I hope they don't screw up this time. Remeber the Mars Lander where they did the calculations in feet and programmed it in meters? Talk about NASA's rocket scientists...
Pete said:It's a planet, it merits exploration.
The Dutch didn't bother exploring Australia because it appeared useless...
ILikeSalt said:I hope they don't screw up this time. Remeber the Mars Lander where they did the calculations in feet and programmed it in meters? Talk about NASA's rocket scientists...
(Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board Phase I Report - large pdf)The MCO MIB has determined that the root cause for the loss of the MCO spacecraft was the failure to use metric units in the coding of a ground software file, “Small Forces,” used in trajectory models. Specifically, thruster performance data in English units instead of metric units was used in the software application code titled SM_FORCES (small forces). The output from the SM_FORCES application code as required by a MSOP Project Software Interface Specification (SIS) was to be in metric units of Newtonseconds (N-s). Instead, the data was reported in English units of pound-seconds (lbf-s). The Angular Momentum Desaturation (AMD) file contained the output data from the SM_FORCES software. The SIS, which was not followed, defines both the format and units of the AMD file generated by ground-based computers. Subsequent processing of the data from AMD file by the navigation software algorithm therefore, underestimated the effect on the spacecraft trajectory by a factor of 4.45, which is the required conversion factor from force in pounds to Newtons. An erroneous trajectory was computed using this incorrect data.
(MARS CLIMATE ORBITER FAILURE BOARD RELEASES REPORT
- errors went undetected within ground-based computer models of how small thruster firings on the spacecraft were predicted and then carried out on the spacecraft during its interplanetary trip to Mars
- the operational navigation team was not fully informed on the details of the way that Mars Climate Orbiter was pointed in space, as compared to the earlier Mars Global Surveyor mission
- a final, optional engine firing to raise the spacecraftÕs path relative to Mars before its arrival was considered but not performed for several interdependent reasons
- the systems engineering function within the project that is supposed to track and double-check all interconnected aspects of the mission was not robust enough, exacerbated by the first-time handover of a Mars-bound spacecraft from a group that constructed it and launched it to a new, multi-mission operations team
- some communications channels among project engineering groups were too informal
- the small mission navigation team was oversubscribed and its work did not receive peer review by independent experts
- personnel were not trained sufficiently in areas such as the relationship between the operation of the mission and its detailed navigational characteristics, or the process of filing formal anomaly reports
- the process to verify and validate certain engineering requirements and technical interfaces between some project groups, and between the project and its prime mission contractor, was inadequate
Reply 1:Me said:The Dutch didn't bother exploring Australia because it appeared useless...
It is useless to me![]()
![]()
And? Just kidding.![]()
ILikeSalt said:I hope they don't screw up this time. Remeber the Mars Lander where they did the calculations in feet and programmed it in meters? Talk about NASA's rocket scientists...
Stokes Pennwalt said:The better question is, why not?
Humans have an inherent desire to see what's over the next hill. Not to mention that space exploration, in general, represents the only eventual future for mankind.
It's easy to bitch about it. That's the problem with space exploration - there's never a good time for it. People don't long for the heavens when their home life is happy and contented.
But that will always be the case. And I figure, now is as good a time as any.
Mercury is actually difficult to get to, as you have to change orbital velocity dramatically; that is why this probe has to fly by Earth and Venus.silas said:1) The outer solar system (ie anything beyond Mars) is a frig of a long way to go and a bitch to get there, thanks to the asteroid belt (well worth exploring on its own account, by the way.)
Yes; it has many more heavy elements than Mars and the Moon; this is because of sorting during the formation of the solar system.2) My science may be a bit out of date, but my impression was that Mercury has metals, ie seriously useful raw materials that we could make use of, unlike both the Moon and Mars which are dry rocks.
3) Mercury is the closest practicable landing point to the biggest energy source in the Solar system. Back in the days before 1965 when it was thought that Mercury only turned one face to the Sun there wasn't a science fiction writer worth his salt who didn't think that direct tap to the energy would be more than worth setting up some kind of facility there. I personally believe that Mercury spins on its axis so slowly that it would still be worth doing something like that, only mobile - it would only have to move as fast as NASA's Vehicle Transporter as long as straight level roads could be made for it.
4) As usual someone quotes a big number like "half a billion dollars" under the impression that is a large amount of money,...