
Hardware Outsourcing
Just imagine if NASA had outsourced hardware support for the Hubble and some wee poor soul draws the short straw. "I've to go where?"
Ever had a component spew garbage and had to bodge around it? Engineers appear to be faced with a similar issue as they continue work to rouse the science instruments of the Hubble Space Telescope from their Safe Mode slumbers. The good news is that the team might be close to isolating the problem. The bad news is that the …
HST Team raise ServiceNow problem ticket.
Outsourced Support Team immediately ask for more information, like "what is HST? what does it do?" thereby stopping the clock on the ticket SLA. That goes on for a bit, then OST passes problem onto some other team who have absolutely nothing to do with HST, still trying anything and everything possible to not do any investigation of the problem. Then eventually back to the HST team just before the system automatically closes the ticket as it has gone beyond a certain time frame.
Joke icon. But the reality in a company I have worked for
"We've all encountered that one weird component in our projects that occasionally does something strange and we end up having to code a bodge to deal with its funny little ways."
Too true. On an instrumentation project decades ago, we found that the hardware 'full' flag of a dual port memory didn't reliably signal memory full. We'd intended this to allow user substitution of devices with different capacities. To work round it we had to implement a user defined initialisation parameter in the software of the data sender so the system knew what size memory had been installed.
When Nasa built the Hubble telescope they actually commissioned two identical ones, because when you're dealing with taxpayer money, why build one when you can build two at double the cost?
The second one has been in a museum since then. Just dust it off and strap it to a rocket.
There's an interesting story about that: the one in the museum apparently is better than the one in space because they were built by different contractors.
Building a single copy of all your unique instruments right from the get go is a seriously stupid idea though. The actual hardware isn't the big cost (apart from the main mirror, that's a very expensive bit of hardware). For all the other stuff you make 2 and start assembling at least the more basic stuff, pick the best and then integrate all the best choices into a single vehicle for launch to orbit. I highly doubt the museum piece would be fully functional and orbit capable hardware. At the very least it'll be missing a mirror (they only made one. Incorrectly as it turns out)
There was a 'backup' mirror blank made but never polished.
It's in the Smithsonian (or it was last time I saw it)
This is normal practice for large or expensive mirrors - sometimes things happen in the grinding or polishing, a flaw is discovered or an accident takes a chunk out.
Zeiss made a spare 8m mirror blank for the VLT (made 5 used 4) that they were trying to sell off to anybody who needed an 8m mirror - don't know what happened to that, probably got melted down.
Knowing Zeiss, they’ve probably forgotten where it is. A friend has some incredibly good, but definitely not cheap, Zeiss optical equipment.
As they couldn’t come and service it in the pandemic, they sent a 30k machine out to use until the original was serviced, around September last year. We’re still falling over the spare now…
First, there is no need for a new mirror.
Second, all the computer kit, which is where the problem lies, has backups.
Third, they are already running on the backup kit since they brought the Hubble back to operational status in June when it encountered a similar issue.
NSA built few for them self. That one in orbit is pointed at Earth and has a resolution about 30cm to 1 meter. How good it is remains a guess work because its classified on the technical specifications.
NSA donated the two remaining to NASA in 2012.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_National_Reconnaissance_Office_space_telescope_donation_to_NASA
Every time we do this.
(1) The NRO carcasses are not Hubbles: their focal length is much shorter. (2) It is not clear if reusing one is even worth it for applications where wide field is suitable: I believe that NGRST is going to use one of the NRO carcasses, but there was (is?) much discussion over whether it would be cheaper to start from scratch. (3) Mirror is not this huge expense: consider VLT: this has 4 8.2m mirrors and 4 1.8m mirrors, and cost less in total than cost of a single shuttle flight to service HST.
And finally (4) It is not clear to me that a new HST is even interesting now: suspect that for wavelengths it covers ground-based telescopes are now better. Certainly think if asked to choose between 10 VLTs and one new vidible-light telescope in space most astronomers would pick 10 VLTs. Certainly also is the case that there are telescopes that need to be in space – JWST for instance will do things that could not be done under atmosphere, but not clear that visible-light super-HST is interesting. But I am theorist: will defer to practicing astronomers on this (just not to space romantics).
When HST was delayed by Challenger disaster they had to keep telescope in storage for about four years. Keeping it in flight condition cost about $6 million a month, in late 1980s dollars. If this second, incomplete telescope could have flown in 1990 (it could not), then it has been in a dirty, uncontrolled environment full of horrid oxygen and other corrosive gases for 30 yeas since then: it certainly can not now,
We've all encountered that one weird component in our projects that occasionally does something strange and we end up having to code a bodge to deal with its funny little ways
It's called Visual Studio but I stopped finding it's time wasting quirks funny a long time ago.
They're not called "weird components" they're called "users".
Of course it sounds familiar. It not only sounds familiar, this is the mind-set of anyone---and their reptilian-IQ managers---who is (laughingly) referred to as an "engineer", nowadays; to wit:
"Software can fix any hardware problem."
Just ask Boeing about its illustrious use of this "fix", to create---with software---a completely brand-new aircraft, the 737-MAX, out of a completely old airframe...which was---at the time it was designed---designed the old-fashioned way of designing aircraft: by real engineers, using real hardware, created for the design of real, safe aircraft.
Now you know:
Software can fix any hardware problem.
It could have worked fine if they had used 3 sensors and implemented a "voting" system to reject spurious data. The fault wasn't necessarily "fixing it in software". The fault was in doing so badly, ignoring the added hardware requirements and not providing training. Oh, and lying to aviation authorities about the nature and effect of the new systems of course. That's kind of a big issue all by itself even if it hadn't gone wrong.
Airbus has very similar systems in all their aircraft, the difference being that they implemented them properly and pilots are trained in their existence, effects and failure modes.
Lift capability, yes. Crew facilities for space walking, nope.
X37B with remote control - maybe. But if it’s electronics giving up ghost, that’s some awkward cct board replacements to do without a human in the loop.
Hubble is approaching the point of decommissioning while it can still be commanded to do so. No pressure on JWST or anything to take over.
As has been said elsewhere building a bunch of expendable orbital scopes without the cost of the shuttle programme would have been cheaper. But politics versus efficiency is a long standing known issue. And A scope is better than no scope at all. Nobody “Had” to build Hubble.
"We've all encountered that one weird component in our projects that occasionally does something strange and we end up having to code a bodge to deal with its funny little ways."
It has always surprised me how many hardware designers don't allow for metastability*** in logic components when interfacing with asynchronous inputs. It produces glitches that fulfil Murphy's Law with the Sod's Law rider "..at the worst possible moment".
**Metastability is what happens to you when the doorbell chimes - and then the phone rings at the other end of the hall. You pause for an indeterminate moment - not sure which one to service. In logic gates there are input set-up timing constraints for reliable propagation times.
NASA is finally ready to launch its unmanned Orion spacecraft and put it in the orbit of the Moon. Lift-off from Earth is now expected in late August using a Space Launch System (SLS) rocket.
This launch, a mission dubbed Artemis I, will be a vital stage in the Artemis series, which has the long-term goal of ferrying humans to the lunar surface using Orion capsules and SLS technology.
Earlier this week NASA held a wet dress rehearsal (WDR) for the SLS vehicle – fueling it and getting within 10 seconds of launch. The test uncovered 13 problems, including a hydrogen fuel leak in the main booster, though NASA has declared that everything's fine for a launch next month.
NASA has chosen the three companies it will fund to develop a nuclear fission reactor ready to test on the Moon by the end of the decade.
This power plant is set to be a vital component of Artemis, the American space agency's most ambitious human spaceflight mission to date. This is a large-scale project to put the first woman and first person of color on the Moon, and establish a long-term presence on Earth's natural satellite.
NASA envisions [PDF] astronauts living in a lunar base camp, bombing around in rovers, and using it as a launchpad to explore further out into the Solar System. In order for this to happen, it'll need to figure out how to generate a decent amount of power somehow.
Sadly for NASA's mission to take samples from the asteroid Psyche, software problems mean the spacecraft is going to miss its 2022 launch window.
The US space agency made the announcement on Friday: "Due to the late delivery of the spacecraft's flight software and testing equipment, NASA does not have sufficient time to complete the testing needed ahead of its remaining launch period this year, which ends on October 11."
While it appears the software and testbeds are now working, there just isn't enough time to get everything done before a SpaceX Falcon Heavy sends the spacecraft to study a metallic-rich asteroid of the same name.
NASA's Moon rocket is to trundle back into its shed today after a delay caused by concerns over the crawlerway.
The massive transporter used to move the Space Launch System between Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) and launchpad requires a level pathway and teams have been working on the inclined pathway leading to the launchpad where the rocket currently resides to ensure there is an even distribution of rocks to support the mobile launcher and rocket.
The latest wet dress rehearsal was completed on June 20 after engineers "masked" data from sensors that would have called a halt to proceedings. Once back in the VAB, engineers plan to replace a seal on the quick disconnect of the tail service mast umbilical. The stack will then roll back to the launchpad for what NASA fervently hopes is the last time before a long hoped-for launch in late August.
Rocket Lab has sent NASA's Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) spacecraft on its way to the Moon atop an Electron rocket launched from New Zealand.
The launch had been subject to a number of delays, but at 09.55 UTC today, the Electron lifted off from Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 1 on the Mahia Peninsula of New Zealand.
Pic When space junk crashed into the Moon earlier this year, it made not one but two craters on the lunar surface, judging from images revealed by NASA on Friday.
Astronomers predicted a mysterious object would hit the Moon on March 4 after tracking the debris for months. The object was large, and believed to be a spent rocket booster from the Chinese National Space Administration's Long March 3C vehicle that launched the Chang'e 5-T1 spacecraft in 2014.
The details are fuzzy. Space agencies tend to monitor junk closer to home, and don't really keep an eye on what might be littering other planetary objects. It was difficult to confirm the nature of the crash; experts reckoned it would probably leave behind a crater. Now, NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) has spied telltale signs of an impact at the surface. Pictures taken by the probe reveal an odd hole shaped like a peanut shell on the surface of the Moon, presumably caused by the Chinese junk.
NASA engineers had to work fast to avoid another leak affecting the latest Artemis dry run, just hours after an attempt to reboost the International Space Station (ISS) via the Cygnus freighter was aborted following a few short seconds.
The US space agency on Monday rolled the huge Artemis I stack back to its Florida launchpad having worked through the leaks and problems that had beset its previous attempt at fueling the beast in April for an earlier dress rehearsal of the final countdown.
As propellant was loaded into the rocket, controllers noted a hydrogen leak in the quick-disconnect that attaches an umbilical from the tail service mast on the mobile launcher to the core stage of the rocket.
The SOFIA aircraft has returned to New Zealand for a final time ahead of the mission's conclusion later this year.
The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) is a modified Boeing 747SP aircraft, designed to carry a 2.7-meter reflecting telescope into the stratosphere, above much of Earth's infrared-blocking atmosphere.
A collaboration between NASA and the German Aerospace Center (DLR), development began on the project in 1996. SOFIA saw first light in 2010 and achieved full operational capability in 2014. Its prime mission was completed in 2019 and earlier this year, it was decided that SOFIA would be grounded for budgetary reasons. Operations end "no later than" September 30, 2022, followed by an "orderly shutdown."
Pondering what services to switch off to keep your laptop going just that bit longer? NASA engineers can relate, having decided the Mars InSight lander will go out on a high: they plan to burn through the remaining power to keep the science flowing until the bitter end.
The InSight lander is in a precarious position regarding power. A build-up of dust has meant the spacecraft's solar panels are no longer generating anywhere near enough power to keep the batteries charged. The result is an automatic shutdown of the payload, although there is a chance InSight might still be able to keep communicating until the end of the year.
Almost all of InSight's instruments have already been powered down, but the seismometer remains active and able to detect seismic activity on Mars (such as Marsquakes.) The seismometer was expected to be active until the end of June, at which point it too would be shut-down in order to eke out the lander's dwindling supply of power just a little longer.
An asteroid predicted to hit Earth in 2052 has, for now, been removed from the European Space Agency's list of rocks to be worried about.
Asteroid 2021 QM1 was described by ESA as "the riskiest asteroid known to humankind," at least among asteroids discovered in the past year. QM1 was spotted in August 2021 by Arizona-based Mount Lemmon observatory, and additional observations only made its path appear more threatening.
"We could see its future paths around the Sun, and in 2052 it could come dangerously close to Earth. The more the asteroid was observed, the greater that risk became," said ESA Head of Planetary Defense Richard Moissl.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022