Yes, checking out the Viking probes would be useful, but not a primary mission. The same was done on one of the Apollo missions. One of the missions visited an old lander and retrieved parts for later analysis. Was a basic exposure experiment, what do electronics look like after spending a few years on the moon? And, what does a scoop that dug in the lunar soil look like after sitting in the sand for a few years? The mission was Apollo 12, they retrieved the scoop and camera from Surveyor 3.
A real exposure experiment would be more useful, various exposed panels and substances. Could even be robotic. Land the experiments. And, land another probe three years later in the same spot to check the condition of the samples.
Static charges have their solution as well, especially when the electronic device in question can ground itself. Now, was that solution feasible this time around? Possibly not. Especially with unknowns of new salts in the soil. A large part of ship design is to keep salts from destroying a ship as the ship grounds itself in ocean water, typically accomplished by giving the salts something else more reactive to reactive with. I was speaking about a future rover. In no way was I implying stupidity on the part of NASA/JPL. These rovers were designed to last at least 90 days, with many unknowns 90 days is a feat. Next time, there will be fewer rover tech related unknowns. I hope the primary anticipated cause of death of the next solar powered rover will not be dust accretion.
If there was already an appropriate rover on the way, yes.
The death of the rovers will likely be slow and gradual. First a camera goes, then the arm, then it doesn't have power to move, then the batteries die, not having enough heat to keep the rover warm at night, the one or two functional devices left only operate during daying hours. Then, eventually, they can only ping the things. And, then everything goes quiet.
Once the batteries fail, many other components will fail due to lack of heating during night and thermal cycles.
Decades from now, we might still be getting signals from the rovers. The orbiters from viking lasted over a decade. One of the russian lunar rovers operated for 10 months. I would hate to think we can't surpass what the Soviets pulled off 30 years ago.
The last successful rover lasted several times longer than it was expected to, in fact the rover outlasted the lander that served as a transmitter and a relay station. Upon death of the lander the Soujourner probe was to try to return to the lander. I wondered how long that thing circled the lander, if it if got back at all.... Part of the reason these rovers are all in one units, capable of communicating with earth (at low baud) on their own, was because the last rover outlasted the lander.
In the two weeks Spirit was useless a few weeks ago, they were afraid components would fail. Now, try to imagine the years it takes to design/launch/wait on/land rovers? What would keep working? One of NASA's pre-Bush-Space-Initiative goals was to build a robot colony on mars. These rovers are not the start though.
I for one, would like to see them relaunch at least one rover similar to these in the next launch window. They are (were) planning on relaunching the polar lander. And, it would be nice if the next gen non-nuclear rovers could dust themselves, think $20 wiper blades.
Any belief system can survive any new discovery, especially if it is a healthy belief system. Just as they survived predictions that the earth was no longer round, or that it was not the center of the universe, etc. Just like the discovery that microbes were a common cause of disease. And like the discovery that there are peoples outside of the sphere of western knowledge.
People regardless of situations or beliefs take advantage of any new information. Even in the act of denying new knowledge, they can be building up their stature and position. Often, people of different belief systems were called subvertive.
Some people feel that the greater the number of "wrong" people that oppose them, the more "right" they are. And, vice versa, the greater the number of "right" people that support them, the less "wrong" they are. Even though in the end the chances of anyone being right are pretty slim.
Would give you all references for my argument, but feel I would be classified as a troll. Nothing like trying to argue major factors in belief systems as being contrived, planed, convenient, or divine.
It is all a little like saying "Finally, an end to trolls."
Yes, but they have less efficient use of surface area, requiring more coating if they had been candy coated chocolate. Also, they would require more supervision and more complex machinery to achieve even coating.
Who else is wanting Almond Bark coated Starbursts for Christmas this year?
There is an unused Lunokhod rover here in the states. Here is a color picture I took a few years ago. The rover is/was at the Kansas Cosmosphere. The Cosmosphere is a wonderful place, and well worth making a road trip.
The top of the rover popped open lengthwise to reveal the solar panels. The long nose looking thing on the front was the antenna. There are rumors that these rovers did sample returns even. Havn't seen any proof though.
I'm fighting with some of my bad habit right now myself. On a dare, I quit coffee for a month but continued drinking caffeine.
The story given to me was that the excess phosphorus in coffee blocks the absorbtion of B-Vitamins, leading to depression and lack of energy.
Trading coffee for diet coke for one month was not that hard and didn't change much, except I did make peace with my boss and his best friend that I had to work with. Said I would continue without coffee just because of that.
In the next three months I found a new job in my old programming field (was waiting tables for years), found a girlfriend, aced my summer semester, and feel better. Also put on 25 pounds, quit going to school, and some of my friends are avoiding me:(
Decided no experiment was complete without an end, went back on coffee for two months. Depression came back, broke up with girl-friend, and my new job is falling apart (would have anyway).
The experiment had mixed results. But for me, there's no question, coffee is out of my life for now. Most of my headaches were related to lack of coffee and dehydration, not with lack of caffeine.
So, my advice is give up coffee, drink lots of water, then see how you feel after a month, and how the people around you treat you. You can worry about soda and tea later.
It's a fairly harmless experiment, all the caffeine you want for a month, just no coffee. Try it, for some the results are amazing
Part of the reason I keep multiple jobs at any given time is to downplay the importance of a given employer. For example, I spent most of the last two years waiting tables. On all of my technical applications I listed my one part time near minimum wage tech job as my current employer, while just barely mentioning to the interviewer that I was moonlighting as a waiter to help pay the bills. They needed how my current work applied to the job I was interviewing for and have that relevance emphasized, not what I was doing for a living.
Space and tech has information on a lot of production and experimental spacecraft. Including payload user manuals in the expendable launch vehical section. The Soyuz payload user manual makes great three AM reading:) According to the documentation there, the Atlas V is in the same category as the Proton and the older Shuttle configurations. IE, roughly 20 tons to LEO, including the Colombia. The Atlas V is just barely more powerful for LEO than the Proton (45238 lbs vers 44035). But, is not as powerful as the current shuttles for LEO, at 65000 lbs. FYI, Columbia has a limited LEO capability. In it's original configuration, it was limited to around 10000 lb payloads. And, granted, GSO is a different ball game.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, checking out the Viking probes would be useful, but not a primary mission. The same was done on one of the Apollo missions. One of the missions visited an old lander and retrieved parts for later analysis. Was a basic exposure experiment, what do electronics look like after spending a few years on the moon? And, what does a scoop that dug in the lunar soil look like after sitting in the sand for a few years? The mission was Apollo 12, they retrieved the scoop and camera from Surveyor 3.
A real exposure experiment would be more useful, various exposed panels and substances. Could even be robotic. Land the experiments. And, land another probe three years later in the same spot to check the condition of the samples.
Static charges have their solution as well, especially when the electronic device in question can ground itself. Now, was that solution feasible this time around? Possibly not. Especially with unknowns of new salts in the soil. A large part of ship design is to keep salts from destroying a ship as the ship grounds itself in ocean water, typically accomplished by giving the salts something else more reactive to reactive with. I was speaking about a future rover. In no way was I implying stupidity on the part of NASA/JPL. These rovers were designed to last at least 90 days, with many unknowns 90 days is a feat. Next time, there will be fewer rover tech related unknowns. I hope the primary anticipated cause of death of the next solar powered rover will not be dust accretion.
If there was already an appropriate rover on the way, yes.
The death of the rovers will likely be slow and gradual. First a camera goes, then the arm, then it doesn't have power to move, then the batteries die, not having enough heat to keep the rover warm at night, the one or two functional devices left only operate during daying hours. Then, eventually, they can only ping the things. And, then everything goes quiet.
Once the batteries fail, many other components will fail due to lack of heating during night and thermal cycles.
Decades from now, we might still be getting signals from the rovers. The orbiters from viking lasted over a decade. One of the russian lunar rovers operated for 10 months. I would hate to think we can't surpass what the Soviets pulled off 30 years ago.
The last successful rover lasted several times longer than it was expected to, in fact the rover outlasted the lander that served as a transmitter and a relay station. Upon death of the lander the Soujourner probe was to try to return to the lander. I wondered how long that thing circled the lander, if it if got back at all.... Part of the reason these rovers are all in one units, capable of communicating with earth (at low baud) on their own, was because the last rover outlasted the lander.
In the two weeks Spirit was useless a few weeks ago, they were afraid components would fail. Now, try to imagine the years it takes to design/launch/wait on/land rovers? What would keep working? One of NASA's pre-Bush-Space-Initiative goals was to build a robot colony on mars. These rovers are not the start though.
I for one, would like to see them relaunch at least one rover similar to these in the next launch window. They are (were) planning on relaunching the polar lander. And, it would be nice if the next gen non-nuclear rovers could dust themselves, think $20 wiper blades.
Any belief system can survive any new discovery, especially if it is a healthy belief system. Just as they survived predictions that the earth was no longer round, or that it was not the center of the universe, etc. Just like the discovery that microbes were a common cause of disease. And like the discovery that there are peoples outside of the sphere of western knowledge.
People regardless of situations or beliefs take advantage of any new information. Even in the act of denying new knowledge, they can be building up their stature and position. Often, people of different belief systems were called subvertive.
Some people feel that the greater the number of "wrong" people that oppose them, the more "right" they are. And, vice versa, the greater the number of "right" people that support them, the less "wrong" they are. Even though in the end the chances of anyone being right are pretty slim.
Would give you all references for my argument, but feel I would be classified as a troll. Nothing like trying to argue major factors in belief systems as being contrived, planed, convenient, or divine.
It is all a little like saying "Finally, an end to trolls."
Ok, but does the artcile mean random shapes would be more efficient yet? Allowing even more packing into empty space?
Yes, but they have less efficient use of surface area, requiring more coating if they had been candy coated chocolate. Also, they would require more supervision and more complex machinery to achieve even coating. Who else is wanting Almond Bark coated Starbursts for Christmas this year?
There is an unused Lunokhod rover here in the states. Here is a color picture I took a few years ago. The rover is/was at the Kansas Cosmosphere. The Cosmosphere is a wonderful place, and well worth making a road trip.
The top of the rover popped open lengthwise to reveal the solar panels. The long nose looking thing on the front was the antenna. There are rumors that these rovers did sample returns even. Havn't seen any proof though.
I'm fighting with some of my bad habit right now myself. On a dare, I quit coffee for a month but continued drinking caffeine.
The story given to me was that the excess phosphorus in coffee blocks the absorbtion of B-Vitamins, leading to depression and lack of energy.
Trading coffee for diet coke for one month was not that hard and didn't change much, except I did make peace with my boss and his best friend that I had to work with. Said I would continue without coffee just because of that.
In the next three months I found a new job in my old programming field (was waiting tables for years), found a girlfriend, aced my summer semester, and feel better. Also put on 25 pounds, quit going to school, and some of my friends are avoiding me :(
Decided no experiment was complete without an end, went back on coffee for two months. Depression came back, broke up with girl-friend, and my new job is falling apart (would have anyway).
The experiment had mixed results. But for me, there's no question, coffee is out of my life for now. Most of my headaches were related to lack of coffee and dehydration, not with lack of caffeine.
So, my advice is give up coffee, drink lots of water, then see how you feel after a month, and how the people around you treat you. You can worry about soda and tea later.
It's a fairly harmless experiment, all the caffeine you want for a month, just no coffee. Try it, for some the results are amazing
Part of the reason I keep multiple jobs at any given time is to downplay the importance of a given employer. For example, I spent most of the last two years waiting tables. On all of my technical applications I listed my one part time near minimum wage tech job as my current employer, while just barely mentioning to the interviewer that I was moonlighting as a waiter to help pay the bills. They needed how my current work applied to the job I was interviewing for and have that relevance emphasized, not what I was doing for a living.
Space and tech has information on a lot of production and experimental spacecraft. Including payload user manuals in the expendable launch vehical section. The Soyuz payload user manual makes great three AM reading :) According to the documentation there, the Atlas V is in the same category as the Proton and the older Shuttle configurations. IE, roughly 20 tons to LEO, including the Colombia. The Atlas V is just barely more powerful for LEO than the Proton (45238 lbs vers 44035). But, is not as powerful as the current shuttles for LEO, at 65000 lbs. FYI, Columbia has a limited LEO capability. In it's original configuration, it was limited to around 10000 lb payloads. And, granted, GSO is a different ball game.