Slashdot Mirror
Equipment Failure May Cut Kepler Mission Short
HyperbolicParabaloid writes "According to the New York Times, an equipment failure on the Kepler spacecraft may mean the end of its planet-hunting mission. One of the reaction wheels that maintains the craft's orientation — critical to long-exposure imaging — has failed. 'In January engineers noticed that one of the reaction wheels that keep the spacecraft pointed was experiencing too much friction. They shut the spacecraft down for a couple of weeks to give it a rest, in the hopes that the wheel’s lubricant would spread out and solve the problem. But when they turned it back on, the friction was still there. Until now, the problem had not interfered with observations, which are scheduled to go on until at least 2016. Kepler was launched with four reaction wheels, but one failed last year after showing signs of erratic friction. Three wheels are required to keep Kepler properly and precisely aimed. Loss of the wheel has robbed it of the ability to detect Earth-size planets, although project managers hope to remedy the situation. The odds, astronomers said, are less than 50-50.'"
Obvious Futurama response:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Isjgc0oX0s
That little probe has been put through a lot. I guess it would be okay to let it come home a little early. Maybe it can help prepare a party for its rover friends when they make it back! :)
Worry not! NASA's TESS and ESA's Gaia missions will be there to pick up the slack. Gaia launches this year and TESS in 2017.
It's the extended mission (to 2016) that may be cut short. The primary mission is already over, in 2012.
They still have 2 reaction wheels, and also thrusters, and a fair amount of fuel. In the press release there was a discussion of options, which "are likely to include steps to attempt to recover wheel functionality and to investigate the utility of a hybrid mode, using both wheels and thrusters."
My guess is that, if they cannot recover pointed mode, they will put the spacecraft in a slow roll, which (if it is slow enough) would be good enough to detect hot Jupiters, but not Earth-like planets.
Maybe you missed the part where it mentioned the fact that they -had- redundancy, and that one had also failed?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
So we, as a species, should stop looking towards the stars and keep our noses to the ground and dig, dig until we build utopia on planet Earth? Somehow I do not think that is a long-term survival prospect for our species.
[insert link to graph showing NASA's budget as compared to DoD budget and other government agencies' budgets].
They added an extra wheel and whatnot to let it make it's mission, which officially ended in 2012. It is already in extended time and all data we get from it now is essentially a bonus.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
The shuttle had humans on it... Kepler doesn't...
Reaction Wheels on spacecraft have always had problems and fail regularly. They are only on spaceships that are flying in space as they are used to orient the ship without using fuel. Rovers don't need them.
We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
...Oh ye of little faith
You were critically hit for no damage. The bruise will look nice, and maybe the scars will make good party talk.
It's one of the only moving parts.
It also has something to do with the fact that something with (relatively) little mass has to spin at a bonkers rate to generate the reaction force required.
Using what? We have no manned space vehicles. Russia and China certainly have no vehicles designed for such a journey. And at 6 millions miles, that's 25 times the distance between earth and the moon. But I think that 6 million is wrong, I've seen other sources quoting it at 40 million. We could *manufacture* a ship to get there....but that would take some time...and be kind of pointless since the telescope could simply be replaced for a fraction of the cost.
These seem to be a relatively common source of woe for spacecraft that use them. I understand it's moving parts and all that, but surely in 0-G there can't be *that* much wear on bearings. Anyway, there seems to be plenty of work on magnetic bearings for momentum wheels, which would eliminate mechanical wear. Or is it not the bearings that fail? Can any /. readers shed some light on why these things seem to pack it in so frequently?
Kepler was launched with four reaction wheels, but one failed last year after showing signs of erratic friction. Three wheels are required to keep Kepler properly and precisely aimed, and now there are only two.
There you go.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
- Make better reaction wheels
- Make better valves
Those two things always come back when missions end, or when a rocket launch has to be delayed.
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
When America can afford to look to the stars, they should. Until then, they are wasting their time (and precious taxpayer money).
If that isn't the finest example of short-sighted thinking, I don't know what is. What you're suggesting is we wait until the last possible second to explore what might be out there just because NASA's budget represents a fraction of a percent of the overall national budget.
If you're that concerned about Federal spending, we can cut the military by 50%, stop all subsidies to business (sugar productoin, ethanol production, farm subsidies in general, scientific advances, production incentives, etc), not to mention all the entitlements people complain someone else is receiving but not the ones they're receiving.
If you want to go that way, I'll back you, but you can't then complain when things fall apart because the private sector has come to rely on government largess.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower