Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pictures of a Comet From 9 Meters Away

Posted by Soulskill on from the whole-nine-meters dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Back in November, the European Space Agency triumphantly put a lander on the surface of a comet and then tragically lost contact with it when it failed to anchor and couldn't harvest enough energy to stay operational. In June, the lander awoke and for a short time was able to send more data back. Now the ESA has published a bunch of pictures and scientific papers about the data gleaned from Philae's short windows of activity, including images of its descent to the surface. Phil Plait summarizes and analyzes the release. The most impressive image is from a mere 9 meters over the surface of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. An animated gif shows the lander's descent near the surface through a handful of pictures. Two shots of the same area from the Rosetta probe show where Philae bounced off the surface, ejecting an estimated 180kg of material in the process. It's a fascinating, close-up look at a very distant and unusual world.

46 comments

  1. Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It is puzzling why the lander moved so radically after landing. You would have thought that the landing control systems would have nulled out velocity before committing to touch down. If it was not possible to null the velocity the attempt should have been aborted and tried again. The landing of NEAR on Eros is particularly instructive of this conservative approach.

    1. Re:Puzzling by eggstasy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Try landing on Gilly in Kerbal Space Program... any sneeze, in the near-zero gravity of a small asteroid/comet, will send you tumbling endlessly.

    2. Re:Puzzling by buchner.johannes · · Score: 4, Informative

      The relative velocities are quite low, because there is very little gravity. So their plan was not to make a jet system that reduces the landing velocity (you may be thinking of the moon landing), but instead to use a cold-gas jet to press the lander onto the surface. That system, unfortunately did not fire. Secondly (and perhaps related?), the trigger that should launch harpoons to anchor the lander did not execute. That is why it did not land, but bounce off again.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    3. Re:Puzzling by KatchooNJ · · Score: 1

      Landing was even hard in the old Lunar Lander arcade game from back in the day. heh *feeds it more quarters for fuel*

      --
      "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
    4. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right? I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home. They're not much bigger than 2 meters.

    5. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like firing the harpoons would force it away from the comet, kind of like if you are standing next to a wall and push your arm against it. If it connected properly it would be OK, otherwise a cause of trouble. It is beyond amazing that a landing on a comet has taken place.

    6. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good heavens! You would have thought the cold gas thrusters would have been checked out before a landing attempt was made. They are vital part of the control system. The more I learn about the engineering surrounding the lander the less impressed I am. ESA had years in transit to check out the spacecraft.

    7. Re:Puzzling by Guy+From+V · · Score: 2

      Moon Patrol was deceptively difficult, also...or at least the difficulty exponentially went bananas after 2-3 levels of easy boredom right smack dab into being almost impossible in addition to being boring.

    8. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      "You would have thought the cold gas thrusters would have been checked out before a landing attempt was made."

      What made you think they didn't check those?
      http://spaceflightnow.com/2014/11/12/comet-landing-is-a-go-despite-thruster-problem/

    9. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good heavens! You would have thought the cold gas thrusters would have been checked out before a landing attempt was made. They are vital part of the control system. The more I learn about the engineering surrounding the lander the less impressed I am. ESA had years in transit to check out the spacecraft.

      Perhaps they couldn't... I could imagine that a "simple" design would provide for ONE shot of the thrusters. After all, the idea was to hold the lander on the surface long enough for the harpoons to anchor it so the simplest design is to just have a valve that opens on command and it would never need to close.

      However, given that neither the thruster nor the harpoons seemed to have been deployed, what seems to have happened is the trigger that says "we are on the surface, activate the landing system" failed to work as planned for some reason.

    10. Re:Puzzling by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I blame the metric system.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    11. Re:Puzzling by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      It is puzzling why the lander moved so radically after landing.

      Puzzling to you, perhaps, but then you didn't consider the possibility that you're ill-informed.

      The landing system failed; had it worked, obviously, the lander would have, well, landed properly.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    12. Re:Puzzling by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      You would have thought the cold gas thrusters would have been checked out before a landing attempt was made.

      Oh, well, there we are then. Obviously they just had to have them "checked out" and everything would have worked fine.

      Perhaps, though, you'd care to expand that two-word phrase a little, and explain to all of us exactly how you would have ensured that this sensitive piece of scientific equipment could survive a journey of ten years through space to land on a tiny ball of spinning rock and have everything go exactly to plan with absolutely no possibility of failure.

      Landing on a comet ain't like dusting crops, boy.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    13. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I blame the metric system.

      Which metric? SLOC, defects per line of code, SLOC per hour, story points, Test pass/fail ratios?

    14. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the medical devices I work on, we have power on self tests that help assure that the device is fit for its life saving purpose. We actuate all of the gizmos and measure their performance against what is expected. You would think the engineers would have had such a test for so crucial piece of equipment as the landing restraint system. I guess. Not. I'm not impressed.

    15. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Such a self-test would be very useful, because just like your medical device, they'd just launch one of the other landers they had at hand and send the broken one in for repair.

    16. Re:Puzzling by KatchooNJ · · Score: 1

      Ah... I liked Moon Patrol. Just start it on Q or whatever the higher level start was. That avoided the overly easy (boring) bits at least some.

      --
      "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
    17. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think they didn't?

    18. Re:Puzzling by Anonymice · · Score: 1

      Not so much a malfunction as a poor configuration in the face of unexpected circumstances. The comet was apparently *much* softer than planned for, so the pressure sensors didn't pass the threshold to activate.
      They were expecting rock, when in fact, they landed in a big pile of dust. Depending on the design of the harpoons, even if they had been triggered in that situation, they might not have had much to hold on to.

    19. Re:Puzzling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They took a leaf out of Nasa's book and got the stage technician to move it. ;-)

    20. Re:Puzzling by tibit · · Score: 1

      The lander has no propulsion. Except for "hold-down" cold gas thrusters that could pin it down temporarily, but failed to fire, and harpoons, that didn't work either, there was nothing on it that could do much to alter its trajectory or retain it on the surface.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    21. Re:Puzzling by tibit · · Score: 1

      ESA had years in transit to check out the spacecraft.

      Yeah, and if the thrusters check out to be broken, then what? Do you volunteer to sponsor a repair mission?

      You're nuts. Truly, certifiably, nuts.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    22. Re:Puzzling by tibit · · Score: 1

      You know what? Pray tell what medical stuff you work on so that I'll never let it anywhere near my body. You're an idiot.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    23. Re:Puzzling by tibit · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    24. Re:Puzzling by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      You would think the engineers would have had such a test for so crucial piece of equipment as the landing restraint system.

      Of course they did. Stop being so obtuse.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  2. Cool Mammals by ememisya · · Score: 1

    Well, I guess the human race does do some interesting things when compared to other mammals.

    1. Re:Cool Mammals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I guess the human race does do some interesting things when compared to other mammals.

      You are not from PETA are you....

    2. Re:Cool Mammals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off the cuff I'm gonna play husbandry, medicine, and art. The first includes plants as agriculture.

  3. It's a Rock by xdor · · Score: 1

    Must be an ant thing

  4. Where's Jebus' face? by turkeydance · · Score: 0

    it's got to be there, somewhere.

  5. Amazing by rbanzai · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Speaking as someone who was a little kid during the Apollo era these images are amazing. I feel so fortunate to be alive in the era of solar system and interstellar exploration. Pioneer, Mariner, Viking... it's like seeing what it would look like to walk on other worlds. Visualizing just how far away the Pioneer and Voyager probes are is mind-bending. And to see new views of Pluto... it's just so awesome. :)

    1. Re:Amazing by occasional_dabbler · · Score: 1

      Me too. My earliest memory, aged four, was of Armstrong's 'giant leap' on a black and white TV. My dad woke me to watch it happen (early morning UK) and I've been hooked ever since. My favourites are the Mars rovers, what amazing pieces of kit!

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "we have a protractor"
    2. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking as someone who was a little kid during the Apollo era these images are amazing. I feel so fortunate to be alive in the era of solar system and interstellar exploration. Pioneer, Mariner, Viking... it's like seeing what it would look like to walk on other worlds. Visualizing just how far away the Pioneer and Voyager probes are is mind-bending. And to see new views of Pluto... it's just so awesome. :)

      Thanks :)
      DnsAyarim.Com
      VideoTurkiye.Net

  6. Total waste of taxpayer money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do societies continue to waste so much of their wealth on such fruitless endeavours? I can't count on two hands the number of multi-billion euro (equiv) satellites that have been lost over the last couple of decades owing to stupid engineering mistakes, like the faulty conversion of units or using the wrong grease.

    We need to take a step back and address our competency issues before we spend yet another billion euro on a lost cause.

    1. Re:Total waste of taxpayer money by joerdie · · Score: 2

      YEAH! Don't explore the galaxy! Let's spend it making more brown people in the desert miserable!

    2. Re:Total waste of taxpayer money by woozlewuzzle · · Score: 1

      How do we develop competency in space without, you know, going into space?

      Also, the money was spent on other taxpayers. The equipment is made by people who got paid using materials that were made by people who got paid. It's not like we threw cash into space - we gave cash to people in return for a fancy piece of equipment. The money, meanwhile, was spent on groceries and heating bills, and iPhones, trash bins, and shovels, and kayaks, and a bunch of other things.

  7. Space done right by kernel_user · · Score: 0

    If you want space done right, go European..

  8. Fantastic pictures by ITRambo · · Score: 1

    The pictures are great. The one of the surface looks like asphalt scarification material that's been spread out and smoothed over. Just my narrow take on it.

    1. Re:Fantastic pictures by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      someone needs to color this shit for me.

  9. USA #1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh wait ....

    1. Re:USA #1 by kernel_user · · Score: 0

      As I said earlier: If you want space done right, go European..

    2. Re:USA #1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoosh - I am European.

  10. Re:Patriarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So is this feminism or just fuckwitism Or maybe they are one and the same thing!