First Controllable Solar Sail Launched Today 237
clustermonkey writes "The first controllable solar sail was launched earlier today from a Russian sub in the Barents Sea. The Planetary Society, founded by Carl Sagan, organized the project and were funded by Cosmos Studios, founded by Sagan's widow. There have been 2 other solar sail deployments by others, but this will be the first to attempt controlled flight. The sail is scheduled to deploy June 25." All may not be well, though: Snot Locker writes "The Cosmos 1 Weblog is showing that, although the launch initially looked successful, they can't seem to find it or hear it. Bummer. Previous Slashdot coverage on the Cosmos 1 Solar Sail mission can be found here."
"Bummer" (Score:5, Funny)
It's a bit more than a "Bummer":
Engineer #1: Yessiree, that solar sail is up there! This calls for a celebration!
Engineer #2: Um. Where is it?
Engineer #1: [points] Up there!
Engineer #2: Where up there?
Engineer #1: Way, way up there.
Engineer #2: You have no idea, right?
Engineer #1: [weak laugh] Nah.
Engineer #1: [shrug] Bummer.
Launched from a Russian sub? Re:"Bummer" (Score:3, Funny)
Re:"Bummer" (Score:2)
Re:"Bummer" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Bummer" (Score:2)
Would it do any good if they are unable to communicate with it to deploy the sail? I suppose it helps to know if the mechanics of the deployment work properly. But it still seems to me like sending a message in a bottle which nobody ever finds. There's not a lot we can learn from something that doesn't send any information back.
Re:"Bummer" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Bummer" (Score:2)
If you can't see or communicate with the car, then I see a certain futility in that, yeah..
Re:"Bummer" (Score:2)
http://www.planetary.org/solarsail/latest_update. h tml [planetary.org]
9:40 pm PDT (4:40 UTC, June 22):
Tracking Station Data Suggest Cosmos 1 in Orbit
Close reviews of telemetry data received at several ground stations appear to reveal weak signals from the Cosmos 1 during the first hours after the launch. This may indicate that Cosmos 1 did make it into orbit around the Earth, though quite possibly not the orbit it was intended for.
In an official statement released at this time
Deja Vu (Score:5, Informative)
If I May Make a Suggestion (Score:3, Insightful)
uh oh (Score:5, Funny)
Re:uh oh (Score:2, Funny)
Re:uh oh (Score:2)
Dont you mean Como, if you're trying to follow the Voyager (whatever) -> V'Ger translation. It is called Cosmos 1 not Solar Sail after all.
I can't see it either (Score:2, Funny)
The requested URL (science/05/06/21/2251211.shtml?tid=160&tid=126&t
...
Unfortunately I can't locate a google cache for the missing spacecraft.
Anyone able to post a mirror?
Re:I can't see it either (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I can't see it either (Score:2)
Always the risk. (Score:5, Interesting)
The trouble is, every time you take what is essentially a robotically controlled device and send it into space giving it a good *shake* in the process (rockets really do vibrate a lot), you run the risk of breaking something.
Of course, you combat this by duplicating as much of the systems as you can but when your experiment requires a very low mass (ala solar sail controller) I wonder how much redundancy is possible?
Still. I hope Cosmos sparks back to life
Re:Always the risk. (Score:5, Informative)
* The signal didn't dissapear suddenly when the kick fired - it became irregular, and then dissapeared after three minutes.
* The signal was received clearly after launch for six minutes.
* There were irregular readings coming from the Volna; however, clearly the craft detached, or there wouldn't have been six minutes of signal.
* STRATCOM can't find the satellite. That doesn't mean that it's gone - only that it's not where they told them to look. Likewise, the lack of ground station reception could mean the same thing. It could be in the wrong orbit, which is actually a more common phenominon than a total craft loss.
* The chance of signal acquisition at the early two stations was only considered marginal to begin with. The big test will be at the permanent stations in Paska Ves, and especially the Tarusa and Bear lakes.
* Not receiving a signal from a spacecraft during the first few orbits is "not extremely unusual". Nonetheless, they do sound a bit nervous.
Re:Always the risk. (Score:2)
New rule, people! No British nannies in space.
SF Chron / AP reporting signals heard (Score:2)
Presumably... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Presumably... (Score:5, Funny)
In other words, what you're trying to say is that somewhere downrange of post-Soviet Russia, solar sail will eventually find yo*CRUNCH*
NO CARRIER
Re:Presumably... (Score:3, Funny)
I mean, in post Soviet Russia, ICBM welcomes you as overlord for old people.
Re:Presumably... (Score:2)
There's a good chance that Russian/US military know exactly where the damn thing fell but aren't telling anyone lest they give away previously unconfirmed capabilities or somesuch.
Re:Presumably... (Score:5, Funny)
You see, the Russians never launched Cosmos 1, they realized that these guys would be a bunch of suckers so what they did, is they got them to pay for the launch, and then launched their own new spy satellite In the same orbit that Cosmos 1 was supposed to be in. And now they are going to tell them "tough luck, you must have out bad communications equipment on her or something". So the Americans pay the money, and the Russians get to launch their spy satellite.
Next Week on Conspiracy Theory 101
Sony and Microsoft are really in bed against Nintendo!
Re:Presumably... (Score:2)
More likely (Score:2)
That or it's simply not in its intended orbit, in which case reestablishing signal is a matter of finding the thing (which will happen eventually) so that one can figure out which way to point the groundstation antennas.
Re:Presumably... (Score:2)
Best place for info on launches etc:
http://planet4589.org/space/jsr/latest.html
Copy and paste the link as
The first uncontrollable solar sail launched in 82 (Score:2, Funny)
Bummer indeed (Score:5, Interesting)
ad astra!
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:2)
A surprising amount of space research is done privately: AmSat HAM radio satelites, several Planetary Society devices, the (failed) Boston University TERRIER and the successful UCal/SpaceDev CHiPSAT. Not sure of the numbers, but big terrestrial telescopes are funded by private foundations as well as the Feds. Did you, perhaps, miss the SpaceShipOne flights last year? This is only the start of commercial/private space development. Not t
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:2)
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:2)
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:2)
OK now seriously... From my point of view much of space research benefits are much the same as pure research... so the progression of technology is in part driven by these sorts of research. Sure medical research is an easily justifiable money sink but the technology that comes from space research accelerates the rate of medical research. I'm in the medical device development business and in the past I have been a part of successful NASA sen
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:2)
Let's see...microwave ovens, velcro, tang, mammography, LEDs, global communications networks, satellite television, jaws of life, breathing systems for firefighters, Vancouver's stadium, laser surgery...all came about because of NASA funded research. That good enough?
Re:Bummer indeed (Score:2)
Already failed according to Russian news (Score:2, Informative)
In short, at 83rd second engine stopped working for unknown reason, and the whole thing is currently being intensively searched for. Probably Russian ICBMs are not so good for launching satellites after all.
Re:Already failed according to Russian news (Score:2)
Look on the bright side, maybe during the Cold War Russia actually attacked the United States a couple times but no one realized it since the warheads got lost along the way...
Re:Already failed according to Russian news (Score:2)
Well then again I suppose it could be a bright side, for a second or so till the shockwave hit right after the flash.
Mycroft
Re:Already failed according to Russian news (Score:2)
Re:Already failed according to Russian news (Score:2)
Sure, with a lighter payload and a longer engine burn to reach an intermediate orbit, they'd 'probably' be ok. But don't bet the whole farm on something that's supposed to just launch to 100km and fall back down again via gravity.
Swords into Plowshares (Score:3, Interesting)
Just like some other craft we happen to know [startrek.com].
Possible bad news: (Score:2, Informative)
Tracking stations failed to pick up signals from an experimental solar-driven orbiter launched on Tuesday from a Russian submarine, raising the prospect the mission had failed.
This includes stations in Russia's Kamchatka peninsula, the Marshall Islands, Alaska, the Czech Republic, and two stations outside Moscow.
Hopefully it's a temporary problem, or just a miscalculated orbit.
Re:Possible bad news: (Score:3, Funny)
Engineer #2: Miles
Engineer #1: What do you mean "miles"?
pwnd!
Well... (Score:2)
Of course they can't find it... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Of course they can't find it... (Score:2)
Too early to say if Cosmos has failed (Score:2, Informative)
To quote from the official timeline (which I will not link to on Slashdot for obvious reasons):
"First high-quality ground station contacts: Tarusa and Bear Lakes
Not looking good! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not looking good! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not looking good! (Score:2)
Man, I wonder how many nukes Soviets would fail to launch back in the cold war days.
Spaceflight now has the scoop (Score:5, Informative)
You have to love russian engineering... (Score:2, Funny)
the first stage engine experienced "a spontaneous stoppage" 83 seconds into launch. The vehicle was allowed to continue flying because it lacked a destruct system. But there has been no further confirmation of the report.
I just love that. The vehicle was "allowed" to continue to fly, because there's no way in hell they could stop it... Oops.
Well, I hope it's doing ok, wherever it is.
It's on mars.. (Score:5, Funny)
Of course they can't hear it! (Score:5, Funny)
How does it stop? (Score:2)
How do they get the damn thing to stop?!
Re:How does it stop? (Score:5, Funny)
We're not saying the launch failed.... (Score:2)
Gotta be said. (Score:3, Funny)
The Project Operations Assistant.
Let's review:
Sexy foreign (to me) accent... check
Geek... check
Cute... check
Knows how to blog... check
Plays with models all day long
Gets to work with stuff that makes a REALLY BIG BOOM... check
Can take a joke... we'll see.
Firszt drunk post from dc (Score:2)
Latest news (Score:2)
developing story - craft detected (Score:3, Informative)
That reminds me... (Score:2)
Alternative for satellite tracking and control (Score:2)
It's cheaper, and should provide continuous tracking and control anywhere.
I think a standard INMARSAT-C terminal could be used for this purpose, as long as the local oscillator is replaced with a unit that uses the GPS signal to calculate the doppler vector to the satellite and apply a correction to the center frequency (Without doppler correction it would miss the 5kHz
Gone with the wind (Score:2)
What can I say, I'm an amateur science fiction writer. Those little pesky things called 'facts' don't really bother me...
Re:Interstellar (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the theory is you get up to a pretty high speed by the time you leave the solar system, then coast. You'd better be sure you can stop at the right place, though.
I'm sure people have figured that out. Obviously you run the process in reverse to slow down when you approach the star. But what if you can only shed half your speed by the time you get to the planet? (that is, if the other star is smaller, the planet further out, etc)?
Anyone?
Re:Interstellar (Score:2, Informative)
Quite simply, you enter orbit.
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
From there you would could get to the target planet.
The big problem I see is making a space craft that would function that long. It would still take a very long time to get the nearest star. I am guessing around 40 years would be the best you could expect a solar sail to do. That would be
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
Right, also, the space vehicle wouldn't necessarily have to go directly to its destination and stop there like a boat or car. It would slow down enough to enter orbit around whatever it was after (positioning itself and/or slowing down by orbiting other things if necessary) and then doing what it needs to do (landing, observing, etc.)
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
Our solar wind is 400 km/s on average and it takes 3 or 4 days to reach the Earth. So at the speed of the interstellar wind that journey would take 60+ days, and that's just 1 AU. To get to 100 AU that would be like 16 years, similar to the speed Voyager is moving at.
If you want to use 20 km/s to get som
Re:Interstellar (Score:3, Insightful)
Why bother to furl the sail? I
Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:2, Informative)
Let's visualize someone on a bike. They stand at the top of a hill (solar radiation effect, closer to the sun, more there is). They peddle enough to get going (ion drive or solar sail). Then they pick up speed rapidly as they go down the hill.
Once they reach the bottom of the hill, where there isn't enough material to push them they fold up the sail - or i
Re:Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:3, Informative)
So when you're craft is going at 200,000 mph, every little hydrogen atom is going to blow a chunk out of your craft and slow down your velocity. So it would make sense to reduce the surface area of your craft, in the direction that it is travelling.
Re:Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:3, Informative)
There is a low density of hydrogen gas out there
Yes, but it's not that low. Actually higher density than the bubble that the Solar system lives inside (as you say, solar wind clears the way). Solar wind is less denser than interstellar space, believe or not.
it wasn't pushed out by the solar wind
They were pushed out. It is just that the gas pressue of interstellar space is in equilibrium with the gas pressure of solar wind. Pushing didn't cease to exist all of sudden,
Re:Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:2)
No, it ceased to exist after it was shoved down stairs.
That is the Terrible Secret of Space.
Re:Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:2)
Re:Interstellar - no solar wind or enough protons? (Score:2)
Re:Interstellar (Score:5, Informative)
An interstellar voyage might be possible, but would probably require a laser or microwave system aimed at the sail for much of its journey (a brief "push" like that is also being tested as part of this experiment).
Re:Interstellar (Score:2, Interesting)
If you want a sail driven by solar wind/protons, you've got the Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion idea, M2P2 [nasa.gov].
From the link:
M2P2 would generate a magnetic field and then inject plasma (ionized gas) that would drag the magnetic field lines out and form a plasma bubble 30 to 60 km (18-36 mi) in diameter.
And, the plasma bubble is very light... lighter than a solar sail.
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
I'm not sure they will, at least not in the way we think of it.
Tacking requires the sail to act basically like an airplane wing. The shape of the sail creates a low-pressure area just in front of it - but that can only happen when you have enough matter in space to create a current. The solar sail relies only on photons to push, and there's no way you'll get them to bend around a sail - at least, not with current technology.
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
I should look it up, but I thought that tacking was basically a lot of vector addition that winds up cancelling out all the side-to-side motion and keeping the forward component. The wind tries to push the sail back, but the sail mostly wants to go sideways. The keel will let the hull go side
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
Starting from earth / orbit you have 3 degrees of freedom. You might want to go above / below the plane of the ecliptic. You can do that by angling a reflective sail so light bounces off and below the plane if you want to go up or reverse that to go down.
You are all ready orbiting so going left right is really a question of waiting or entering a higher / lower orbit waiting a while and then going back to your old orb
Re:Interstellar (Score:3, Interesting)
On idea that's been kicked around is to put a huge laser on the moon and shine it at a retreating solar sail to give it an extra push to bring it up to higher speeds faster. This has the advantage beign able to use a huge facility without taking it along. Of course you'd have to reverse the sail much sooner a
Re:Interstellar (Score:2)
Re:Did they program it in miles again? (Score:3, Insightful)
what an ass.
also, it's Reagans fault.
Re:Did they program it in miles again? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Did they program it in miles again? (Score:2)
Oops, comrade! I said LEFT at Borisoglebsk, not LET IT CRASH at Borisogleb
Re:Did they program it in miles again? (Score:3, Funny)
You sure do.
Endevour [sic] (Score:3, Informative)
You forgot one step:
Lastly, the solar wind will shred the sails of this craft, as we have not yet developed a material light enough for solar sails, yet robust enough to withstand long-term exposure to the solar wind.
Still perfectly valid for proof-of-concept, but a good long way from practical application.
Re:Endevour [sic] (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Endevour... (Score:2)
Spending more doesn't always get you better. But it may be that the "sweet spot" is $40 million, not $4 million or $4 billion.
Re:What if someone does find this thing? (Score:2)
Re:Solar Sail + Ramjet (Score:2)
Re:Solar Sail + Ramjet (Score:2)
The reason it's called a ramjet is because like the sort of ramjet you're apparently thinking of it requires a healthy velocity to work,
Re:They seem to have "found it" (Score:2)
SAC: Unidentified incoming...ready all missiles...fire!!!
***WHAAMMMM***
SAC: Threat eliminated.
Scientists: SAC, you haven't seen our spacecraft, have you? It would sort of look like an ICBM fired by a Russian sub...