Slashdot Mirror


Mars Winds Clean Spirit's Solar Panels Again

Titoxd writes "In a blast from the past, NASA reports that Spirit's solar panels have received a much-needed cleaning courtesy of the Red Planet. The report states, 'The cleaning boosts Spirit's daily energy supply by about 30 watt-hours, to about 240 watt-hours from 210 watt-hours. The rover uses about 180 watt-hours per day for basic survival and communications, so this increase roughly doubles the amount of discretionary power for activities such as driving and using instruments.'"

11 of 269 comments (clear)

  1. Next time . . . by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . . don't forget to pack the broom.

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
    1. Re:Next time . . . by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Informative

      They decided that a windshield wiper didn't have a good benefit/cost (in both money and weight) ratio. Especially for a 90-day mission. I understand that the best they could get the wipers to do was smear the dust around (something about static cling keeping it from coming off), so it wasn't going to do much good, anyways.

    2. Re:Next time . . . by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Funny

      Your post advocates a

      (X) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

      approach to Rover problems. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

      (X) It requires too much power
      ( ) It may make situation worse
      ( ) It doesn't solve the problem
      (X) It works here on Earth but not on Mars
      (X) It will work for two weeks and then it might get stuck
      (X) It does not account for the climate of Mars
      (X) Marvin the Martian will not put up with it

      Specifically, your plan fails to account for

      (X) Weight limitations on mission payload
      (X) Space limitations on mission payload
      (X) Extreme cold of Mars
      (X) Atmosphere of Mars
      ( ) Difference between Mars gravity and Earth gravity
      ( ) Materials don't exist yet
      (X) Survivability of materials on Mars
      ( ) Distance between Mars and Earth
      ( ) NASA bureaucacy
      (X) Technically illiterate politicians
      (X) Marvin the Martian
      (X) Democrats
      (X) Republicans
      (X) Ralph Nader

      and the following objections may also apply:

      (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
      (X) Solution is beyond mission scope
      ( ) Solution solves the wrong problem
      ( ) Only delays the inevitable
      ( ) Cost limitations
      (X) Requires redesign
      (X) Scientific instruments may have to be excluded
      ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem

      Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

      (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
      ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
      ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Next time . . . by thenickdude · · Score: 5, Funny

      Two astronauts, one faceplate?

    4. Re:Next time . . . by apostrophesemicolon · · Score: 5, Funny

      enough kids...

      now WHO gave these two too much candy??

  2. Re:Squeegee kid by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 5, Funny
    It was a martian. You see about a billion years ago, the Martian civilization discovered the secret of consiousness. Eventually the robots they created displaced them, and then when the planet's resources were depleted, they left for the stars leaving behind some curators. These curators are not really consious, their robotic creators ensured this so that they would be reliable in their task of preserving their martian heritage, but sometimes they do act in ways that are, almost uncannily lifelike.

    This was the case here. The Martian curator bots find the rovers interesting, or rather, they find their controllers interesting. They periodically dust the solar panels so that they will be able to keep roving. They are curious as to what they are doing, maybe even appreciative that someone has visited to appreciate what they have devoted the past eon to preserving. For them, watching us look is most gratifying. They really ache to communicate with us and show us all the Martian history in their underground vaults, but because of their programming to remain inconspicuous, they can't. Still, they are helpful when they can be and not give themselves away.

    --
    ...
  3. Re:How much longer? by Chabo · · Score: 5, Funny

    And of course, the scene from the TNG episode "Relics":

    "Starship captains are like children. They want everything right now and they want it their way. The secret is to give them what they need, not what they want."

    "I told the Captain I would have this diagnostic done in an hour."
    "And how long will it really take you?"
    "An hour!"
    "Oh, you didn't tell him how long it would really take, did you?"
    "Of course I did."
    "Oh, laddie, you have a lot to learn if you want people to think of you as a miracle worker."

    --
    Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
  4. Re:Amazing by evanbd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not 240 watts; 240 watt-hours. With 24.6 hours per Martian day, that's about 9.75 watts average consumption.

  5. Only on Slashdot! by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Only on Slashdot can a post that confuses power (watt) and energy (watt-hour) be modded +3 Interesting.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  6. Re:How much longer? by dlevitan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    NASA probably has a good idea. Published estimates were likely wrong on purpose from the start to give them the opportunity for more media coverage and subsequently budget opportunities.

    Not exactly. Estimates are based on worst case scenarios. What would have been the public's reaction if NASA had said that the rovers would last 1 year but they only lasted 6 months? NASA guidelines require that when something is supposed to last x months/years, then it's engineered such that it will last that long, no matter what. Specifying mission requirements is actually a tricky problem for the scientists on a mission because you want the most possible science that fits within a budget and that will last for as long as you say it will last. And usually the only way to convince NASA that something will last is if you add in backup systems. With new, expensive technology this becomes even harder.

    So yes, the rovers were conservatively estimated to last 3 months. I'm sure the scientists on the mission expected that they would last longer, but 3 months was a good benchmark that provided a good amount of science for a reasonable cost. Everything else has just been icing on the cake (and in this case, a lot of icing). Personally, I think they did a great job and cannot fault them at all.

    (I am a grad student working on a NASA mission and have seen a bit of how this process works)

  7. Screw Next time . . . by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about we all stop thinking that we have better ideas than the guys who built these incredible pieces of machinery?
    I mean the designers built two rovers that had to survive a launch from earth, months in deep space, a bouncy landing on another world, and then operate correctly with a 10 minute (Or longer) radio delay.
    That is an incredible accomplishment! Then for it to continue to operate for YEARS! I am in awe of the designers.
    Now here on /. we have a bunch of armchair engineers believing they could do better?
    Do you honestly believe that the same people who built these incredible machines didn't think of a solar panel wiper? A can of compressed air? A fan? A compressor?

    To the designers: If any of you are reading this. My hat is off to you. Well done!

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?