Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 318 posts

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#91

Post by metalman »

that_lurker wrote: post #9
metalman wrote: post #7

It's too bad this cant qualify as some sort of world record

Could be the start of space records :-)

I was struggling trying to think up any other plausible scenario, where one unit in a continiously operating piece of electronic /hard/soft ware was rebooted after such a long time and Voyager most likely has no competition in this regard or in a number of others sure speaks volumes for how well the nasa crew ,knew there stuff, and got it right durring that era,on budget,on time, and now doing inter generational space research making the actual designs and blue prints of the space craft, very much worth re examinining

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#92

Post by exmadscientist »

jfengel wrote: post #33
mannykannot wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this quote: “We didn’t design them to last 30 years or 40 years, we designed them not to fail,” John Casani, Voyager project manager from 1975 to 1977, says in a NASA statement.

That doesn't seem helpful. Nothing lasts forever, and if you don't figure out when it's going to fail, it's going to be sooner rather than later.

Incidentally, you have the question backwards: no one really cares when it's going to fail. We care when it's not going to fail: will the spacecraft make it to its destination or not? It doesn't really matter what happens after that.

This might seem like a nitpick, but changes in approach and mindset like this are often the difference between success and failure with "impossible" problems like this. So it's critical to get your approach right!

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#93

Post by mannykannot »

jfengel wrote: post #33
mannykannot wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this quote: “We didn’t design them to last 30 years or 40 years, we designed them not to fail,” John Casani, Voyager project manager from 1975 to 1977, says in a NASA statement.

That doesn't seem helpful. Nothing lasts forever, and if you don't figure out when it's going to fail, it's going to be sooner rather than later.

I imagine there are cases which exemplify your point, but this does not look like one of them.

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#94

Post by mmooss »

augusto-moura wrote: post #46
ghoomketu wrote: post #35

It's fascinating how Voyager 1, despite my lack of space knowledge, utilizes a nuclear power source for 40+ years, offering steady and reliable power without any moving parts that could degrade over time. In contrast, India's decision to rely on solar panels led vikram lander to be dead in just 14 days due to lack of sunlight (afaik). I'm curious about the rationale behind this choice when nuclear power seems like a…

I don't know the exact reasons why Vikram didn't get a fission reactor. But I can assume from similar missions: 1. Solar is pretty good as far as Mars and it gets worse as it travel further from the Sun. This is why most probes that travel past Mars need a nuclear reactor (Voyager, Pioneer, Cassini, etc). Going closer to the sun they get even better 2. Sending radioactive materials on rockets presents a risk and it i…

> fission reactor

Am I wrong that the plutonium in the Voyagers is not in a fission reactor but in an RTG (Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator), which converts the heat from the plutonium into electricity. ?

I suppose the heat is result of fission, but I don't think an RTG is what is meant by a fission reactor. ??

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#95

Post by jdthedisciple »

jonplackett wrote: post #17

Were engineers 50 years ago just much smarter than we are now? It’s pretty unbelievable that these things still work. Or is there something systemic about how they were able to achieve so much so long ago with basically no computers to help.

They weren't affected by DEI nonsense yet.

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#96

Post by WalterBright »

tliltocatl wrote: post #84
WalterBright wrote: post #82

Now that we've got SpaceX cheap launches, it's time to launch a fleet of solar system probes and space telescopes. Why isn't this happening?

AFAIK launch vehicle cost were never the problem for deep space probes. Launch windows still are - Voyager was extremely lucky in this regard. And then there is probe design and construction - SpaceX made launches cheaper, but that just shift most of the cost into the payload. And then there is no point in having such a fleet if you there isn't enough funding for scientists to process the results.

Most of the probes would be identical. Building two identical probes would cost only marginally more than 1, perhaps 10% more.

> but that just shift most of the cost into the payload

It reduces the cost, not shift it.

> And then there is no point in having such a fleet if you there isn't enough funding for scientists to process the results.

Plenty of funding would become available if the funding for junk science stops, such as:

"In 2021, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded $549,000 to a Russian lab performing experiments on cats, including removing part of their brains and seeing if they could still walk on treadmills, according to the Washington Times." https://nypost.com/2024/11/13/us-news/where-elon-musk-can-st...

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#97

Post by fwipsy »

timthorn wrote: post #22
jmclnx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I remember the "crazies" saying the world will come to an end due to that alignment. That belief was reported in the main stream media. When it did not happen, I think they moved on to 2012 :)

Ah, yes - The Jupiter Effect: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3400930-the-jupiter-effe...

Forward by Isaac Asimov? I'm surprised he would have his name associated with this.

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#98

Post by mmooss »

WalterBright wrote: post #82

Now that we've got SpaceX cheap launches, it's time to launch a fleet of solar system probes and space telescopes. Why isn't this happening?

Isn't most of the cost due to designing and building the probes? One launch has been routine for NASA (and others) since long before SpaceX.

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#99

Post by elzbardico »

ghoomketu wrote: post #35

It's fascinating how Voyager 1, despite my lack of space knowledge, utilizes a nuclear power source for 40+ years, offering steady and reliable power without any moving parts that could degrade over time. In contrast, India's decision to rely on solar panels led vikram lander to be dead in just 14 days due to lack of sunlight (afaik). I'm curious about the rationale behind this choice when nuclear power seems like a…

India is a nuclear armed-nation with some long-standing border tensions with some of their also nuclear-armed neighbors.

The military probably have priority on the decisions about the allocations of their plutonium stocks.

Re: Voyager 1 breaks its silence with NASA via radio transmitter not used since 1981

#100

Post by mmooss »

WalterBright wrote: post #96
tliltocatl wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK launch vehicle cost were never the problem for deep space probes. Launch windows still are - Voyager was extremely lucky in this regard. And then there is probe design and construction - SpaceX made launches cheaper, but that just shift most of the cost into the payload. And then there is no point in having such a fleet if you there isn't enough funding for scientists to process the results.

Most of the probes would be identical. Building two identical probes would cost only marginally more than 1, perhaps 10% more. > but that just shift most of the cost into the payload It reduces the cost, not shift it. > And then there is no point in having such a fleet if you there isn't enough funding for scientists to process the results. Plenty of funding would become available if the funding for junk science stop…

> Most of the probes would be identical.

Is there some existing plan? A paper that supports this idea? It's not clear to me that the probe we send to one place for one purpose is the same we'd send to another.

> Building two identical probes would cost only marginally more than 1, perhaps 10% more.

I've read from experts - somewhere here on HN - that isn't how the costs work.

> Plenty of funding would become available if the funding for junk science stops, such as

> "In 2021, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded $549,000 to a Russian lab performing experiments on cats, including removing part of their brains and seeing if they could still walk on treadmills, according to the Washington Times." https://nypost.com/2024/11/13/us-news/where-elon-musk-can-st...

$500k is not enough to matter for a space probe, and I don't see why that brain research is junk science. If you truly think the research was about half-brained cats, then you really should appreciate that research. :D

Post reply on HN