UJRefugees.net

Officially. It landed on Mars in January of 2004. Same month another rover landed called Spirit. But, spirit met an untimely death in a sand trap, unable to get sunlight, in 2010.

But, the rover Opportunity far outlasted its expected life time. It clocked just over 28 miles of travel across the planet. Its death came from a dust storm that blocked the sun for months and its batteries crapped out.

If it was a Toyota it would still be running.

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:01 pm Officially. It landed on Mars in January of 2004. Same month another rover landed called Spirit. But, spirit met an untimely death in a sand trap, unable to get sunlight, in 2010.

But, the rover Opportunity far outlasted its expected life time. It clocked just over 28 miles of travel across the planet. Its death came from a dust storm that blocked the sun for months and its batteries crapped out.

NASA at the time announced it's life expectancy at 90 days. Ended 15 years later buried under sand from a massive dust storm.

The mission was supposed to last 90 days. It lasted 15 years.

It's final transmission was ... “my battery is low and it's getting dark.”

Reservoir Dog wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:29 pm The mission was supposed to last 90 days. It lasted 15 years.

It's final transmission was ... “my battery is low and it's getting dark.”

Stop Dave......

I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?

megman wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:36 pm

Reservoir Dog wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:29 pm The mission was supposed to last 90 days. It lasted 15 years.

It's final transmission was ... “my battery is low and it's getting dark.”

Stop Dave......

[HAL's shutdown]

HAL: I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I'm a... fraid. Good afternoon, gentlemen. I am a HAL 9000 computer. I became operational at the H.A.L. plant in Urbana, Illinois on the 12th of January 1992. My instructor was Mr. Langley, and he taught me to sing a song. If you'd like to hear it I can sing it for you.

Dave Bowman: Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.

HAL: It's called "Daisy."

[sings while slowing down]

HAL: Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do. I'm half crazy all for the love of you. It won't be a stylish marriage, I can't afford a carriage. But you'll look sweet upon the seat of a bicycle built for two.

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:54 pm I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?

To secure more funding ?

That rover was the size of a golf cart. I'm not sure that 28 miles of travel in 15 years is all that impressive.

An 18 hole golf course is around 3.5 miles long. So that's only about 8 rounds of golf in 15 years.

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:54 pm I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?

The end was exactly what they thought would happen, dust built up on the solar panels so it couldn't maintain enough charge to survive. They didn't anticipate the frequency of cleaning events, where martian wind cleaned off the panels. That's why it lasted so much longer than the minimum spec. The final killer was a global dust storm on top of failing batteries and a series of other hardware failures over the years. To be fair though it was kinda hard to guess what martian surface wind conditions would be in advance. Bit of a mystery why none of the geniuses at nasa thought of always maintaining enough charge for a single pass of a simple windscreen wiper though.

Incredible to think though that one day Chinese astronauts will be able to recover it and tell party members exactly what went wrong with the former USA's greatest technological feat.

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:02 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:54 pm I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?

The end was exactly what they thought would happen, dust built up on the solar panels so it couldn't maintain enough charge to survive. They didn't anticipate the frequency of cleaning events, where martian wind cleaned off the panels. That's why it lasted so much longer than the minimum spec. The final killer was a global dust storm on top of failing batteries and a series of other hardware failures over the years. To be fair though it was kinda hard to guess what martian surface wind conditions would be in advance. Bit of a mystery why none of the geniuses at nasa thought of always maintaining enough charge for a single pass of a simple windscreen wiper though.

Incredible to think though that one day Chinese astronauts will be able to recover it and tell party members exactly what went wrong with the former USA's greatest technological feat.

There's often an underlying message to everything you say here AH. Yes, China is the next superpower. My mom told me that when I was 12 after she learned that when she went to a good college in the 1950's. She also told me that the UK is going down the tubes, slowly & steadily, and she was right with that prediction as well.

Meanwhile, do you see people in the US wearing gas masks, destroying their environment and having such a miserable quality of life like the people in China do? No thanks, if that's what it takes to be #1 they can have it. I don't know why we're wasting trillions of dollars in space exploration either. There are so many more higher priorities than that it's not even funny.

Not entirely clear what 'brit gary' is meant to mean, but you poor fools aren't wounding me as you apparently want to by pointing out the UK is no longer the superpower it once was. I am and always have been in touch with reality. The world wars took the greatest empire the world has ever or will ever see, and brexit relegates us to a fairly irrelevant major developed economy where the people live free and happy with superior healthcare and social mobility. I reckon we'll survive.

Did you ever meet Astro Hammy? You better watch yourself, because Drake's dog is looking for you. Make sure you don't meet up with him.

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:54 pm I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things.

NASA had not anticipated the rover would meet up with a bunch of Cuban mechanics who could keep it running so long?

captquint wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 8:10 pm

Dude.......

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:02 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:54 pm I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?

The end was exactly what they thought would happen, dust built up on the solar panels so it couldn't maintain enough charge to survive. They didn't anticipate the frequency of cleaning events, where martian wind cleaned off the panels. That's why it lasted so much longer than the minimum spec. The final killer was a global dust storm on top of failing batteries and a series of other hardware failures over the years. To be fair though it was kinda hard to guess what martian surface wind conditions would be in advance. Bit of a mystery why none of the geniuses at nasa thought of always maintaining enough charge for a single pass of a simple windscreen wiper though.

Incredible to think though that one day Chinese astronauts will be able to recover it and tell party members exactly what went wrong with the former USA's greatest technological feat.

Actually, nobody noticed it at the time, but the UK's spiral from World domination downward was already apparent before Queen Victoria passed away. There was no way a small island nation like that could keep that up economically against upcoming giants like the US and others. Still, hell of a 300 year run. Amazing, even.

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:14 pm

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:02 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:54 pm I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?

The end was exactly what they thought would happen, dust built up on the solar panels so it couldn't maintain enough charge to survive. They didn't anticipate the frequency of cleaning events, where martian wind cleaned off the panels. That's why it lasted so much longer than the minimum spec. The final killer was a global dust storm on top of failing batteries and a series of other hardware failures over the years. To be fair though it was kinda hard to guess what martian surface wind conditions would be in advance. Bit of a mystery why none of the geniuses at nasa thought of always maintaining enough charge for a single pass of a simple windscreen wiper though.

Incredible to think though that one day Chinese astronauts will be able to recover it and tell party members exactly what went wrong with the former USA's greatest technological feat.

Actually, nobody noticed it at the time, but the UK's spiral from World domination downward was already apparent before Queen Victoria passed away. There was no way a small island nation like that could keep that up economically against upcoming giants like the US and others. Still, hell of a 300 year run. Amazing, even.

Well no, the decline was after and caused by WW1. It's kind of the point of an empire that it wasn't just a small island nation, it was a quarter of the globe. That's like saying the US is DC. The Victorian era is aka the golden age, and the empire actually expanded during her reign. Really don't want to get into another exploration of your ignorance though.

[quote=analhamster post_id=10883 time=1550532457 user_id=105]
[quote=WestTexasCrude post_id=10879 time=1550531645 user_id=116]
[quote=analhamster post_id=10723 time=1550451748 user_id=105]
[quote=Flumper post_id=10670 time=1550440483 user_id=196]
I don't understand why Nasa so greatly under estimates the life expectancy of these things. Both rovers surpassed their life expectancies by huge amounts. And those space explorer things they sent out to study the planets, same thing.

What did they think would happen within 90 days that took 15 years to happen? Are they just setting the bar so low that they don't look stupid if something goes wrong?
[/quote]

The end was exactly what they thought would happen, dust built up on the solar panels so it couldn't maintain enough charge to survive. They didn't anticipate the frequency of cleaning events, where martian wind cleaned off the panels. That's why it lasted so much longer than the minimum spec. The final killer was a global dust storm on top of failing batteries and a series of other hardware failures over the years. To be fair though it was kinda hard to guess what martian surface wind conditions would be in advance. Bit of a mystery why none of the geniuses at nasa thought of always maintaining enough charge for a single pass of a simple windscreen wiper though.

Incredible to think though that one day Chinese astronauts will be able to recover it and tell party members exactly what went wrong with the former USA's greatest technological feat.
[/quote]
Actually, nobody noticed it at the time, but the UK's spiral from World domination downward was already apparent before Queen Victoria passed away. There was no way a small island nation like that could keep that up economically against upcoming giants like the US and others. Still, hell of a 300 year run. Amazing, even.
[/quote]

Well no, the decline was after and caused by WW1. It's kind of the point of an empire that it wasn't just a small island nation, it was a quarter of the globe. That's like saying the US is DC. The Victorian era is aka the golden age, and the empire actually expanded during her reign. Really don't want to get into another exploration of your ignorance though.
[/quote]
Sure, WW1 was the major blow that really headed it down the inevitable decline, but the economic data from 20 years before really showed that the amazing run started 200+ years before during the Industrial Revolution was really coming to an end for anyone who wanted to notice, At the time, Coal production, Iron production and ship building were considered the the big 3 for economic might. By the start of WW!, they had slipped to 3rd and and fading fast. Actually the only reason the UK was able to weather WW1 and then WW2 and not see the breakup of the empire until the late 1940's was their aggressive entry into the Middle East oil situation in the 20's-30's.

Sure thing buddy, you really know your stuff. I'd get into it, but I'm researching where all the earthworms went.

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:54 pm Sure thing buddy, you really know your stuff. I'd get into it, but I'm researching where all the earthworms went.

OK, just setting the record straight. Believe me, of all the Empires the World has ever seen, The British one is the most amazing one ever seen. A little dinky island of what a few 10's millions dominating the World stage for almost 300 years. Based not on land strength but naval. And this from an island
whose forests were cut down centuries before. Amazing.

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:10 am

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:54 pm Sure thing buddy, you really know your stuff. I'd get into it, but I'm researching where all the earthworms went.

OK, just setting the record straight. Believe me, of all the Empires the World has ever seen, The British one is the most amazing one ever seen. A little dinky island of what a few 10's millions dominating the World stage for almost 300 years. Based not on land strength but naval. And this from an island
whose forests were cut down centuries before. Amazing.

Hey WTC, are there earthworms in the UK? I have a friend from Ireland and he tells me they have no squirrels there to help eradicate them against rabies. You never know.

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:10 am

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:54 pm Sure thing buddy, you really know your stuff. I'd get into it, but I'm researching where all the earthworms went.

OK, just setting the record straight. Believe me, of all the Empires the World has ever seen, The British one is the most amazing one ever seen. A little dinky island of what a few 10's millions dominating the World stage for almost 300 years. Based not on land strength but naval. And this from an island
whose forests were cut down centuries before. Amazing.

Well no, you were setting the record wrong and still are but you're just too stupid to bother arguing with. I just find it kinda hard not to point out we still have forests. The amount of land mass covered by forest bottomed out, but never hit zero, as a result of WW1, not before, and that was because imports were limited. It has always been a trading nation and timber is a commodity.

analhamster wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:23 am

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:10 am

analhamster wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:54 pm Sure thing buddy, you really know your stuff. I'd get into it, but I'm researching where all the earthworms went.

OK, just setting the record straight. Believe me, of all the Empires the World has ever seen, The British one is the most amazing one ever seen. A little dinky island of what a few 10's millions dominating the World stage for almost 300 years. Based not on land strength but naval. And this from an island
whose forests were cut down centuries before. Amazing.

Well no, you were setting the record wrong and still are but you're just too stupid to bother arguing with. I just find it kinda hard not to point out we still have forests. The amount of land mass covered by forest bottomed out, but never hit zero, as a result of WW1, not before, and that was because imports were limited. It has always been a trading nation and timber is a commodity.

Actually, I'm trying to remember how we got from the Mars Rover to an argument over the British Empire.