring people.

      We still talk and make movies about astronauts who went to the moon, but we make very few movies (I can only remember "Andromeda Strain") about space probes.

  7. "The observatory will hunt for alien planets..." by rminsk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The observatory will hunt for alien planets... Wouldn't any planet not our own be an alien planet?
  8. Gas Generator by eap · · Score: 2, Funny

    PLATO is powered by a gas generator, and has a 4000-litre tank of jet fuel to keep it running through the winter. If they can generate their own gas, why do they need jet fuel?
    1. Re:Gas Generator by s20451 · · Score: 1

      "Gas" here is in the physical state sense, not the fuel sense.

      They're using a gas turbine to generate electricity. A gas turbine is basically a jet engine, where the exhaust gases are collected and redirected to perform useful work (in this case, to turn a fan connected to the rotor in a generator). The gas generator is part of this assembly, and generates the huge volumes of gas needed to turn the fan.

      --
      Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    2. Re:Gas Generator by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping that wooshing noise you heard before you posted was the joke going over your head.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  9. Jet fuel? Great - more pollution... by Bearhouse · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Chinese, eh? Well, no need to ask about their attitudes to pollution, huh?

    The last thing that one of the greatest expaneses of reasonably unpolluted places on earth, (reasonably? They can detect significant levels of lead at both poles thanks to the worldwide use of leaded fuel), is more pollution.

    How about a large tank of hydrogen instead, guys?

  10. You can't fool me by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1
    I know that Antarctica is on the bottom part of the world and you can't see alien planets if you're looking DOWN. This is why the project "became aborted halfway in its implementation due to some reasons."

    It's just a lot of turtles, as far you can see ...

    --
    .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
  11. Tagging beta by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

    What? A "robot" tag without the compulsory "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag?

  12. awesome by Neuropol · · Score: 1

    simply awesome. I wonder if at some point they'll put them online for access and have membership accounts for controlling and data collection. Services like that are a great way to generate funds for operation. A solid membership base can help to continuously scan the skies by having people that can schedule log-ins from locations around the world.

  13. Re:"The observatory will hunt for alien planets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes...that's sort of the idea. Hunt for planets not our own.

  14. Expecially Good Because by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    It's especially good because you can look right up through that hole in the ozone layer.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Expecially Good Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "PLATO is powered by a gas generator, and has a 4000-litre tank of jet fuel to keep it running through the winter."

      I agree - sounds like a great way to speed up global warming to me. Let's put a giant furnace right on top of the biggest iceberg in the world, below the ozone hole. I trust they've got that part figured out, but still...

  15. Alien Planets by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    The observatory will hunt for alien planets

    Are there any other kind?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Alien Planets by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      The observatory will hunt for alien planets
      Are there any other kind?
      Well to put it another way, they are not interested in the planets that have green-cards.
    2. Re: Alien planets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the one we're living on isn't usually considered alien.

  16. Must.. Not.. Read.. Postings.. From.. 3rd Graders. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Antarctica claims some of the best astronomical sky conditions in the world -- devoid of clouds with steady air that makes for clear viewing.
    I've never heard Antarctica claim anything.

    Now astronomers in a Chinese scientific expedition have set up an experimental observatory at Dome A after lugging their equipment across Antarctica with the help of Australia and the US.
    In other words the Chinese couldn't do this without Australian or United States help.

    The observatory will hunt for alien planets, while also measuring the observing conditions at the site to see if it is worth trying to build bigger observatories there.
    Why aren't they looking for native planets?

    The observatory is automated, pointing its telescopes on its own while astronomers monitor its progress from other locations around the world via satellite link.
    You keep using that word automated, and on its own. I don't think it means what you think it means.

    Astronomers hope to return in 2009 with new instruments, including the Antarctica Schmidt Telescopes (AST-3), a trio of telescopes with 0.5-metre mirrors, which will be more sensitive to planets than CSTAR."
    Why do our telescopes need to be sensitive to other planets?

    -10 to IQ points after reading this.

  17. Re:Now that's cool-And Easy If Done With... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Dragging all that equipment and fuel across what is probably the most barren landscape on the planet, with weather conditions subject to change at a moments notice, is a feat.

    I doubt it would be that hard. All you need is a good sled team of Emperor Penguins.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  18. Re:"The observatory will hunt for alien planets... by s20451 · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't any planet not our own be an alien planet?

    Not if we're the lost 13th colony.

    --
    Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
  19. At the mountains of madness... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our new star-headed overlords.

  20. Re:"The observatory will hunt for alien planets... by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

    Depends on what you mean by "alien" - could just mean extra solar.

    However, an extraterrestrial planet is any non-earth planet.

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  21. What about the shoggoths? by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nice to see that you took care to make efficient use of the fuel, but did you guys find the remains of any Elder Things?. What about shoggoths? They're pretty nasty if you thaw 'em out.

  22. Re:"The observatory will hunt for alien planets... by jesdynf · · Score: 1

    Well, yes. But after BioDome 2: The Search For Beer, lawmakers have been wary about funding multi-million dollar observatories to find our own planet.

    --
    Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
  23. Re:"The observatory will hunt for alien planets... by uofitorn · · Score: 1

    "Wouldn't any planet not our own be an alien planet?"

    Exactly. I don't get the confusion. Why was this marked +3 insightful?

    --
    "What kind of music do pirates listen to?" -Paul Maud'dib
    "Yeeeaaarrrrr n' Bee!!" -Stilgar, Leader of Sietch Tabr
  24. some information on the computer control systems by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Informative

    As one of the University of New South Wales people involved, I thought slashdot might like some information on the computer systems that PLATO uses.

    PLATO uses two redundant PC/104 form factor computers running Debian Etch. The computers boot from a 4GB flash disk (we tested 5 different models in the lab, and found one that worked reliably to -60C, despite only being spec'ed to -25C; all the other models worked to -40C, but had problems below that).

    We use a readonly filesystem, with /home, /etc, and /var being created on boot in a ramdisk. This works really well, and it is nice to be able to turn off the power at any time without being concerned about filesystem corruption. Needless to say, with no possibility of any human being on-site for the rest of the year, we have thought very carefully about reliability.

    Bulk data storage is provided by terabytes of conventional disks, with the most precious data being backed up on ~64GB of USB flash disks. Conventional disks don't handle the altitude very well, so we don't like to rely on them.

    Communication is via two Iridium satellite modems, running at 2400 baud. We can push software updates by sending a set of "Short Burst Data" messages of up to 2000 bytes at a time. We can also login to PLATO using ssh, and I'm logged in as I'm typing this and running experiments.

    There is a CAN (Controller Area Network) bus running throughout PLATO and linking the two modules: the Instrument Module, and the Engine Module, 45m apart. Each of 11 nodes on the bus has a small Atmel board that can turn power on/off to experiments, digital and analog I/O, etc.

    More info, photos, and links to the health and status data are at http://mcba11.phys.unsw.edu.au/~mcba/plato

  25. Honest officer! by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1

    I wasn't perving the girls' dorm on purpose! My roboscope got a virus.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  26. Uh-Oh by JoeD · · Score: 1

    Better watch out for shoggoths!

  27. Fantastic info - why is this not modded up? by dtolman · · Score: 1

    2400 baud - ouch. At that data rate, how much data can be returned in a given day? Or is the plan to just physically pickup the bulk of the data at the end of the year for processing, and use the real time info just for guidance and target selection?

    1. Re:Fantastic info - why is this not modded up? by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Informative

      With two modems going flat out we could theoretically transfer 40MB per day. In practice the link isn't all that reliable and we would be lucky to achieve half of that. Still, it is enough to control the experiments and return reduced data to verify that everything is working. All of the health and status information fits into 12KB per day.

      The bulk of the data will be physically returned by the next Chinese traverse team, this time next year.

  28. Re:Jet fuel? Great - more pollution... by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The decision to use "jet fuel", specifically Antarctic grade kerosene, was made by the Australian team after much consideration of all reasonable alternatives. Environmental issues were foremost in our minds. PLATO produces a microscopic addition to the kerosene usage in Antarctica. We are using efficient diesel generators, and have over 200mm of additional insulation lining both modules of PLATO. Every 15 watts of heat we put in raises the internal temperature by 1 degree C.

    We have 1kW of solar panels, which provide most of the power during summer. However, when the sun is down, and with the very low windspeeds at Dome A, the choices become limited.

    We will eagerly embrace hydrogen fuel cells when they become practical. However, they are not there yet.

  29. Re:some information on the computer control system by russ1337 · · Score: 1

    Fantastic photos and interesting stuff.

    I'm a kiwi and I've worked with the Scott Base deployments out of Christchurch, but never made it there myself. Take care mate, and hope you make the news again soon!

    Cheers.

    Russ

  30. Re:some information on the computer control system by R2.0 · · Score: 1

    Checked out the pics - those generators are so CUTE! What is the spec on them, and what are you doing for low temp starts?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  31. Re:some information on the computer control system by lrohrer · · Score: 1

    So why not use short wave transmissions for data even as a backup?

  32. Re:some information on the computer control system by conlaw · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Professor Ashley,

    I'd give you mod points for your answers but there seems to be no category for comments that are simultaneously informative, interesting and insightful. Therefore, I'll just extend thanks on behalf of all of us who will benefit from this extension of knowledge and wish you great success and excellent karma.

  33. Re:some information on the computer control system by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Informative

    The engines are Hatz 1B30, we use two different generators: four are made by eCycle, and two by Mavilor. Each puts out about 1kW at 120VDC.

    To start the engines we have two banks of Ultracapacitors. These are amazing devices, 3000 Farads each, charged to 2V, with 12 in each bank arranged to give 12VDC. They can turn over the engines very quickly. We haven't had to crank an engine for more than 2 seconds yet, although we haven't dropped the engine temperatures below 0C.

    We tested the system in a pressure tank at UNSW to simulate the roughly 0.5atm pressure. The engines still work well at this altitude.

  34. Re:some information on the computer control system by hotwatermusic · · Score: 0

    Great! What was the password again?

  35. And it really does run linux.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now finally tux has a computer to play with!

  36. How PLATO got to Dome A by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 5, Informative

    For your interest, here is some information on how PLATO got to Dome A.

    The PLATO modules were built at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. Instruments were provided by our collaborators at a number of universities in China, the US, and the UK.

    In late November 2007 PLATO was trucked 3912 km to Perth, where it joined a Chinese icebreaker for a two week trip to Zhongshan station on the edge of Antarctica. A helicopter then lifted the modules off the ship and about 100km inland where they joined a traverse for the ~1200 km journey to Dome A.

    The traverse was an amazing feat. 17 people, 5 tractors. PLATO itself weighted about 10 tonnes. The traverse moves at speeds of 5-10 km per hour each day for 10 hours, and then rested for 14 hours. After three weeks of this, they arrive at Dome A. I am told that the undulating motion of the tractors over the ice can give you "sled sickness", an unpleasant variety of seasickness.

    The team spent 10 days at Dome A, and did a fantastic job of installing the experiments and getting everything working. The temperatures were around -30C, which isn't much of an issue at low wind speeds. The altitude (4090m) is more of a problem, as it makes physical work exhausting, and there are difficulties with sleeping, mental acuity, etc.

    Much more information, and a diary of the trip by the Chinese team members, is at http://mcba11.phys.unsw.edu.au/~mcba/plato.

    1. Re:How PLATO got to Dome A by pohl · · Score: 1

      Thank you for posting here. I'm shocked that nobody has created a wikipedia article from your posts yet. :-)

      --

      The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...

    2. Re:How PLATO got to Dome A by giarcgood · · Score: 1

      Prof Michael, thanks very much for adding so much to this discussion.

      I like these photos a lot as it make me remember that in all of these types of adventures, there are actually real people doing the work. Physically traveling to places that are incredibly difficult and I guess dangerous as well.

      The shot of two blokes sitting on top of the yellow box just for a photo is great. If only they were holding up a "Hi Mum" sign or something.

      Hope it all goes well.

    3. Re:How PLATO got to Dome A by Shag · · Score: 1

      The temperatures were around -30C, which isn't much of an issue at low wind speeds. The altitude (4090m) is more of a problem, as it makes physical work exhausting, and there are difficulties with sleeping, mental acuity, etc. You Aussies fund a share of the Gemini observatories - should've come hung out with all of us at 4200+m for practice! :)

      (Admittedly, we don't get to -30C. -10C is unusually cold for us.)
      --
      Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  37. please tag "plateauofleng" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, please somebody tag this story "plateauofleng". It is just so asking for it...

  38. Re:"The observatory will hunt for alien planets... by ozbird · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't any planet not our own be an alien planet?

    Only if it has aliens on it.

  39. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can a gas generator run on jet fuel?

    1. Re:Huh? by SlashWombat · · Score: 1

      Jet fuel is high grade kerosene ... Diesel is low grade kerosene ...

  40. Re:Jet fuel? Great - more pollution... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

    Got a car? Take any form of motorized transportation? Chances are that you have personally used over 4000 liters of fuel in just the past couple of years. Maybe you ought to invest in a tank of hydrogen.

  41. Resizing the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know this is off topic, but the site for the Chinese expedition resizes the browser. Slashdot warns you if the link is to a PDF, so why not have a warning for links that resize your browser? Seriously, you would think that nobody would do this anymore -- except spam and porn sites.

  42. Re: Really Wrong... by colinnwn · · Score: 1

    Why is PitaBred getting modded informative when he is wrong, and AC modded down when he is right?

    Kerosene (jet A) does become more viscous when cold than octane (traditional gas). I'm sure they use Kerosene because the viscosity increase is manageable, it contains more power per liter than gas, diesel engines are more efficient, it is safer to transport, and jet A is probably easier to get in the Antarctic.

    I wish I had some of my ethereal mod points right now.

  43. Re:some information on the computer control system by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

    Has your team considered puting the hard drives in a pressure vessel of some sort? It seems silly to put data on drives that you're afraid to rely on because of altitude problems.

  44. Re:some information on the computer control system by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 4, Informative

    Has your team considered puting the hard drives in a pressure vessel of some sort?

    Yes, we have thought about this a lot, and have never had the time to complete the design! It is the best solution, and we should be doing it. It is much easier nowadays that IDE interfaces are going away and serial connections mean that fewer cables need to leave the pressure vessel.

    If we use a USB interface, I'm a bit nervous about the reliability of Linux USB storage, or perhaps it is the controllers that interface the drive with USB. I've had many examples of filesystem corruption with external USB drives. And USB flash disks seem to have problems too. Quite often during boot a drive will give all sorts of error messages and will require power cycling to fix it. Googling for these problems show that they are common, but with no solutions that I have found.

    Our particular PC/104 computer has both USB 1 and 2 interfaces, but we can only boot reliably off USB 1, and we see intermittent failures if we use both USB 1 and 2. The flakiness of USB for storage is a major frustration.

    SATA wasn't an option on our computer. These are low-power embedded systems, so they tend to lag a bit with some of the newer interfaces.

  45. ineludible Lovecraft joke by williamyf · · Score: 1

    please post here your "at the moi=untains of madness" after this thread.

    Thank you!

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
  46. Does it float? by das_magpie · · Score: 1

    I hope the new observatory floats, if things go according to plan, its going to be spending most of its time at sea level throughout the summer months.

  47. Re:some information on the computer control system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The engines are Hatz 1B30"

    I thought you had to change the oil frequently in diesel engines. How do you manage that with visits only once per year?

  48. Re:some information on the computer control system by dargaud · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Hello Michael, are you still running your experiments at Dome C ? I haven't been there since late 2005 and I haven't been following closely.

    Do you expect the seeing to be significantly better at Dome A than Dome C ? Do you know if the turbulent layer is lower than the 30m of Dome C ? Is there winter weather information available since the chinese first set foot there in 2005 (I'd expect they left an AWS) ?

    I hope you have improved the reliability of your equipment and that it didn't get too banged up during transportation. Anyway, good luck with this experiment. Has the traverse team turned tail already ?

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
  49. I, for one, .. by Nivlheim · · Score: 1

    .. welcome our new gas generating telescopic overlords

    /hides

  50. Re:some information on the computer control system by Michael+Ashley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hi Guillaume, good to hear from you! (Slashdotters - do yourself a favour and visit Guillaume's website and have a look at some of his amazing photos). We aren't currently running anything at Dome C. Dome A is likely to have similar seeing to Dome C above the boundary layer, but the layer is expected to be lower, possibly touching the ice. That is one of PLATO's prime goals - to measure the height of the boundary layer with a sonic radar.

    The Chinese took an Australian Antarctic Division AWS to Dome A in 2005.

    Yes, the reliability of our equipment continues to improve. It is now even better than the stuff we took to Dome C!

    We mounted everything on shock absorbers to survive the 1200 km sled trip. There was no damage.

    The traverse team should arrive back in Zhongshan station today.

  51. Re:some information on the computer control system by niktemadur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well said. But don't worry about excellent karma for Prof Ashley, I've never seen a Slashdot User profile page with more +5 posts in a single thread in my life! (Darth Vader voice) "Impressive, most impressive".

    The equipment is quite modest by many standards, what impresses me is what they were able to make it portable, then freakin' sled it to one of the most remote spots on the planet. What other telescope is in a spot so completely away from artificial lights?
    I wonder what sort of image noise will be created in the images by the Aurora Australis. Or might the effect be negligible?

    I mean, the only other astronomical endeavor I can think of that was done close to either the Arctic or Antarctic Circle was in Alaska, a couple of kilometers down a mineshaft, during another species of beast altogether - the neutrino hunt. Who knows, maybe that mine is still being used for that purpose.

    Then, when the telescope is up and running, for every single observation there's calibrating, aligning, doing the time exposures... oh dear. These things are difficult enough with a crew right by the telescope. I have a friend who hasn't been able to get a single night's worth of useful data in the last four or five trips to the big telescope in my neck of the woods - the UNAM Observatory in San Pedro Martir, Baja California. Seems like every time she goes up there, something goes wrong.

    Buckle up, people, it's gonna be a wild ride Down Under! Needless to say, I'm thrilled and fascinated by the whole thing.

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  52. Re:some information on the computer control system by rcw-home · · Score: 1

    SATA wasn't an option on our computer. These are low-power embedded systems, so they tend to lag a bit with some of the newer interfaces.

    Do adapters work?

  53. It's already tagged "mountainsofmadness". by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 1

    It's already tagged "mountainsofmadness". What more do you want?

  54. Eclipse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the timing of the article, it seems surprising that nobody mentioned whether or not the observatory will be taking pictures of this month's solar eclipse, for which the best viewing area is in Antarctica.

  55. Re:Jet fuel? Great - more pollution... by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

    I'd love to - where's the technology? Even the Toyota Prius is a fraud - it has comparable or less fuel economy than a good, small diesel. Anyways, rather than carry around a ton of useless metal when I travel, I use a small 4-stoke scooter. It consumes and pollutes much less than a car. Not as safe, though...