NASA can really suck sometimes

[Barbarian]

If I wasted 18 years of my life because somebody forgot to flip a frickin’ switch, I’d be a little less sanguine than this scientist.

[OtakuLoki]

Actually, that was an ESA responsibility.
Not that it makes for a much better result for the guy. 18 years?!?! :eek:

[Scylla]

Had to be a Frenchman:
“That’s a priceless Titanide wind experiment that I spent 18 years on!”
[clouseau]Nut inny mooore,[/clouseau]

[Angua]

Mind you, it looks like Hubble’s going to be stranded

[Exgineer]

@Barbarian

If I wasted 18 years of my life because somebody forgot to flip a frickin’ switch, I’d be a little less sanguine than this scientist.

They got the story a bit wrong. It was 18 man-years put in by the entire team, not an 18 year project.

Still sucks though.

[Finagle]

Well, in the inverse of “suck”, it looks like they may have been able to retrieve the data using radio telescopes. Which considering the strength of the signal would be absolutely remarkable.

[OtakuLoki]

@Angua

Mind you, it looks like Hubble’s going to be stranded

Not to sound cynical, but the Senior Senator from MD has already saved Hubble once, IIRC, so I’m not so sure it will stay cut. Not out of any sense of scientific history, or exploration, but to keep the pork barrel rolling. :dubious:

Not that I don’t want Hubble saved, mind you, I just wish it would be for the right reasons.

[clayton_e]

@Exgineer

They got the story a bit wrong. It was 18 man-years put in by the entire team, not an 18 year project.

“In total, the core of our team has invested something like 80 man years on this experiment, 18 of which are mine”

…

[KGS]

What on earth is wrong with NASA these days?? Back in the 60’s and 70’s, when hazards of space travel were mostly unknown and computer science had barely reached the microchip stage, all missions were one success after another, even when confronted with a potential catastrophe. And it can’t all be blamed on funding problems, either…a lot of it is stupid shit like forgetting to convert from metric, or this thing.

[OtakuLoki]

@KGS

What on earth is wrong with NASA these days?? Back in the 60’s and 70’s, when hazards of space travel were mostly unknown and computer science had barely reached the microchip stage, all missions were one success after another, even when confronted with a potential catastrophe. And it can’t all be blamed on funding problems, either…a lot of it is stupid shit like forgetting to convert from metric, or this thing.

I take it you’ve forgotten Apollo I?

Or the way that Gus Grissom’s Mercury capsule sank?

Not to mention the number of boosters that have gone CATO.

You might find this thread informative.

[KeithT]

@KGS

What on earth is wrong with NASA these days?? Back in the 60’s and 70’s, when hazards of space travel were mostly unknown and computer science had barely reached the microchip stage, all missions were one success after another, even when confronted with a potential catastrophe. And it can’t all be blamed on funding problems, either…a lot of it is stupid shit like forgetting to convert from metric, or this thing.

Not every mission was a success.

Lest ye also forget a few failed Mariner probes, and the Apollo 1 fire.

[KeithT]

(That’s not a simulpost, just a redundant system. )

As it turns out, it looks like the ground-based telescopes trained on Huygens were able to pick up the data transmitted to the inactive receiver channel. From space.com:

The communications glitch will mean that doppler wind data from Huygens will need to be pieced together from the many ground telescopes that were trained on Huygens during its two and one-half-hour descent to Titan’s surface on Jan. 14.

But that data will be available given the global response of radio astronomers to Huygens, said Leonid Gurvits, head of the team that coordinated the 18 primary telescopes in Australia, China, Japan, the United States and Europe. “We will get the same scientific result, it will just take a little longer,” Gurvits said.

[ivylass]

You know, I wouldn’t blame him one bit if he just sat on the floor and cried.

Here’s hoping some heads get smacked at ESA and that some of the data can be retrieved.

[OtakuLoki]

@ivylass

You know, I wouldn’t blame him one bit if he just sat on the floor and cried.

Nor would I. Or if he even did a Howard Dean yell.

[Podkayne]

Aw, I don’t feel to bad for this guy. You do not put an instrument on a spacecraft without preparing yourself for the possiblity that it will:

[ul]
[li]Blow up on launch.[/li][li]Blow up when the main engine fires.[/li][li]End up wandering aimlessly when the main engine fails to burn.[/li][li]Run into a planet during a gravity assist.[/li][li]Go off couse during an engine burn or a gravity assist.[/li][li]Blow up during orbital insertion.[/li][li]Miss the intended destination.[/li][li]Crash headlong into the intended destination.[/li][li]Burn up in the atmosphere of the intended destination.[/li][li]Pancake on the surface when the parachute pyros fail.[/li][li]Fail because one of the components was damaged on lauch, in flight, or on landing.[/li][li]Fail because one of the components was manufactured incorrectly.[/li][li]Fail because one of the compments was designed incorrectly.[/li][li]Fail because of a software error.[/li][/ul]

The folks who work on this stuff are as fatalistic as Vikings. They plan for the thing to fail stupidly—and they work themselves into exhaustion to make sure that when the thing does die for a stupid reason, it isn’t their fault. (To be honest, I feel worse for the poor schmuck who was responsible for writing the line of code that was supposed to turn it on.) Space exploration is not a low-risk endeavor. If you can’t hack it, you work on ground-based telescopes! I wouldn’t do a space mission for all the tea in Darjeeling, man.

[Barbarian]

There is nothing wrong with a hearty “Fuck you Loki!” upon hearing catastrophic bad news.

I’ve even been known to rant and rail for 15 minutes at bad weather.

You can accept bad news. You don’t have to pretend to like it.

[Moirai]

I have met Gene Kranz and gotten the opportunity to speak with him at length. He assured me (and others) that at some point (or more than one) they were seconds or inches away from total disaster on every single mission. It was the professionalism, creativity and outright miracle-working of a bunch of 20-something geeks who saved the day each time.

And he certainly believes that the NASA of today is not the NASA of our parents…

Check out his book, Failure is Not an Option. It’s a wild ride.

[RandomLetters]

@OtakuLoki

Not to sound cynical, but the Senior Senator from MD has already saved Hubble once, IIRC, so I’m not so sure it will stay cut. Not out of any sense of scientific history, or exploration, but to keep the pork barrel rolling. :dubious:

Not that I don’t want Hubble saved, mind you, I just wish it would be for the right reasons.

Even if they don’t save Hubble, the
James Webb Space Telescope is scheduled to be launched in 2011, and will be a large improvment over Hubble - the James Webb Telescope has a main mirror more than twice the diameter of the mirror on the Hubble scope.