NASAs $100,000 mistake, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 24-12-2008 @ 10:38 AM by Now_Then
reply to post by Jkd Up



They didn't forget a lens... the lens (or was it a mirror) was made incorrectly - and it was something in the order of nano meters - the lens was an ingenious solution that saved the whole project... so money well spent - the hubble is a valuble asset that was either gonna be scraped or brought back to earth for a fix - either way THAT would of been a waste of money.

reply to post by jd140



That guy was a woman


reply posted on 24-12-2008 @ 12:51 PM by jd140
reply to post by Now_Then



Hard to tell by watching the video, guess I should have read the article. Okay for those who read my comment, replace guy with gal, him with her and he with she.


reply posted on 24-12-2008 @ 01:44 PM by Now_Then
reply to post by jd140



Yhea those outfits are not exactly flattering



reply posted on 24-12-2008 @ 06:16 PM by Credulity Kills
Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Why cant they just go get it?

Seems reasonable to me...they have space SUITES on the space STATION yes?

Jesus H. Why can't any of these rocket scientist use common freakin sense?

Like that Mars rover that died out because of the dust, then came back to life when wind blew it clean...anybody think to put a damn FAN over the solar panel? God Almighty, I hate our "smart" people...

[edit on 24-12-2008 by midnightbrigade]

Wow, I don't even know where to begin. Clearly you should be in charge instead of doing whatever it is that you do . What do you do anyway? Given that you "hate smart people" you clearly must not partake in self-loathing. That's good for you I suppose.

I'll start with the obvious: when smart people find a problem to be difficult, it probably is. As a non-expert you should realize that you know less than them and defer judgement until you understand the problem. You do not.

Do you think you can just swim around in space? Real space isn't like BSG or Star Wars. First of all, while they have suits on the shuttle and ISS, they don't have the ability to fly around with them. NASA had such capability with the now-retired MMU but didn't find it useful enough to warrant the size and cost. It was replaced with a much smaller version called SAFR which is only to be used if an astronaut becomes untethered from the ISS or shuttle.

As for the Mars lander, of course scientists and engineers had accounted for degrading solar arrays as material accumulated on them. It was designed to last as long as it needed to plus what engineers call Phi, or a factor of safety. Accumulated dust only became an issue when it exceeded its expected mission duration several fold.

[edit on 24-12-2008 by Credulity Kills]


reply posted on 24-12-2008 @ 06:37 PM by RFBurns
The "wiper" idea was in fact considered in the initial designs of all 3 rovers and the Phoenix probe as well.

The problem wasnt that the wiper required a motor to work and would draw energy from the batteries. The problem was that when it was tested on the prototypes, the wiper not only wiped away the dust, but it also scratched the surface of the solar cells due to the dust particles, and over several tests, the solar pannel surfaces ended up diffusing the sunlight enough to degrade the efficency of the solar pannels.

It did not have anything to do with room or drawing energy from the batteries. The rovers and the probe draw energy mostly from the pannels if they are putting out their highest efficiency as well as the batteries at the same time. The batteries are only used by themselves when either the sun is blocked by the dust storms, clouds or during the night when the rovers and probes are in sleep mode, and when in sleep mode, they draw very little energy, just enough to keep the circutry from freezing.

The fan idea was also considered. Putting a fan on a movable arm that would run along the length and width of the solar pannels. However the problem with that was there would have to be a fair amount of airflow to effectively blow away the dust. Such a fan would have either required an elaborate duct work setup to both wings of solar pannels on a pivoting arm that moved across the whole surfaces, and the fan would have to be filtered so that it did not end up just blowing more dust onto the pannels and becoming clogged itself, both the duct work and the fan blades and the filter in front of the fan. Not very practical and would have ended up becoming totally useless after a very short time.

Letting the natural wind on Mars was the best choice, and on many occasions, the wind not only would cover the solar pannels with dust, it would remove the dust as well. So the decision was made to let nature do its thing.



HO HO HO!!!!
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



"My God, its full of stars!"
  Posted 19 days ago with 83 member flags
Newfound "super-Earth"
  Posted 8 days ago with 56 member flags
Enceladus Backlit by Saturn
  Posted 2 days ago with 50 member flags
Toronto teens send Lego man into space: video
  Posted 16 days ago with 28 member flags
Amazing new photo of Earth. The Blue Marble 2012
  Posted 12 days ago with 22 member flags
NASA Probe Captures 1st Video of Moon\'s Far Side
  Posted 9 days ago with 19 member flags