Live data from Hacker News

NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

phys.org

121–130 of 150 posts

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#121
post #81

For me, being listed as a contributor to Ingenuity is one of the highlights of my career in software development. I mean, I just fixed a bug in some python library, but that was enough to get the GitHub Ingenuity badge. And when ever I am asked for a fun fact about myself, I can answer: some of my code is flying on Mars :)

I don’t think you should be apologetic about the small scale of your contribution: the animating principle of open source is that the aggregation of small contributions like yours can create outcomes that rival those of even the wealthiest organizations in the world.

But usually it is a handful of really large contributors and more smaller ones. And that's fine, but I'm not aware of a project where the contribution graph is more or less flat. And more often than not those large contributors are paid by large companies to contribute.

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#122
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the shorter term, I see the helicopter as making the rover more capable, by finding routes and destinations of interest. And the rover makes the helicopter more capable by providing a recharging station. So they're both at their best when working as a system. Maybe a rover can support multiple choppers.

> the rover makes the helicopter more capable by providing a recharging station Does it? I thought the helicopter was just solar powered.

That's cool. Thinking about it, there must be a tradeoff. The rover could support more massive batteries, but then "docking" between the two machines would have to be utterly reliable.

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I somehow never imagined that even NASA's technology choices would be influenced by "all the data stuff being for Python". But I guess if it's all sandboxed and any errors are reversible... then why not? It all makes rational sense. It just feels weird to think about Python running on Mars before there's even people there.

GP stated, that there is a lot of Python based stuff on the ground though, as I read it. Not necessarily on Mars.

Ah, I see. I read "ground station" as hardware on the ground on Mars, as opposed to on the helicopter itself.

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a terrifying anecdote.

From some perspectives, yes. From others it's not so bad. I love having cover from the top to do engineering and qualification to have better solutions. Normally it's "we don't have time or resources to make it, get back to the spreadsheet mines". For LEO you can scoot by pretty easily with non-hardened solutions and better systems engineering and software. For deep space you'll need to be more clever.

> It got there by challenging conventional wisdom, she adds. Most launchpad air conditioning systems, for instance, cost nearly half a million dollars, but SpaceX execs wondered why it cost so much more to cool an area the size of a conference room than the $75,000 it cost to cool their entire headquarters and manufacturing plant. The company brought the cost down to about $35,000, says Shotwell.

https://www.northwestern.edu/magazine/spring2012/feature/roc... (Page 3)

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original Elon Musk biography describes how a legacy aerospace engineer joined spacex and was tasked with a part: > He got a quote back for $120,000. “Elon laughed,” Davis said. “He said, 'That part is no more complicated than a garage door opener. Your budget is five thousand dollars. Go make it work.’”

This is a terrifying anecdote.

That depends on the validation and QC of their internal engineering. It is just as terrifying to spend USD120000 on a part that might be no better that what you can design&build in-house.

Here's the background:

  There were numerous ways in which SpaceX's strategies diverged from space industry norms, and almost all of them had direct implications for the cost of its launch systems. First, whereas most aerospace companies give their designs to myriad third-party contractors who create the hardware for them, SpaceX produced roughly 80% of its launch hardware inhouse. SpaceX builds its own motherboards and circuits, vibration sensors, radios and more. In most industries vertical integration increases the costs of firms by not enabling them to benefit from competitive bidding between efficient suppliers. In the aerospace industry, however, the entrenchment of norms around using parts specialized for the space industry ("space grade"), and the bureaucratic rules defined by government contractors, had kept supply costs high — very high. SpaceX decided instead to build many of its own parts, or to buy parts not considered "space grade" and modify them to achieve "space grade".For example, rather than paying $50,000 to $100,000 for an industrial-grade radio, SpaceX was able to build its own for $5,000, and shaved 20% of the weight off at the same time.

  SpaceX's willingness to produce their own parts came as a shock to suppliers. For example,Tom Mueller recounts a time when he asked a vendor for an estimate on a particular engine valve: "They came back [requesting] like a year and a half in development and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Just way out of whack. And we're like, 'No, we need it by this summer, for much, much less money.' They go, 'Good luck with that,' and kind of smirked and left." Mueller's team created the valve themselves, and by summer they had qualified it for use with cryogenic propellants. "That vendor, they iced us for a couple of months," Mueller said, "and then they called us back: 'Hey, we're willing to do that valve. You guys want to talk about it?' And we're like, 'No, we're done.' He goes, 'What do you mean you're done?' 'We qualified it. We're done.' And there was just silence at the end of the line. They were in shock." As noted, a big factor driving savings at SpaceX is that it often builds its components out of readily available consumer electronics rather than equipment alreadydeemed "space grade" by the rest of the industry. Twenty years ago "space grade" equipment would have had far superior performance characteristics compared to consumer electronics, but today that is no longer the case-standard electronics can now compete with more expensive, specialized gear. For example, at one point SpaceX needed an actuator that would steer the second stage of the Falcon 1. The job fell to engineer Steve Davis to find the important part, and since he had never built a part like that before he sought out suppliers who could make it for them. Their quoted price for the device was $120,000. As Davis recalls, "Elon laughed. He said, 'That part is no more complicated than a garage door opener. Your budget is five thousand dollars. Go make it work.'"20 Davis ended up designing an actuator that cost $3,900. Another example is provided by the computers that provide avionics for a rocket. Traditionally NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory bought expensive, specially toughened computers that cost over $10 million each to operate its rockets. Musk told engineer Kevin Watson that he wanted the bulk of the computer systems for Falcon 1 and Dragon to cost no more than $10,000. Watson was floored,noting, "In traditional aerospace, it would cost you more than ten thousand dollars just for the food at a meeting to discuss the cost of the avionics."21 Watson was inspired by the challenge, however, and ended up creating a fully redundant avionics platform that used a mix of off-the-shelf computer parts and in-house components for just over $10,000. That same system was then also adapted for use in the Falcon 9.
About the actuator:

  Steve Davis, the twenty second hire of SpaceX, needed an actuator that would trigger the gimbal action used to steer the upper stage of Falcon1. He went to find some suppliers and got a quote a $120,000. “Elon laughed”. Davis said. “He said, ‘That part is no more complicated than a garage door opener. Your budget is five thousand dollars. Go make it work.’” Davis spent nine months building the actuator and the final actuator approved by Musk ended up costing $3900.
Seems like they don't include the engineering time in the part cost calculations - so cheating a bit!

I've experienced building something in-house that is far better than what you could otherwise get. Back in the 00's I wrote a JavaScript framework because the existing ones were all crappy in a variety of ways. Even as a one-person effort (and I'm no 10x engineer) I could write something that was wayyy better in a bunch of important ways (albeit not pretty enough design). My work was engineered better than the open source and commercial frameworks that I evaluated/used. Better loading, better recovery from network and other errors, better memory behaviour, better size, better speed, better integration, better diagnostics, better browser support, better user interface, customised for our needs. It did exactly what we needed for our project and mostly worked flawlessly.

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#126

On Jupiter Broadcasting there was a lot of interviews on how this was a Linux powered device and could be the first of many new Linux devices on Mars by JPL. If I remembered correctly they used a space hardened Power cpu with an ancient version of Yocto since the newer versions of it did not have working drivers. When the rover had an issue they actually used the helicoptor's userspace command line GNU utilities to d…

Fun fact - the cameras that captures Perseverance's landing are also Linux based and vim is installed - at least on the later model that I worked with.

Using it with a 20 minute delay between keystrokes and their results must be interesting

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original Elon Musk biography describes how a legacy aerospace engineer joined spacex and was tasked with a part: > He got a quote back for $120,000. “Elon laughed,” Davis said. “He said, 'That part is no more complicated than a garage door opener. Your budget is five thousand dollars. Go make it work.’”

This is a terrifying anecdote.

Not sure I understand your response. There is a tremendous amount of launch data from several years of launches (and landings) that demonstrate whatever approach to design and manufacture SpaceX is using results in incredibly robust and capable space systems. I think rather than fear, a better response is to see what can be learned from SpaceX and see if it can be applied elsewhere.

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think you should be apologetic about the small scale of your contribution: the animating principle of open source is that the aggregation of small contributions like yours can create outcomes that rival those of even the wealthiest organizations in the world.

But usually it is a handful of really large contributors and more smaller ones. And that's fine, but I'm not aware of a project where the contribution graph is more or less flat. And more often than not those large contributors are paid by large companies to contribute.

I wonder which largish FOSS project has the flattest contribution graph?

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#129
post #111
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What make & model of camera are these?

FLIR Chameleon3 connected via USB to a Intel Atom Linux SBC running ffmpeg to encode the video. See EDLCAM in https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11214-020-00765-9

I am really surprised they are using essentially off-the-shelf USB cameras. I guess if it works, it works, but surprising that they didn't need to design circuitry to work in a space environment.

I am guessing the requirements for circuitry operating on Mars isn't quite as much as a spacecraft or satellite, but it is still getting hit with cosmic particles and solar radiation with no atmosphere.

Re: NASA regains contact with mini-helicopter on Mars

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From some perspectives, yes. From others it's not so bad. I love having cover from the top to do engineering and qualification to have better solutions. Normally it's "we don't have time or resources to make it, get back to the spreadsheet mines". For LEO you can scoot by pretty easily with non-hardened solutions and better systems engineering and software. For deep space you'll need to be more clever.

> It got there by challenging conventional wisdom, she adds. Most launchpad air conditioning systems, for instance, cost nearly half a million dollars, but SpaceX execs wondered why it cost so much more to cool an area the size of a conference room than the $75,000 it cost to cool their entire headquarters and manufacturing plant. The company brought the cost down to about $35,000, says Shotwell. https://www.northwes…

These are self-reported stories by one of the most extreme self-promoters in business. Let's not take it too seriously.
Post reply on HN