Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mars Rover Spirit Still Alive

Posted by timothy on from the brief-flower's-bloom dept.

Toren Altair writes with this excerpt from a story at The Space Fellowship: "NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Spirit communicated via the Mars Odyssey orbiter today right at the time when ground controllers had told it to, prompting shouts of 'She's talking!' among the rover team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. 'This means Spirit has not gone into a fault condition and is still being controlled by sequences we send from the ground,' said John Callas of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., project manager for Spirit and its twin, Opportunity."

30 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. This was a triumph! by White+Flame · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm making a note here:
    HUGE SUCCESS.

    1. Re:This was a triumph! by Sasayaki · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.

      --
      Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
    2. Re:This was a triumph! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      "the baby is crying"

      (from someone at JPL)

      At least you're not completely emotionally invested in this thing. Seriously, when it 'dies', somebody is going to need some serious counseling.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:This was a triumph! by Tavor · · Score: 4, Funny

      And I don't even work at NASA.

      You're not smart. You're not a scientist. You're not a doctor. You're not even a full-time employee. Where did your life go so wrong?

      --
      Windows has detected an undetectable error.
    4. Re:This was a triumph! by confused+one · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course people are emotionally invested. Think about it for a minute...

      *waits*

      It is not unusual for someone to put in 10 years of their life planning and building one of these things. They you have to wait for the launch, wait for it to reach Mars, and hope you get some good science out of it.

      This rover was supposed to last at least 90 days. It's still going 5 years later. They're still getting good science out of it.

      Now, with some of the people on the project having 15+ years of their lives invested in this, you expect them to NOT be emotionally invested?

  2. Everyone Dance! by compro01 · · Score: 5, Funny

    And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive.
    Ah, ha, ha, ha,
    Stayin' alive.
    Stayin' alive.
    Ah, ha, ha, ha,
    Stayin' alive.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  3. They don't make 'em like that anymore by fortapocalypse · · Score: 4, Funny

    But I wish they did!

  4. Setup a status page by Bananatree3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Abe Vigoda has one,why not the mars rovers?

    1. Re:Setup a status page by cheetham · · Score: 5, Funny

      There is even one for if the LHC has destroyed the world or not!

  5. NASA Automotives by supun · · Score: 5, Funny

    It rains and my stupid car won't start. Their little rover can travel to a different planet, survive the cold, survive dust storms, etc and keep going. Maybe instead of bailing out the "big three", we should dump all that money into NASA to make cars.

    I'm willing to risk my safety on a metric to standard conversion problem for a car that will run.

    --
    :w!
    1. Re:NASA Automotives by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree, I think your car would run pretty darn well if you had a dozen scientists and engineers continually operating and maintaining it.

    2. Re:NASA Automotives by Dzimas · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sure! But be aware that your car will cost $243 million and travel at a maximum speed of 3 mph, while taking up three lanes with its enormous solar wings. Oh, and its only under warranty for three months because of concerns about the unpredictable Terran atmosphere.

    3. Re:NASA Automotives by lysergic.acid · · Score: 4, Funny

      clearly he means that auto mechanics will be able to fix your car remotely from 35~250 million miles away regardless of where it breaks down. they can even get your car unstuck remotely if you ever get stuck in a ditch.

      suck on that OnStar! all they can do is unlock your car.

    4. Re:NASA Automotives by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Informative

      Spirit has gone 4.8 miles so far, and Opportunity has gone 7.68 miles.

    5. Re:NASA Automotives by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Funny

      "...and travel at a maximum speed of 3 mph, while taking up three lanes..."

      So, sort of like selling a Cadillac to a senior citizen?

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    6. Re:NASA Automotives by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's not fair. OnStar can also route all audio from your car to any law enforcement group that wants to keep an eye on you!

    7. Re:NASA Automotives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Spirit has gone 4.8 miles so far, and Opportunity has gone 7.68 miles.

      +36 Million miles each if you count the commute to work.

    8. Re:NASA Automotives by smussman · · Score: 5, Funny

      nah, old people only drive slow when you're in a hurry.

      I think this is more accurate.

    9. Re:NASA Automotives by silarulz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      During the Lunokhod Programme in the late 60's and early 70's, the two rovers traveled a combined distance of 47kms on the moon! Actually I think one of the rovers still holds the record for the longest traveled distance on any extra-terrestrial planet. And that's in the 70s!

      --
      silarulz!
    10. Re:NASA Automotives by necro81 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Compared to roving on Mars, the Lunokhod program had lots of things going for it.

      * The much shorter communications time, which someone else mentioned, allows near real-time operator control, so a rover can move faster and not so gingerly creep your way around. Being so much closer allows you to also use a less-powerful transmitter, or transmit more data at the same power level.

      * Being so much closer to the Earth means that it is feasible to send a much larger and heavier rover using the same rocket.

      * Being so much closer to the Sun means that there is vastly more energy available, even considering the state of photovoltaics in the 1970s. The Moon has no dust storms to obscure the panels, either. Because of its slow rotation, one has about two weeks of continuous sunlight to work with. (On the other hand, it also means that you need to build a rover that can survive for two weeks with no sunlight).

      On the whole, I'd say that the success of Lunokhod 30-40 years ago shouldn't make the Mars rovers' accomplishments seem puny today. The environments and challenges of the two locations are distinct, so the comparison isn't appropriate. Perhaps it would be better to compare the progress that has been made for each location over that time.

      How good were Mars rovers of that time compared to now? Answer: terrible. There weren't any Mars rovers until Sojourner in 1996.

      How good are the lunar rovers of today? Answer: who knows!? There haven't been any since Lunokhod. There are a few in development, from governments and private groups, but none have launched or landed yet, and won't for years still.

  6. I'm not dead! by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Funny

    "I'm getting more charged...I think I'll go for a drive..."

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
  7. Re:bellows and a nozzle? by compro01 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It would have to be quite powerful, as as far as I understand, that dust (or the rover, I forget which at the moment) has a fantastic static charge to it, so it requires a potent wind to remove it, which they've been getting on a fortunately regular basis for the past few years.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  8. Re:bellows and a nozzle? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 5, Informative

    My understanding: The thing that the designers had decided was that the weight of a dust removal system was not worth removing a scientific instrument to do so, because they had a weight and size budget to deal with. They didn't think there was an effective means to clean the dust to extend the lifetime of the rover vs. less data recovered.

  9. links... by sraviik · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_rover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_rover and http://marsrovers.nasa.gov/

    --
    4c:61:7a:79
  10. Re:Ummm by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's doing science and it's still alive.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  11. Re:Ummm by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hate to ask, but is it doing any useful science anymore?

    Even if it is still doing the same science year after year it can deliver information on longer term changes in the environment on Mars. A five year perspective is much more than 20 times more valuable than a three month perspective.

    --
    http://michaelsmith.id.au
  12. Re:Ummm by east+coast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't seeing how much longer it will live and the problems it will have just as much science as anything it's doing related to Mars?

    Consider that the powers that be decided that the price tag associated with these two gizmos was worth it for the three months worth of science they were going to get out of them. Now that they've lasted roughly 20 times as long that means something went really right, the return on investment is definitely there. But it's just as important to know what they could do better. What are the weaknesses of the system? What systems upheld the best? These systems aren't mass produced like your auto, knowing what is effective and what isn't is just as much science as their original mission. And with the data that we're collecting we're going to make better probes in the future. That's worth the money too.

    And yes, I'm sure that they're still doing science based on their original mission too. They have an ability to see things from a point of view we may not see for many more years to come. May as well get what we can while we can.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  13. Re:It is not Mars Rovers by coxymla · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't be, the chances of anything like that coming from Mars are a million to one!

  14. Re:bellows and a nozzle? by ledow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just to give some sense of the scale of the problem:

    http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA03272 http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA10128 - dirty solar panels.

  15. Re:Fail by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Informative
    I realy like the word Imperial better.

    Imperial units, which are used in England, aren't the same as English units, which are used in America. All pints in America are 95ml short, although given what's in them that's probably a mercy.

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.