Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russia Lost a $45 Million Satellite Because 'They Didn't Get the Coordinates Right' (gizmodo.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the good-enough-for-government-work dept.

Last month, Russia lost contact with a 6,062-pound, $45 million satellite. Turns out, that happened because the Meteor-M weather satellite was programmed with the wrong coordinates. Gizmodo reports: On Wednesday, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin told the Rossiya 24 state TV channel that a human error was responsible for the screw-up, according to Reuters. While the Meteor-M launched last month from the Vostochny cosmodrome in the Far East, it was reportedly programmed with take-off coordinates for the Baikonur cosmodrome, which is located in southern Kazakhstan. "The rocket was really programmed as if it was taking off from Baikonur," Rogozin said. "They didn't get the coordinates right." And the rocket had some precious cargo on board: "18 smaller satellites belonging to scientific, research and commercial companies from Russia, Norway, Sweden, the U.S., Japan, Canada and Germany," Reuters reported.

101 comments

  1. Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's ridiculous just how xenophobic everyone, users and editors alike, are against Russians. It's basically a bunch of McCarthyism, and that's unfortunate. These articles are probably what it's like to attend a KKK meeting if the KKK hated Russians.

    1. Re:Slashdot racists will be out in force by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0, Troll

      These articles are probably what it's like to attend a KKK meeting if the KKK hated Russians.

      Except the KKK loves the Russians. It's the Jews, blacks and Catholics the KKK hates.

      But other than that, and the fact that it's completely wrong, it's a very good comparison.

      And we know something the KKK loves:

      http://fortune.com/2016/11/02/...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      To my knowledge, none of the various tiny pieces that remain of the klan endorsed Trump for 2016 or 2020. I know a Klansman is on video endorsing Hilary, but hey, you probably don't buy that.

      Why would the Klan love Russia? Why do you hate Russia?

    3. Re:Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love Russians. I just know the difference between that and TRUSTING VLADIMIR PUTIN, OR DONALD TRUMP. These faggots have no likable qualities, and are traitors.

    4. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Why would the Klan love Russia? Why do you hate Russia?

      The Klan loves Russia because it's white. The Rus were Viking.

      Why do you hate Russia?

      I don't hate Russia, but Putin can eat all the dicks.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh dude, jesus

    6. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You bring up an interesting point; when the Varangian Rus invaded Russia, the Varangians were Scandinavian, the native Russians were Slav. Well, the same things happened with the Vikings in England and the Normans in France; a Scandinavian Ruling Class evolved.

      Russia is weird in a way; they want Warm Water Ports... well everybody wants those. But since the time of Peter the Great, they've wanted, as a National Policy, a ring of subservient Client States who will blunt the Next Invasion, because Russia, whether Empire or Soviet or Federation, for over a thousand years keeps on being invaded. I think that this is quite old-fashioned now; Ballistic Missiles sort of makes Invasion obsolete, but Crimea is quite important to Russia for just those two historical goals. Missile/Rocket Technology is just another recent Tool.

      As far as the KKK goes, they are just regular old American Morons. They would hate Russians too if they thought about it a bit, but they don't think much. It was from the word Slav that the word for their favorite Institution, Slavery, was derived.

    7. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As far as the KKK goes, they are just regular old American Morons. They would hate Russians too if they thought about it a bit, but they don't think much. It was from the word Slav that the word for their favorite Institution, Slavery, was derived.

      Yeah, I've known a couple of more, uh, advanced skinheads who really hated everyone who wasn't a white Aryan, and who actually knew about the slav thing. Sadly, there's no shortage of well-educated racists, although they certainly aren't in the majority.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aww, poor baby. Maybe log into your bogaboga account and continue spreading that propaganda. That'll help win the Russians some more respect!

    9. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      We don't hate Russia or the Russian People. However Putin's Russian authoritarian government we have problems with. Being that he used his power to spam social media to Polarize Americans, by taking our political differences and putting a wedge between them. Creating protests and counter protests not to push an agenda of the protest, but to push Americans into instability.

      If you find yourself hating Liberals, or Hating Conservatives much more today then you did last year, then chances are you were influenced by Putin's Media Blitz.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      There's nothing weird about Russia wanting warm water ports , of course, you wrote that. But there's nothing weird about Russia wanting a buffer of client states to blunt land assaults. Ballistic missiles being used would likely mean nuclear war, and that's a losing proposition for all sides. Land assaults can be done today, since they always relied upon political preparation and semi-surprise. So reestablishing the Warsaw Pact 'alliances' is very useful for Russia, and clearly NATO establishing relations and membership with those states moves the political/military line of defense further east, which is not good for Russia.

      It makes sense. Russia under Putin is behaving both predictably and rationally. Their limited attempts to influence politics in other nations is also rational, and is unexceptional. Not that it shouldn't be exposed, denounced as diplomats do, and even perhaps countered, but it's predictable. Most nations do this, and a surprising number of nations that would not seem to have a stake in the outcomes of other nations' affairs do so just to establish their cyberwarfare capabilities. Imagine this - if you could, with a minimal investment in armament, such as a crate of AK-47s and a few dozen land mines, develop a military capability that would bring American to its knees, would you? That's the equivalence of cyberwarfare. It take surprisingly little in resources to wage cyberwar at the same level, and with equal results, against any nation, large or small. If for no other reason, some tinpot/crackpot dictators do this just to pump themselves up, distract the opposition foreign and domestic, and extract concessions or aid from other nations. Win-win. All you have to do is know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

      Of course Russia messes with us. Duh.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    11. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The rus(sians) are not vikings.
      The rus(sians) are slavic, the vikings are germanic (or teutonic as the english oddly call the germanic tribes).

      And yes, if you look at it from a 'racial' point of view: they look completely different.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Strictly speaking, the Aryans are not white, and blonde hair is super rare amoung them. But we do not need to tell that KKK and Nazis.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    13. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weak-minded americans can easily be duped by a couple of advertisements. An entire population of dolts led down the path by whoever dangles a shiny bauble in front of their noses. Either americans are even stupider than the rest of the world thinks or your narrative is wrong.

      The truth is, the american people got the government that they wanted and voted for. Yup, they did it all by themselves and most seem rather proud of it.

    14. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it does get complicated here, because the Vikings probably weren't Germanic. This is all new stuff; the last paper that I read on it is just a year old, but various Genome Projects are looking at bits of ancient DNA, and if you go back far enough, it looks like what became the Finns/Swedes took a high Northern route _West_ from somewhere way beyond the Urals, and a few thousand years later went East again, basically skipping Western and Central Europe completely.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N-M231

      This is quite controversial, especially in Russia. Heyerdahl posited that "Odin" was an actual King about 2000 years back, before he got promoted, and that the various stories associated with him and his horse "Sleipnir" had their origins in Central Asia, possibly around present-day Mongolia/Kazakhstan, which is not only not Russian, it isn't even Slavic.
      "Teutons" comes simply from the Gaulish word for "Peoples", and until fairly recently, referred to Peoples not of modern German territory, but that of the once much larger Poland and Lithuania further East. The Germanic Tribes were known as the Franks... which somehow wrongly became France; the old French were more Celtic than German. What in English is called German has very little to do with an actual Territory, Language or People, it meant "closely-related", and survives in the meaning of the word Germane. Dutch/Deutsch were what those Peoples referred to themselves as.
      We are just now beginning to untangle Legend from Language from DNA.

    15. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by virve · · Score: 1

      The rus(sians) are not vikings.

      Eh, sort of. The founders and leaders of the Kievan Rus were Vikings.

      Allegedly, the origin of Rus is in Roslagen (in Sweden) similarly to the word in Finnish Ruotsi for Sweden.

      You would likely be able to unconfuse yourself, if you distinguished by Rus and Russians; also the ruling classes and the great unwashed masses.

      The rus(sians) are slavic, the vikings are germanic (or teutonic as the english oddly call the germanic tribes).

      The term Teutons goes back, at least, to Strabo.

    16. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's also the old invading Ukraine and shooting down an airliner nothingburger.

    17. Re: Slashdot racists will be out in force by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Of course some cities in Russia are founded by Vikings ... that does not change the fact that Vikings/Germans and Russians/Slavic People are two different ethnic groups.

      Cologne was found by Romans, but there mainly always only lived Germans/Teutons.

      German is the correct name (but the english don't use it) for the group of teutonic tribes living in Germania (hence the name) ans Skandinavia.

      The Teutons are just a single tribe, getting famous for attacking Rome. For some reason the english speaking historians picked that tribes name to classify all teutonic tribes.

      It is like calling all red wines Chianti or all black tees Darjeeling.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  2. That's human error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    If it falls down because a nation uses the imperial system from centuries ago, it's human stupidity.

    1. Re:That's human error by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      US Trident II missiles do all their targeting in coordinates of new groats per old hogshead per mile per fortnight squared. This ensures that only US personnel can program them.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:That's human error by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      ... or British people over the age of 80.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:That's human error by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      This is probably the reason the UK is the only export customer for Trident II, despite valiant attempts by Lockheed Martin to find more.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:That's human error by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Depending on the price tag, I would buy one or two.
      Or take them as gifts!

      I like fireworks!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  3. Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    caus everyone likes old news

  4. Customer Service by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    And the rocket had some precious cargo on board: "18 smaller satellites belonging to scientific, research and commercial companies from Russia, Norway, Sweden, the U.S., Japan, Canada and Germany,"

    I'm wondering, if you pay Russia to launch a satellite for you and they fuck it up, do you get a refund? I hope those countries kept their receipts.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re: Customer Service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Perhaps they should stop launching satellites that pollute space with junk. Businesses should be prohibited from launching new satellites, unless they're safely deorbiting an existing one at the same time.

    2. Re:Customer Service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If this is anything similar to SpaceX, you get to choose from: a large refund for a new flight or a new flight. a new flight is usually scheduled a lot sooner than buying a new flight later, but a refund is nice when you can't afford a new satellite. The satellite itself (usually a lot more expensive than the launch cost) is not refunded, you have to ensure that yourself. It's usually insured separately for everything until engine ignition (transport, integration onto the rocket, etc.), everything between engine ignition and making contact in orbit (the correct orbit), and optionally for N years of operation after than. When launching a large set of satellites in several launches the owner can take a bit of a hit and pays for the first failure, resulting in much lower insurance cost. For example for the new Iridium network, the remaining 6 sets of 10 satellites where launched a few month after the first set of 10, because the insurer (for N years of lifespan) wanted to be sure there where no technical problems with the first 10.

    3. Re:Customer Service by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Typically, the owner of the satellite(s) buys insurance. In the event of a launch accident, the insurance pays for the cost of the satellites and launch fees. The rate of launch failures is high enough (about 1 in 30) that insurance is prudent. But it's consistent enough that the insurers can make money off of it.

      Given the extremely limited number of countries/companies offering launch services, I doubt any of them give you a refund if a launch fails.

    4. Re:Customer Service by jaa101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given the extremely limited number of countries/companies offering launch services, I doubt any of them give you a refund if a launch fails.

      The launch providers are still penalised for failure, even if their contract has no financial penalty. The insurance rates are set according to risk and every failure makes a provider seem riskier. This means that failures make providers less competitive in the market.

    5. Re:Customer Service by 4im · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Some companies have started so small that they couldn't afford insurance, they just bet all on the launch succeeding. Have a look at the early history of SES - their very first satellite, Astra 1A, went up without insurance. Had the Ariane rocket exploded, nobody would be talking about SES, and chances are sat TV would have developed quite differently.

    6. Re: Customer Service by hackwrench · · Score: 0

      LaGrange points, you know all of that Sciency stuff? Everything is going to move exactly as it must.

    7. Re:Customer Service by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Ahh, the magic of the limited liability corporation...

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    8. Re:Customer Service by careysub · · Score: 1

      Satellite Insurance is commonly used. Having a launch failure pay for the payload is very unusual. Maybe the launch contract should have a "really stupid mistake" clause wherein they pay for the satellite (or else the insurance premium) if it the accident is not due to an unavoidable hardware failure.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    9. Re:Customer Service by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Russian law, but under U.S. law, the insurance company would pay the insured, and would subsequently go after the responsible party (in court, if necessary) to recover its losses (assuming that the gross negligence can be adequately proven).

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    10. Re: Customer Service by EndlessNameless · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which satellites, exactly, get anywhere near a LaGrange point? Nothing in orbit, that's for sure.

      I ask because it sounds like you're throwing out "space" words without knowing what they mean.

      The nearest LaGrange points are very very far from satellites. Geosynchronous satellites are ~35,000 km (the highest orbit we really use), compared to the L4/L5 LaGrange points at ~380,000 km. Nothing is going to just drift over there. Anything in Earth orbit is either staying there for a long time or burning up on its way down.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    11. Re: Customer Service by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Who modded this nonsense up?

      Low orbit cleans itself up by atmospheric drag. There just isn't that much stuff in other orbits to worry about collision hazards. Further, it's not feasible to deorbit dead satellites out of geostationary orbits, but that's OK because there aren't many satellites there to start with, and won't be for a very very long time.

      Cut back on the socialism for a second to examine the facts and you'll breathe easier.

    12. Re: Customer Service by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they should stop launching satellites that pollute space with junk. Businesses should be prohibited from launching new satellites, unless they're safely deorbiting an existing one at the same time.

      I bet you think it's long way down the road to the chemist's, too.

  5. someone's going to Siberia? by k6mfw · · Score: 1

    it has happened before (wrong numbers, longterm deployment deep in the forest,...)

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
    1. Re:someone's going to Siberia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so? They have internet in Siberia. Getting reassigned and/or forcibly retired sounds like a great opportunity to code Free Software full time. It's a win-win-win situation for the Free Software movement. All hail GNU Stallman! Zeig Heil!!

      CaptCha: triumphs

    2. Re:someone's going to Siberia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing wrong with Siberia, it is actually a rather nice destination now, though deathly cold in the winter.

    3. Re:someone's going to Siberia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cold winters are perfect for bitcoin mining. Rig me up!

    4. Re:someone's going to Siberia? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Yes. But they got the coordinates wrong.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  6. Bull. Shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I am American and I know this "report" is based on deep state propaganda about true Russia capabilities. CIA/NSA just not want to admit that they are significantly behind Russia in capability. Sad.

  7. Russians TERRIBLE at maths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so this is what is to be expected. Russians think like Putin, which is where can I steal my next ruebull.

    1. Re:Russians TERRIBLE at maths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nazis were first to space, and Russians were first to orbit. American yank-offs only went to the moon because America had already lost the space race.

    2. Re:Russians TERRIBLE at maths by gravewax · · Score: 1

      Yeah as opposed to those mathematical geniuses with the Mars Climate Orbiter

    3. Re:Russians TERRIBLE at maths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least they don't use that aweful imperial system

    4. Re: Russians TERRIBLE at maths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about we send all those with impure blood to Mars. Since your Great^42Grandmother fucked a Neanderthal, you get to be first in line. Remember to send a postcard.

  8. Red Planet? Mars gonna be the Black Planet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right on, brother. I wanna see what Michael Jordan could have done in Martian gravity for reals.

  9. Not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We can download and 3D print a new one, and use VR-augmented AI algorithms to crowdfund a IoT into orbit with private space colonies using fusion reactors!

    Technology!

    1. Re: Not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention it is all financed by bitcoins and of course implemented in the cloud!

    2. Re: Not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, no apps?

    3. Re: Not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or HOSTS files?

  10. Re:Bull. Shit. by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Shouldn't you be golfing, Mr. President?

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  11. Re:Bull. Shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a working golf session.

  12. GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One would think these rockets' guidance systems have some kind of GPS already built in, right? Hard-coding source coordinates seems kind of top-down holy crap inexcusable IMO.

    1. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russians would use GLONASS, not GPS.

    2. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well there's the problem. GLONASS relies on vodka to operate, and the Russians have been drinking it all themselves, leaving nothing less to fuel GLONASS.

    3. Re:GPS maybe? by Immerman · · Score: 4, Informative

      From what I can find the GPS system doesn't work nearly as well in space - especially if you're above the GPS orbits. Might be serviceable in low orbit, but why bother with all the potential failure modes when you already know exactly where it starts from. You did double-check that before the launch, right?

      Problem one is that the GPS satellites tight-beam their signals at the Earth to avoid wasting energy - picture a cone roughly twice as tall as it is wide, with the Earth's cross-section filling it's base, and a GPS satellite at it's tip. That's the space containing the signal, and there's going to be an awful lot of space between those cones as you gain altitude. Though there is typically a bit of "overshoot" around the edges as well, so things aren't as bad as they might be.

      Problem two is that the faster you're moving the harder it is to lock on to the signal - think of how much longer it takes for a recently powered-off GPS device to establish its location while driving down the highway versus when you're parked. And then figure LEO orbital speed is about 17,450mph. No doubt it could still be done - but might be expensive and/or unreliable.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    4. Re:GPS maybe? by dcrisp · · Score: 5, Informative

      Civilian GPS equipment is actually designed to cut out above a certain velocity and altitude. Generally the velocities and altitudes involved in weapons delivery applications. This is, of course, designed to prevent somebody building an ultra cheap Balistic Missile guided by GPS OR an ultra fast rocket propelled missile guided by GPS. Go too fast OR too high and your guidance goes from accurate to estimate to guesstimate to "ooh, look at the flowers"

    5. Re:GPS maybe? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the Falcon vehicles use a combination of GPS and INS. A good system would integrate data from both and survive the loss of either in flight, so you'd get both improved accuracy and improved fault tolerance. Plus, your average aerospace GPS unit is not your average consumer GPS unit.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:GPS maybe? by zwarte+piet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My old tomtom worked fine when I stuck it to a passenger window of a 737 and showed me we were going around 900km/h. It didn't take much longer to find the satelites. (but I had to delete any routes and turn off the speed camera warnings, cause it couldn't keep up with that)

    7. Re: GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well put

    8. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Horseshit. Sententious horseshit. Ignorant sententious horseshit.

      Why would anybody use "civilian" a priori expectations of altitude & velocity for these applications. If this terminology is puzzling, you're not qualified to have an opinion.

      As it happens, yes I am a rocket scientist. Got the mug and everything.

    9. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's still too low speed/altitude for the cut-off. It would kick in with supersonic speeds I think. Try it next time you're aboard Concorde.

      As a side note, you don't need old-school equipment. Any smartphone with a decent GPS app (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.eclipsim.gpsstatus2&hl=en) should be able to get a fix provided the fuselage isn't blocking the signal.

    10. Re:GPS maybe? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Yeah, your parent is either misinformed or spreading false information intetionally.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    11. Re:GPS maybe? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That is nonsense ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:GPS maybe? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      You might be correct. For suborbital applications I suppose it would probably be fine, provided speed wasn't a problem - and quality hardware should be anle to deal with that. It's when you get higher, into the dead zones, that you'd start having issues. Though I guess they've been working on using it even in orbits above the GPS satellites themselves, presumably using only the "overspray" from the satellites on the other side of the Earth... since 2002 apparently.

      Mea culpa.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    13. Re: GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GPS can be used for position determination even if you are above the GPS constellation. There are now some Geo birds that use GPS for onboard navigation.

    14. Re:GPS maybe? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      From what I can find the GPS system doesn't work nearly as well in space - especially if you're above the GPS orbits. Might be serviceable in low orbit, but why bother with all the potential failure modes when you already know exactly where it starts from. You did double-check that before the launch, right?

      Of course, that's exactly what didn't happen. So $50 worth of GPS hardware would have prevented the loss of a ~$95 million-dollar launch ($45M for the satellite, ~$50M for the launch costs), because the launch computers in the satellite would have said, "Wait, what the f***? My trajectory, fuel, etc. were calculated based on launching from a launch site 4,000 miles from here. I can't launch like this."

      Those who repeatedly cut corners eventually run out of paper.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    15. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't go fast and high enough. GPS receivers normally cut out at above 500 m/s (1800 km/h), well faster than a 737, or above 18 km (59000 feet), well above anything that's not an SR-71. They want to make it harder to put them on ballistic missiles, not airplanes. Airplanes use GPS all the time.

    16. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're both misinformed. GPS cuts out when you go fast (more than 515 m/s) or high (more than 18 km) enough, but that's well faster and higher than an airplane. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#Restrictions_on_civilian_use

    17. Re:GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent is correct, it is 60,000 feet or 1200 mph. Neither is achievable by 737

    18. Re:GPS maybe? by zwarte+piet · · Score: 1

      I've been told it also works aboard the ISS, which is 400km high

    19. Re: GPS maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a software limit not a signal limit.

  13. Re:So what by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    Well, so what. This isn't about who well known haters are cozying up to, but who exactly is doing unfounded hating of whom. Just because some haters like Trump says nothing about what Trump actually hates for whatever reasons Trump may have.

  14. Genius! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turns out, that happened because the Meteor-M weather satellite was programmed with the wrong coordinates.

    I'm totally guessing here, but my guess is that they discovered this new methodology called "Agile" and started using that to program their satellites. In order to save money and get satellites up quicker and be more competitive. But mainly to save money.

    Similar stuff happened before.

  15. At least we don't do this... by neoRUR · · Score: 5, Informative

    These kinds of errors are not just related to Russia.

    Mars Climate Orbiter probe lost due to Math error:
    English to Metric math conversion error
    https://edition.cnn.com/TECH/s...
    https://mars.nasa.gov/msp98/ne...
    http://articles.latimes.com/19...

    ExoMars Schiaparelli lander crashed due to failure to recognize the proper height.
    http://spaceflight101.com/exom...
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/b...

    1. Re:At least we don't do this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every bug comes down to a simple error, in the end.

    2. Re:At least we don't do this... by skullandbones99 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You mean "Imperial" and not "English" measurements. People from England (UK) use Metric measurements except were tradition, and government rules dictate Imperial measurements are used. For example, distances for transport are in miles but fuel is measured in litres. When shopping, products are labelled in imperial and metric measurements but imperial only selling is possible in traditional street markets.

      Note that the US uses a different set of imperial definitions to the UK due to the US War of Independence causing the US to fail to get subsequent updates to the UK's Parliament's Act of Weights and Measures. This caused the US gallon to be a different size to the UK's imperial gallon.

    3. Re:At least we don't do this... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      You mean "Imperial" and not "English" measurements.

      No, he/she/it probably meant "English", since what is used in the USA isn't what was used in the UK pre-metric - the two systems started the same two centuries ago, but have diverged a bit since.....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:At least we don't do this... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It's not a case of diverging, it's more that national standards were only set down after the miserable puritan buggers had sailed off in a huff - hence a Norfolk gallon might be different to a Yorkshire one.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:At least we don't do this... by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      What a bunch of idiots. It's not like this is rocket science.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    6. Re:At least we don't do this... by Falconnan · · Score: 1

      In fairness the Mars Climate Explorer wasn't a bug, it was utter failure by a contractor to RTFM! All programming modules were good, just not compatible.

  16. One Satellite or 18? Or 19? by mentil · · Score: 1

    The headline suggests one satellite worth $45 Million was lost, while the summary suggests it was 18 small satellites. Was there a $45 Million satellite in addition to those 18 mini satellites? Or was it $45 Million total between the 18 of them?
    The article says '18 satellites [...] were on the same rocket' so I'm guessing there were 19, one of which was worth ~$45 Million.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  17. No, no, no... NO! by brindafella · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have a read of the story, that is WRONG AS WRITTEN.

    > While the Meteor-M launched last month from the Vostochny cosmodrome in the Far East, it was reportedly programmed with take-off coordinates for the Baikonur cosmodrome, which is located in southern Kazakhstan.

    No, no, no... NO! The word "it" refers to the Meteor-M satellite. The satellite was NOT programmed incorrectly; it was the launcher that was mis-programmed, as the following sentence clarifies.

    > "The rocket was really programmed as if it was taking off from Baikonur," ....

    --
    Looking at space, radio, science and computing from a 'down-under' amateur enthusiast perspective.
    1. Re:No, no, no... NO! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      The satellite was NOT programmed incorrectly; it was the launcher that was mis-programmed,

      As I wrote below, even that is apparently not accurate, unless by mis-programmed you mean there's a bug in the control system. (But in this context, I assume that "programming" refers to correct data input.)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  18. Fake news? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Informative
    The cause of the problem seems to have been somewhat different:

    In the Soyuz/Fregat launch vehicle, the first three booster stages of the rocket and the Fregat upper stage have their two separate guidance systems controlled by their own gyroscopic platforms. The guidance reference axis used by the gyroscopes on the Soyuz and on the Fregat had a 10-degree difference. The angle of a roll maneuver for rockets lifting off from Baikonur, Plesetsk and Kourou, which was required to guide them into a correct azimuth of ascent, normally laid within a range from positive 140 to negative 140 degrees. To bring the gyroscopic guidance system into a position matching the azimuth of the launch, its main platform has to be rotated into a zero-degree position via a shortest possible route. The ill-fated launch from Vostochny required a roll maneuver of around 174 degrees (which was apparently conducted from the 5th to 22nd second of the flight), and with an additional 10 degrees for the Fregat's reference axis, it meant that its gyro platform had to turn around 184 degrees in order to reach the required "zero" position.

    In the Soyuz rocket, the gyro platform normally rotated from 174 degrees back to a zero position, providing the correct guidance. However on the Fregat, the shortest path for its platform to a zero-degree position was to increase its angle from 184 to 360 degrees. Essentially, the platform came to the same position, but this is not how the software in the main flight control computer on the Fregat interpreted the situation. Instead, the computer decided that the spacecraft had been 360 degrees off target and dutifully commanded its thrusters to fire to turn it around to the required zero-degree position. After the nearly 60-degree turn at a rate of around one degree per second, the Fregat began a preprogrammed trajectory correction maneuver with its main engine. Unfortunately, the spacecraft was in a wrong attitude and, as a result, the engine was fired in a wrong direction.

    Nothing about the vehicle or the satellite being "programmed with the wrong coordinates", just an edge case for the control system (a little bit like with the Ariane 5 incident).

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  19. Dumbed down but still correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i.e. they normally launch from Baikonur, Plesetsk and Kourou, and the reference angle for those are within 140 to -140 and the software is designed to take the shortest rotation to get back to zero. 140,130,120,110....

    However they launched from a far east site, with 184 reference angle, the software was not programmed to work for that reference angle and so it flipped all the way over. 190,200,210...

    So yes it was programmed for launched for a different coordinate launch. The article may be dumbed down, but its not fake.

    1. Re:Dumbed down but still correct by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      But this has nothing to do with the coordinates of the launch site. You could have the same problem at Baikonur if the launch pad over there had a different orientation or it wasn't rotating. (The original Soyuz launch pads were rotating, the ones for Soyuz 2 aren't but I'm not sure if you can launch a Soyuz 2 vehicle from a Soyuz launch pad. You most likely can but you definitely can't launch a Soyuz (the original) from the cheaper-to-build fixed-position Soyuz 2 pad.)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Dumbed down but still correct by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Anyway, the article is wrong at least in the respect that this had absolutely nothing to do with the programming of the satellite. The satellite doesn't guide itself into orbit.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Dumbed down but still correct by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      However they launched from a far east site, with 184 reference angle, the software was not programmed to work for that reference angle and so it flipped all the way over. 190,200,210...

      Also, it's not "a reference angle", it's the launch azimuth (plus the Fregat correction) and thus it's independent on the longitude (it doesn't matter that it's "far east" because the Earth is round, it's only a function of the orbital plane inclination and the cosine of the latitude), and it's not that it "was not programmed to work for that reference angle ", it simply had a bug. And the bug was not that it continued rotating the platform, that was the correct thing to do. The problem was manifested after the platform was in the correct position and how the flight computer interpreted the angle (apparently differently from the platform's electronics).

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  20. Re: Bull. Shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rights of loss what OMG

  21. Reminds me of that other story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia Elected a $0.45 President Because 'They Didn't Get the Coordinates Right'

    FTFY

  22. Protip für Untermeschen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're already a subhuman, getting drunk as a monkey isn't going to help matters.

  23. 45 million? that's cheap. by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    Elon Musk probably makes that much in tesla stock from every snarky tweet. 45 million is less than insuring many ships or buildings. it's nothing.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  24. Crowd Source for Help by pedz · · Score: 1

    Perhaps if they put its picture on the back of milk cartoons, someone will spot it.

  25. Another successful op by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Bygones.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  26. Russians Failed At Maths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I checked, 2 + 2 still equals 4.

    Seems like that has been true for many centuries now.

    Just sayin....