Philae Lands Successfully On Comet

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Philae Lands Successfully On Comet

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday November 12, 2014 @04:45AM from the amazing-job-folks dept.

The European Space Agency has confirmed that the Philae probe has successfully landed on the comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko and established contact with headquarters. The harpoons have deployed and reeled in the slack, and the landing gear has retracted. (Edit: They're now saying the harpoons didn't fire after all.) There are no photos from the surface yet, but the Rosetta probe snapped this picture of Philae after initial separation, and Philae took this picture of Rosetta. Emily Lakdawalla has a timeline of the operation (cached). She notes that there was a problem with the gas thruster mounted on top of the lander. The purpose of the thruster was to keep the lander on the comet after landing, since there was a very real possibility that it could bounce off. (The comet's local gravity is only about 10^-3 m/s^2.) The pins that were supposed to puncture the wax seal on the jet were unable to do so for reasons unknown. Still, the jet did not seem to be necessary. The official ESA Rosetta site will be continually updating as more data comes back.

122 of 188 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

second picture by schneidafunk · 2014-11-12 04:47 · Score: 1

Can someone explain what I'm looking at in the second picture?

--
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
1. Re:second picture by arth1 · 2014-11-12 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  Can someone explain what I'm looking at in the second picture?
  Nice bokeh.
2. Re:second picture by smooth+wombat · 2014-11-12 04:52 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The second picture was taken from the probe itself after it detached. According to the ongoing conference, the picture was taken exactly (their words) 50 seconds after the probe was released.
  The Sun is the bright spot in lower middle. Rosetta itself is in the upper right. Because the probe was spinning when released, there is a slight blurring of the picture.
  
  --
  We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
3. Re:second picture by Soulskill · 2014-11-12 04:52 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The blur in the center is a sunbeam -- ignore that. The boxy shape on the top right is the Rosetta probe itself. Extending to the left is Rosetta's solar panel. Here's an artist's conception of Rosetta to give you a better idea of what you're seeing. The stuff around the bottom corners and very left side of the images are just reflections/lens artifacts.
4. Re:second picture by Thanshin · 2014-11-12 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  It's the Rosetta spacecraft as seen by the Philae moments after separation.
5. Re:second picture by gstoddart · 2014-11-12 04:57 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Is your phone over 10 years old and just traveled millions of miles through space?
  No, it isn't.
  This will be, what, 14-15 year old tech by now?
  Do let us know when you get your iPhone to a comet and can send back pictures with it. Then we might be impressed.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
6. Re:second picture by ColdWetDog · 2014-11-12 04:57 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Didn't realize that J.J. Abrams was involved in this project.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
7. Re:second picture by oodaloop · 2014-11-12 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  It's a schoolbus crashing into an Aerobee.
  
  --
  Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
8. Re:second picture by xaotikdesigns · 2014-11-12 05:00 · Score: 2
  
  Don't forget bandwidth limitations. We don't have 4g connections to the lander, so downloading all those megapixels would take some time
  
  --
  XDInd
9. Re:second picture by MooseTick · 2014-11-12 05:02 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  "Is your phone over 10 years old and just traveled millions of miles through space?"
  Hasn't everything on Earth traveled "millions of miles through space" in the last 10 years?
  
  --
  Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
10. Re:second picture by An+Ominous+Coward · 2014-11-12 05:20 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Ah, the "Whoosh". Because when your poor attempt at humor is indistinguishable from idiocy, clearly it's the audience's fault.
11. Re:second picture by itzly · 2014-11-12 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  That would depend on your frame of reference, which is completely arbitrary.
12. Re:second picture by opus_magnum · 2014-11-12 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  This will be, what, 14-15 year old tech by now?
  Probably even more since space-rated gear trails by a few years at spec parity.
13. Re:second picture by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · 2014-11-12 05:27 · Score: 2
  
  The main thing that puzzled me were what look like numbers along the body of the solar panels on Rosetta - are those computer artifacts too?
14. Re:second picture by ColdWetDog · 2014-11-12 05:43 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Rough crowd tonight.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
15. Re:second picture by Anonymous Coward · 2014-11-12 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget bandwidth limitations. We don't have 4g connections to the lander, so downloading all those megapixels would take some time
  You had a 1.4 billion Euro budget and decided to save a few cents by not adding a 4G service? Shame on you.
16. Re:second picture by Pope+Hagbard · 2014-11-12 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  I am the center of my universe and everything revolves around me.
17. Re:second picture by hey! · 2014-11-12 06:24 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Bad form, calling "whoosh" on a response your own attempt at a joke. Only a third party can call "whoosh".
  
  --
  Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
18. Re:second picture by BlackPignouf · 2014-11-12 06:26 · Score: 1
  
  It looks like CCD artifacts to me (http://www.eso.org/~ohainaut/ccd/CCD_artifacts.html).
  It sometimes happen when movement or very bright light sources (e.g. the sun or metallic parts of solar panels) are involved.
  I still like my old Nikon D40 sensor thanks to its very fast flash-sync, but I get weird artifacts when shooting into the sun.
  PS: I just checked wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philae_%28spacecraft%29), and CCD sensors are used on Philae.
19. Re:second picture by Anonymous Coward · 2014-11-12 06:33 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Not only the simple age of the devices, but modern space electronics are made using exotic SOI processes (Early era devices had features so large that radiation-induced avalanches from single particle didn't matter, but then Moore's Law happened and an insulator substrate became necessary) and in terms of feature size and speed run far, far behind the state of the art commercial devices at the time of design
  Last I checked, the most powerful general purpose spaceflight-rated computer is still a rad-hard MIPS R3000 running around 300MHz with 128MB of memory. It cost a quarter million dollars, but it's also multiple redundant everything and it wouldn't even fart at a radiation dose sufficient to kill a thousand people.
  Look at the specs on New Horizons: One megapixel camera. 16GB onboard SSD... And after fifteen years cruising through space colder than a cryogenic refrigerator it wakes up and tells mission command "Ready for Pluto to come at me, bros!". Fuck yeah, science.
20. Re:second picture by NoImNotNineVolt · 2014-11-12 06:34 · Score: 1
  
  Alright, Barf.
  
  --
  Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
21. Re:second picture by camperdave · 2014-11-12 06:59 · Score: 2
  
  Whew! What a relief! I'm not a pilot, but that looks like a bad angle to be approaching a runway, especially at night.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
22. Re:second picture by Talderas · 2014-11-12 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  According to many teenage girls the boys from One Direction are the center of their universe and everything revolves around them.
  
  --
  "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
23. Re:second picture by Immerman · 2014-11-12 07:37 · Score: 1
  
  Do they have to find it funny, or only recognize that some idiot thought it was funny?
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
24. Re:second picture by Immerman · 2014-11-12 07:42 · Score: 1
  
  Sure the service was cheap, but if you thought it was difficult finding a signal in rural Siberia...
  Not to mention the difficulties in getting a compatible phone four years before the service first deployed.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
25. Re:second picture by Immerman · 2014-11-12 07:48 · Score: 2
  
  Not really - only inertial reference frames qualify for that feature. Circular motion (actually any acceleration) is absolute, easily measured, and disqualifies you as an equal member in the association of arbitrary reference frames.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
26. Re:second picture by Blaskowicz · 2014-11-12 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  I thought it was the hardened PowerPC 750 variant (i.e., a G3) at up to 200MHz.
  The MIPS R3000 I found on wikipedia runs at 10 to 15MHz ^. R3000 is very old (late 80s)
27. Re:second picture by Artifakt · 2014-11-12 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  Based on numerous examples, it's acceptable on /. to whoosh at the very presence of idocy, funny or not. Predeclared cases invoking this rule are also the only cases where a first party follow-up whoosh (FPFW, pronounced Fip-Fwu) is acceptable, but I'm going to be socially responsible and wait to see who's dumb enough to set themselves up for one and not just hand them out like candy. Don't even ask about Meta-Whooshes - The Foo-Whoosh, Bar-Whoosh and their ilk are for situations which cannot happen unless /. fixes their text encoding.
  
  --
  Who is John Cabal?
28. Re:second picture by Artifakt · 2014-11-12 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  That's amazing - you've finally come up with a convincing argument why teenage girls aren't the foundation of all wisdom. I would never have suspected that!
  
  --
  Who is John Cabal?
29. Re:second picture by Deadstick · 2014-11-12 11:06 · Score: 1
  
  "After ten years in solar freefall" would carry a bit more meaning...
30. Re:second picture by SharpFang · 2014-11-13 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  Considering about 3AU distance, if you set base stations 35km apart (maximum for GSM), to relay the signal from one to another, you'd need some 12,000,000 of them. If you spent all of the budget on base stations, they'd have to be priced about 116 euro/piece.
  I don't think you can buy a BTS for 116 euro.
  
  --
  45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
31. Re:second picture by SharpFang · 2014-11-13 01:56 · Score: 1
  
  Most of Philae subsystems (like the landing system) are based on a RTX2010 processor. It's 16-bit, and in the landing system it's running at 1.7MHz, with 64K RAM, 16K PROM, and... Forth as its native "assembler"/"machine language".
  Outside of its very original machine language, and being X-ray-hardened, these specs are quite typical to standard "industrial" control systems - processors running subsystems of a larger machines, controllers of CNC devices, and so on.
  
  --
  45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
32. Re:second picture by Optali · 2014-11-13 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know what it is but it was ALIENS
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
33. Re:second picture by david_thornley · 2014-11-13 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  Accelerated reference frames (like anywhere on the surface of the Earth) work too. The math's harder, that's all. IIRC, in the 60s or so somebody proved that the effects of circular motion can be accounted for by having the Universe turning around that point.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
34. Re:second picture by Immerman · 2014-11-13 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, you can compensate for an accelerating reference frame, but it will never be a "first class" frame from the perspective of special relativity. I would be interested to see that rotating universe proof, but it doesn't change the fact that such a transformation violates the fundamental assertion of special relativity that all non-accelerating reference frames are equally valid. As soon as you set all of spacetime spinning around a point that point becomes "special" and uniquely valid.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
35. Re:second picture by sociocapitalist · 2014-11-14 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  Is your phone over 10 years old and just traveled millions of miles through space?
  No, it isn't.
  This will be, what, 14-15 year old tech by now?
  Do let us know when you get your iPhone to a comet and can send back pictures with it. Then we might be impressed.
  I hear that's slated for iPhone 7.
  
  --
  blindly antisocialist = antisocial
36. Re:second picture by david_thornley · 2014-11-14 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, for special relativity you're correct. Sorry I can't be more specific on the rotation, but it's something I read some time ago from an apparently trustworthy source or two, you know how that goes. Of course, the only humans in a non-accelerating reference frame are in the ISS
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Congratulations! by QuietLagoon · 2014-11-12 04:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Congratulations to the European Space Agency!
.
10 years and 317 million miles.
1. Re:Congratulations! by Frederic54 · 2014-11-12 04:56 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  > 10 years and 510 million km
  
  FTFY
  
  --
  "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
2. Re:Congratulations! by QuietLagoon · 2014-11-12 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for the assist. :)
3. Re:Congratulations! by weilawei · 2014-11-12 05:19 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Jeez people, watch your units!
  
  260.7 fortnights and 2.535x10^9 furlongs
  FTFY.
4. Re:Congratulations! by soccerisgod · 2014-11-12 05:31 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The mission in it's entirety, including the planning stage, took around 25 years. Or so they said during the post-landing press conference.
  
  --
  If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
5. Re: Congratulations! by pr100 · 2014-11-12 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  Years? Doesn't sound like an SI unit. I suppose you meant 315,360,000 seconds?
6. Re: Congratulations! by GNious · 2014-11-12 06:54 · Score: 1
  
  315.36 Ms
7. Re:Congratulations! by Talderas · 2014-11-12 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  Now convert it into score and fathoms.
  
  --
  "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
8. Re:Congratulations! by oobayly · 2014-11-12 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  Seeing as it's essentially an electronic device (a big PDA) "thrown" across our solar system, I think think the preferred unit is Campbells
9. Re:Congratulations! by sidyan · 2014-11-12 10:08 · Score: 1
  
  Over 6.4 billion kilometers, actually...
  The oft-stated 510 million kilometers is merely the current distance between Earth and 67P Churyumov-Gerasimenko.
  It's taken Rosetta quite a journey to be able to match orbit with the comet.
10. Re:Congratulations! by frisket · 2014-11-12 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  Because 'Merkins use funny units like feet and pounds. Blood cholesterol is measured in teaspoons per gallon.
11. Re:Congratulations! by Megane · 2014-11-12 11:45 · Score: 1
  
  But how many stone does the probe weigh? (inb4 weight vs mass)
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
12. Re:Congratulations! by qwak23 · 2014-11-12 14:18 · Score: 1
  
  1 Rosetta Period (RP) and 1 Rosetta Length (RL).
  I typically prefer to work in units where whatever quantity I need is equal to one.
13. Re:Congratulations! by Optali · 2014-11-13 06:58 · Score: 1
  
  Metric FTW!!!
  BTW, how much are 10 years in US units? 34,2 Leapfrogs and 1/8 of a snot?
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
14. Re: Congratulations! by Optali · 2014-11-13 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  Binary seconds or Decimal seconds ?
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
15. Re: Congratulations! by Optali · 2014-11-13 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  No, it's not true!
  We also greatly enjoy gassing AC's, not to speak about vivisection !
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
16. Re: Congratulations! by Optali · 2014-11-13 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  Chill down. We can settle in Football Fields. FIFA standards for international games.
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
17. Re:Congratulations! by david_thornley · 2014-11-13 11:27 · Score: 1
  
  About 315 megaseconds and 510 gigameters.
  FTFY.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Hold on by zerosomething · 2014-11-12 04:51 · Score: 4, Informative

Harpoon did not fire. https://twitter.com/esaoperati...

--
It all starts at 0
1. Re:Hold on by amicusNYCL · 2014-11-12 04:54 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  That's what I thought. About 15 minutes ago on the live feed they had someone in the control room say that the harpoons did not fire and that Philae was not anchored to the comet. Hopefully they get it anchored, and hopefully they already got a couple pictures from the descent and landing.
  
  --
  "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
2. Re:Hold on by zerosomething · 2014-11-12 05:07 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Just saw people in the control room make hand motions that might indicate the lander bounced and drifted around a bit. Hopefully they are just speculating till they get better data.
  
  --
  It all starts at 0
3. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · 2014-11-12 05:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Couldn't firing it's harpoons after it's lost all it's forward momentum just launch it off the comet?
4. Re:Hold on by avgjoe62 · 2014-11-12 05:11 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Harpoon did not fire
  I understand that a Greenpeace boat got in the way...
  
  --
  How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?
5. Re:Hold on by zerosomething · 2014-11-12 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  Harpoon did not fire
  I understand that a Greenpeace boat got in the way...
  It was probably a German made harpoon too, not Japanese or Norwegian
  
  --
  It all starts at 0
6. Re:Hold on by Ken_g6 · 2014-11-12 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  I understand that a Greenpeace boat got in the way...
  Or was it a piece of a green ship?
  
  --
  (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
7. Re:Hold on by MyLongNickName · 2014-11-12 05:48 · Score: 1
  
  My understanding is that the harpoons were one of two ways that ESA was going to secure the probe to the comet. There were also screws that were supposed to attach the legs to the surface. So if they can still fire the harpoons they ought not have an issue with Philae flying off into space, but does anyone with more information on the relative strength of each? And if the harpoons could not be fired... what is the real risk of the probe shifting? I mean what would cause it to shift in the first place once settled on the comet?
  
  --
  See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
8. Re:Hold on by MyLongNickName · 2014-11-12 05:52 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Now that I think about it, if Philae did not bounce off of the comet, then the screws must be doing their job and I would think the harpoons might not be needed at all. I would assume the harpoons were in the plans because the engineers couldn't be sure the screws would work on the surface of a comet.
  
  --
  See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
9. Re:Hold on by JoeSchmoe999 · 2014-11-12 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  Or maybe a slightly different Green ship that dislikes harpoons http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.memory-alpha.org%2Fwiki%2FHMS_Bounty&ei=w51jVMQbiqPJBPekgfgF&bvm=bv.79189006,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNHGWio54fRZSnhTUHC5d88oOb7nAw&ust=1415900978182699
  
  --
  You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.
10. Re:Hold on by Immerman · 2014-11-12 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Pretty impressive actually. The anchoring harpoons didn't fire, the downward-facing landing jets didn't fire. And it *still* managed to land successfully. Bodes well for future missions - it would appear it's easier to land on a comet than expected. Or at least easier to land on *this* comet. But, guys, your hardware needs work.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
11. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · 2014-11-12 08:12 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  So if they are screwed, then they are fine, right?
12. Re:Hold on by catmistake · 2014-11-12 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  Harpoon did not fire. https://twitter.com/esaoperati...
  
  Broken Harpoon
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
13. Re:Hold on by ccanucs · 2014-11-12 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  Or a Klingon battle cruiser on a mission to bring a comet back into the 24th century :-)
14. Re:Hold on by ccanucs · 2014-11-12 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  (Not a bird of prey as someone else pointed out - you need a bigger ship to snag a comet ;-) )
15. Re:Hold on by weilawei · 2014-11-12 10:19 · Score: 1
  
  I've some some blu-tack they can scrape off my wall! That stuff never comes off.
  
  Of course, I'm referring to the wall, not the object it's supposed to hold...
second picture by j-b0y · 2014-11-12 04:53 · Score: 4, Informative

Rosetta solar panels at the top of the image, with the main body of the probe top right. The sun was causing lots of straylight in the image and it was quite saturated, so they had to do some major fix-up work to get anything sensible, hence the wierdness that you see on the left hand side.

--
Please remain calm, there is no reason to pani... wait, where are you all going?
Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta events by Thanshin · 2014-11-12 04:55 · Score: 5, Informative

https://twitter.com/Philae_MUP...
https://twitter.com/Philae2014
https://twitter.com/esa_rosett...
http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/
Re:No anchors and the jet didnt work. by ColdWetDog · 2014-11-12 05:01 · Score: 1

Reliable information about anchor temperature shall come frum MUPUS ONLY. 3rd parties please stop speculating and tweeting
Hang on (both literally and figuratively). Wait for the computer. The computer is your friend.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Not bad. . . by smooth+wombat · 2014-11-12 05:02 · Score: 4, Interesting

for a government run operation.
Congrats to everyone at ESA, especially to all the people behind the scenes you never get to see but whose contribution to this project cannot be overstated.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
1. Re:Not bad. . . by NoImNotNineVolt · 2014-11-12 09:53 · Score: 3
  
  Indeed, if they keep it up, they'll soon have caught up to the Walmart probe out in the Kuiper Belt, the Apple spacecraft out exploring the Oort cloud, and the Exxon-Mobil "lander" navigating the depths of the seas on Titan.
  
  You say "for a government run operation" as though those weren't the most impressive operations to date.
  
  --
  Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
2. Re:Not bad. . . by Optali · 2014-11-13 07:25 · Score: 2
  
  Sorry mate, but last time I checked we didn't have an European Government.
  And ESA is a joint venture of a good bunch of private AND public companies.
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
Re:No anchors and the jet didnt work. by ColdWetDog · 2014-11-12 05:10 · Score: 2

I’m on the surface but my harpoons did not fire. My team is hard at work now trying to determine why. #CometLanding
I knew they should have sent a real harpooner along on this trip. You can't just automate everything.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
sloppy wording by iggymanz · 2014-11-12 05:13 · Score: 1

No, the acceleration due to comet's gravity is a thousandth of a meter per second squared. The gravitational field itself is a vector quantity.
1. Re:sloppy wording by blueg3 · 2014-11-12 09:48 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't say "gravitational field". It says "[t]he comet's local gravity".
  I'll have you know that acceleration, like gravitational field, is also a vector quantity.
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by Anonymous Coward · 2014-11-12 05:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

Excuse me for being a curmudgeon, but why the crap do they need half a dozen twitter accounts?
There's @esa (ok, great, your organization has a twitter account), @esa_rosetta (oh... ok, a twitter account for each mission seems redundant, but...), @Philae2014 (now hang the fuck on, you gave the LANDER a twitter account?), @esascience (as opposed to what, the esa_cooking_show?) and @esaoperations (...what was wrong with the other four accounts?!)
This is why I don't do "social media". The S/N ratio isn't just out of whack, it's non-existent. Everything is just bloody noise.
More images... by Camel+Pilot · 2014-11-12 05:18 · Score: 1

List of images....
http://www.reuters.com/article...
Hoping for some larger resolution of these. Fantastic the surface of a comet close up.
Flickr by Camel+Pilot · 2014-11-12 05:20 · Score: 1

Ahh here they are...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/...
Re:No anchors and the jet didnt work. by zerosomething · 2014-11-12 05:22 · Score: 1

Did they name the Harpoon "Queequeg"? tell me they didn't.

--
It all starts at 0
News coverage by johnw · 2014-11-12 05:22 · Score: 5, Interesting

Having checked a number of on-line news sites, the best real-time coverage seems to be on XKCD
1. Re:News coverage by WhiteDragon · 2014-11-12 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  Having checked a number of on-line news sites, the best real-time coverage seems to be on XKCD
  yes, that's how I found out about it.
  
  --
  Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
2. Re:News coverage by Jason+Levine · 2014-11-12 05:54 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I loaded XKCD late in the game an thus missed some of his humorous updates regarding the landing. Luckily, XKCD1446.org has compiled all of them and you can flip through them from the first (blank) image to the most recent.
  
  --
  My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
3. Re:News coverage by flowerp · 2014-11-12 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  the site (I kid you not) is mained by MagicalTux (aka Mark Karpeles)
  
  --
  --- Eat my sig.
4. Re:News coverage by flowerp · 2014-11-12 05:58 · Score: 2
  
  relevant reddit link
  http://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/2m1mvp/xkcd_1446/cm0765k?context=1
  
  --
  --- Eat my sig.
5. Re:News coverage by BlackPignouf · 2014-11-12 07:05 · Score: 2
  
  Except for the fact that Randal wrote "U.S. Scientists: Proud" for a european achievement. (http://xkcd1446.org/img/r_16-25-00_MZ7aAUNWN5.png).
  I realize NASA worked on some parts for this project, but it still looks a bit like chauvinism.
  He then corrected it (http://xkcd1446.org/img/r_16-55-00_bD01qtUkFk.png).
6. Re:News coverage by Megane · 2014-11-12 11:51 · Score: 1
  
  XKCD1446.org
  Someone in another thread was complaining that there were four twitter accounts being used by ESA. But now someone has created an entire domain for a single XKCD comic? I mean, explainxkcd could have a better presentation for #1446 but there's no reason to create a whole new freaking domain for this.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Queequeg by Camel+Pilot · 2014-11-12 05:35 · Score: 2

I can only hope they named the Harpood system Queequeg...
1. Re:Queequeg by Deadstick · 2014-11-12 11:09 · Score: 1
  
  There seems to be one on each of three landing gear legs, so Queequeg, Tashtego and Daggoo would be appropriate.
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by Your.Master · 2014-11-12 05:37 · Score: 1

You think the signal to noise ratio would be improved by less granularity?
For the mathophobes... by Radical+Moderate · 2014-11-12 05:39 · Score: 1, Interesting

Earth's gravity is roughly 10m/s^2, so the the comet's gravitational attraction is about ten thousand times weaker than ours. Disclaimer: I am not a physicist, and yes, I know "ten thousand times weaker" is crappy phrasing.

--
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
1. Re:For the mathophobes... by ScentCone · 2014-11-12 06:08 · Score: 2
  
  Disclaimer: I am not a physicist, and yes, I know "ten thousand times weaker" is crappy phrasing.
  So ... don't phrase it that way? What the hell is wrong with "one ten-thousandth as strong," anyway?
  
  --
  Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
2. Re:For the mathophobes... by jules_d'entremont · 2014-11-12 07:03 · Score: 2
  
  So, the weight of this 100 kg lander would be about 1 newton, or the equivalent of 100 grams on Earth. That's a little more than 2 golf balls. It's a wonder they can land that without it bouncing off.
  Actually, 0.1 newton, or 10 grams - the weight of 2 nickels.
3. Re:For the mathophobes... by Immerman · 2014-11-12 08:38 · Score: 1
  
  Nope, gravity doesn't work that way. You'd need 10,000 comets crammed into the same volume as the current one to get Earth-normal surface gravity. Out in the real world though adding mass adds volume, which increases the radius, which reduces surface gravity. Basically volume (and mass) increase with the cube of radius (m=A * r^3), while gravity falls off with the square (g = B/r^2), so at a given density surface gravity increases with the cube root of mass (gs = K * m / (m^1/3)^2 = K*m^1/3), or roughly linearly with radius.
  Which is why Mars, which has half the radius and 1/10th the mass of Earth manages to still have 38% the gravity
  So, for 10,000 times the surface gravity you'd need 1,000,000,000,000x the mass.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
4. Re:For the mathophobes... by jeffb+(2.718) · 2014-11-12 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  Or, you would need 10 000 comets mashed together into the same volume to have the surface gravity of earth.
  ...and they wouldn't stay that squished for very long. The explosive rebound of the comet's surface would vastly exceed its escape velocity. Or, to put it more succinctly, BOOM. Unless, of course, you can wrap it in a stasis field, or stabilize it with some other layer of handwavium...
5. Re:For the mathophobes... by SharpFang · 2014-11-13 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, as news show, they can't. But two bounces later they are landed okay.
  
  --
  45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by geekmux · 2014-11-12 05:39 · Score: 1

Excuse me for being a curmudgeon, but why the crap do they need half a dozen twitter accounts? There's @esa (ok, great, your organization has a twitter account), @esa_rosetta (oh... ok, a twitter account for each mission seems redundant, but...), @Philae2014 (now hang the fuck on, you gave the LANDER a twitter account?), @esascience (as opposed to what, the esa_cooking_show?) and @esaoperations (...what was wrong with the other four accounts?!)
This is why I don't do "social media". The S/N ratio isn't just out of whack, it's non-existent. Everything is just bloody noise.
They probably thought they could get paid sponsorships from Red Bull, or whatever stupid shit is the motivator behind rampant eNarcissism these days.
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by tibit · 2014-11-12 05:42 · Score: 1

I do. The updates are so few that splitting them between the lander and the orbiter is nuts. Similarly, a split between @esa and @esascience is nuts as well.

--
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
Re:Amazing by Urkki · 2014-11-12 05:46 · Score: 2

How did they know the harpoons would be able to remain lodged in the target?
That is easy: They didn't.
Re: Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta ev by jovius · 2014-11-12 06:15 · Score: 1

Multiple accounts are useful, for example to bundle up news on certain topics only. It's no different from following only certain RSS feeds of a news site. It's good service and a way to filter the signal out of noise.
Moby Dick by ThatsNotPudding · 2014-11-12 06:18 · Score: 1

"Had his chest been a cannon, he'd have shot his Philae upon it." Or something.
It CAN'T land on a comet - see thunderbolts projec by Anonymous Coward · 2014-11-12 07:26 · Score: 1

"Edit: They're now saying the harpoons didn't fire after all."
It's irrelevant. Even if they did fire, the electrical system would be shorted out. It can't work. It's not possible.
More here and here
Re:It CAN'T land on a comet - see thunderbolts pro by vikingpower · 2014-11-12 07:46 · Score: 1

Holy crap. The EU fruitcakes here.... wow. Normally, I never react upon ACs, but your stupidity, Sir, blows my mind more than a 1 TeraVolt/meter electric field could ever do.

--
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Re:It CAN'T land on a comet - see thunderbolts pro by Immerman · 2014-11-12 07:58 · Score: 1

Well there's a couple minutes of my life I'll never get back. They appear to not even understand such simple concepts as ice != water ice.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Re:No anchors and the jet didnt work. by Immerman · 2014-11-12 08:04 · Score: 1

Nah, that would be a good name for the launcher, but the harpoon should be named Agrajag.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by tibit · 2014-11-12 08:12 · Score: 1

It's not as if you can't be logged into the same Twitter account from multiple locations...

--
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
I'll toast to that by danknight48 · 2014-11-12 08:13 · Score: 1

*Opens up the special bottle from 1980's*
Finally a news summary story on /. that is, exactly what is is ;) (hats off to soulskill)
Re: Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta ev by tibit · 2014-11-12 08:14 · Score: 1

Except when different pieces of news from the same freakin' lander are reported on different Twitter handles. That's when multiple accounts are counterproductive. I think that ESA's approach to PR is a bit broken.

--
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
Escape velocity. by Camel+Pilot · 2014-11-12 08:34 · Score: 1

The escape velocity is around 1 m/sec so it wouldn't take much to send the probe off again. A good jump from 67P would send you flying away (or maybe in orbit).
Re:Amazing by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · 2014-11-12 08:36 · Score: 1

How did they know the harpoons would be able to remain lodged in the target?
Like moons are made from cheese, comets are made of whale-meat.
Re:It CAN'T land on a comet - see thunderbolts pro by catmistake · 2014-11-12 09:06 · Score: 1

Holy crap. The EU fruitcakes here.... wow. Normally, I never react upon ACs, but your stupidity, Sir, blows my mind more than a 1 TeraVolt/meter electric field could ever do.
I know, right? Its incidental that comet action is electrical... its just an effect. Comets are nucular... they're really just flying nucular ractors.

--
The Admin and the Engineer
ESA PR sucks by TheSync · 2014-11-12 10:17 · Score: 1

I think the ESA media relations is pretty bad. There is really no explanation of what is going on now...
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by qwak23 · 2014-11-12 14:23 · Score: 1

My cat just tweeted an angry reply to your post.
We're whalers on a comet......now with harpooning by Slagothor · 2014-11-12 18:39 · Score: 1

We're whalers on a comet.....now with harpooning action!
It worked by omast · 2014-11-12 23:56 · Score: 1

We've got a picture: http://www.esa.int/spaceinimag...
So, by now... by SharpFang · 2014-11-13 02:20 · Score: 1

By now ESA has scored three successful comet landings.
With the same lander, on the same comet.
I think that's cheating,

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Re:Links for a quick review of today's Rosetta eve by SharpFang · 2014-11-13 02:33 · Score: 1

Actually, the split is lesser.
@esa_rosetta and @Philae2014 are popular-PR accounts for fun, relaxed reporting, supposed to chat with each other - something kids can watch.
@esaoperations is the team responsible for delivering the lander to the destination, so it's your primary source of news on the landing itself,
@esascience are the guys who operate all the scientific equipment on-board, and you'll get whatever Philae discovers from them - it's still quite a while before they have anything worthwhile to report.
@esa is organization-wide. They have quite a few more things to report than just Philae, and you will only see retweets, press notices etc from there - a secondary source.
For now, just follow @esaoperations and switch to @esascience in a couple days.

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Re:Amazing by SharpFang · 2014-11-13 02:39 · Score: 1

Well, informed guess. The harpoons were to be fired at 250 km/h, with good several grams of metal (I don't have the exact specs but they are about pencil-sized).
That means if there's a lot of dust, they would just bury and provide some anchoring. If there's porous rock or ice, they would firmly lodge. The only case where they wouldn't work is smooth rock at angle that would cause a bounce, or rock brittle enough that the harpoons would punch a hole much larger than the hook, so it wouldn't hold. Generally a pretty good chance to get it working.

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2