Genesis Fireball

[cjolley]

Originally posted by KRSESQ
Well, it definitely wasn't designed to travel vertically through the atmosphere at over 100 mph!

Kevin

Well, if it had been stable it might have hit at more like 500-1,000 mph.
That would have made a much more interesting crater.

On a more upbeat note, it sounds like they may still be able to salvage some science from it.
Chuck

[ZokesPro]

I wonder if they actually tested the landing, or just implemented it assuming it would all go well....

[mmp121]

I'm assuming that the latter is what they hoped for.

[cjolley]

The pyrotechincs are very reliable, and all of them failed to fire.
So they are looking a battery that indicated overheating shortly after takeoff.

Not that they could have done anything even if they had known it was fried* at the time.
Chuck


* "Ignore it, and maybe it will go away" where have I heard that before?

[Dr Mordrid]

Only one pyrotechnics battery? You'd think they'd build in some redundency in that system. Last I checked batteries were cheap.

Dr. Mordrid

[cjolley]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
Only one pyrotechnics battery? You'd think they'd build in some redundency in that system.
Dr. Mordrid

Maybe they calculate the odds of a short in the added extra wiring is higher than the odds of a failure in the extra battery.

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
...Last I checked batteries were cheap.
Dr. Mordrid

I suspect it isn't a couple D cells in there.
Or, I mean one D cell in there

Chuck

[Ribbit]

Originally posted by KvHagedorn
NASA's on drugs.. Catching the parachute with a hook from a plane? Now tell me THAT wasn't a batty idea.

The pilots had been training for this for five years, and the "lead" pilot had caught the practice drone on every single attempt. Doesn't seem all that crazy.

Plus, I gather film canisters were routinely retrieved from spy satellites this way a few decades ago, so it's nothing new. (Or has someone been watching too many old spy movies?)

[mmp121]

Originally posted by Ribbit

*SNIP*

Plus, I gather film canisters were routinely retrieved from spy satellites this way a few decades ago, so it's nothing new. (Or has someone been watching too many old spy movies?)

I would say you have been watching too many old spy movies. I mean if they dropped canisters from spy satellites, how the heck would they re-load them? Would you have a limited supply of canisters on board? That makes no sense to me.

[cjolley]

Originally posted by mmp121
I would say you have been watching too many old spy movies. I mean if they dropped canisters from spy satellites, how the heck would they re-load them? Would you have a limited supply of canisters on board? That makes no sense to me.

It's true.
Early 60's (maybe late 50's too).
We needed pictures and that was the only way to get them.
Chuck

[SpiralDragon]

urg.. to bad it was a miss... seems like every other atempt to explor the univers is ending up in failiur for the last decade...

[KRSESQ]

I recall reading a number of years ago that when a spy satillite would send a film package back to Earth, it was common practice for the paracuting bundle to be snagged by a retrieval airplane.

Doc, can you confirm this? or am I getting mixed up with scenes from "Ice Station Zebra"?

Kevin

[mmp121]

Maybe its my youth and ignorance on the subject at hand. I just figured that if they had a way to tell the satellite when to take pictures, that they would have a way to receive them as well.

[spadnos]

Originally posted by mmp121
Maybe its my youth and ignorance on the subject at hand. I just figured that if they had a way to tell the satellite when to take pictures, that they would have a way to receive them as well.

First, I think a lot of the early satellites were mostly automatic. They would be put into fairly elliptical orbits, and be set to take pictures when close to perigee (closest approach to earth). The optics and film weren't good enough to get good pictures from further away.

It's pretty easy to make something happen without having the ability to get data back the other way. Note that there have been TV remote controls for decades, but the remote almost never gets confirmation back from the TV that it did anything, or what channel has been set, etc.

Even if there is confirmation of image capture, that would be a short signal that says "I heard ya", not a multi-hour transmission of image data (remember - those were the days when high speed was measured in kilobits per second).

- Steve

[mmp121]

Agreed, I currently work with a 1981 launched satellite (designed in the early 70's). I know what you mean when you say high speed and having it only be 32 kilobits a second.

Its just that I haven't been around spacecraft operations long enough to know how they use to do things in the OLD OLD days.

[cjolley]

Also, back then (and even to a certain extent now) film was a LOT more detailed than any electronic imaging they had.

The TV cameras (and all electronic cameras) were nowhere near high enough rez.
chuck


edit: syntax