Rosetta's 12-Year Mission Ends With Landing On Comet (sciencemag.org) 40
sciencehabit writes: It was an unusual grand finale. The crowded European Space Agency (ESA) operations center in Darmstadt, Germany, waited in silence and then the signal from the descending Rosetta mission simply stopped at 1.19 pm local time showing that the spacecraft had, presumably, landed on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko some 40 minutes earlier, due to the time the signal takes to reach Earth. Mission controllers hugged each other; there was gentle applause from onlookers; and that was it. There were no last minute crises. Seven of Rosetta's instruments kept gathering data until the end. Holger Sierks, principal investigator of the 12-year mission's main camera, showed the gathered staff, officials, and journalists Rosetta's final picture: a rough gravelly surface with a few larger rocks covering an area 10 meters across. Earlier, it had snapped the interior of deep pits on the comet (shown above, from an altitude of 5.8 kilometers) that may show the building blocks it is made of. "It's very crude raw data but this will keep us busy," Sierks said. It is hoped that this last close-up data grab will help to clarify the many scientific questions raised by Rosetta.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
>there's no way to know what direction Mecca is in to pray towards five times per day while in space,
If you are that far away (where that comet is) then facing the Earth would be good enough
Re: (Score:2)
Oh of those of so little math skills.
Muslim or not. In space you can find Mecca with knowing the current time. Your current speed and direction related to earth.
These spacecrafts need this type of calculation to send messages back to earth. While not targeting Mecca they may be targeting Hustan Texas. Which is the same thing.
Re: (Score:1)
Different objectives - impacting a comet is by design a limited function. And Rosetta went MUCH farther - rovers traveled maybe 250 million km from earth, but Rosetta traveled 6.4 Billion km. See here [esa.int].
Re: (Score:1)
But why did they program it to shut off on impact? Who cares if it might be damaged and short-circuited by the impact, it's end of life anyway, might as well see if if some parts of it survive the impact and send back something useful. No, they intentionally programmed it to go into "safe mode" and basically shut off at the moment of impact. A "clean end" to the mission, they called it. I think they should have gone for some "dirty" pictures instead. Better than nothing, and what does the probe have to lose
Re: (Score:2)
From what I read, they want to prevent having a noise source that could interfere with future missions. I'm not sure I buy that, with what power the satellite could get from broken solar panels on the comet surely the noise would be quite limited, but that's what the local newspaper said.
Also, I guess they just want to wrap up the project, shut off the receivers, and move on.
Re:Meanwhile, the fucking Mars rover (Score:5, Informative)
First off, Rosetta is not Philae. It was never designed to "land" - just orbit. The moment of impact it was going to be destroyed You have to remember that they're only strong when they were folded up - once everything's unfolded it's quite fragile. At the moment of landing, the solar panels would've collapsed - they are long parts and it was only strong when it was folded up for launch, so it would've twisted and bent.
And there's no power once that happens - Rosetta was dying - its onboard fuel is nearly depleted and its far from the sun so its power reserves are diminished. This lets it do some final science using its onboard sensors and relay some final data before impact.
Additionally, the antenna would've collapsed on impact so it will no longer be pointing towards earth so even if they kept Rosetta "on", there would be no way to receive anything because the antenna would be pointed in a random direction.
Re: (Score:1)
It may have bounced around for hours with all its sensors shut off while it was still perfectly capable of sending back more data.
Except, once on the surface, its antennas would no longer be correctly oriented. Same for the solar panels, so it would lose power quickly, especially with direct heat transfer due to contact with the cold surface.
Thoughts on the comet (Score:4, Funny)
The spacecraft's final transmission : "I wonder if it'll be friends with me"
Re: (Score:3)
Editing -- not copypasting (Score:4)
Earlier, it had snapped the interior of deep pits on the comet (shown above, from an altitude of 5.8 kilometers) that may show the building blocks it is made of.
It it too much to ask submissions be re-written to a point and not just blatant copying and pasting from the source?
Re: (Score:2)
It it too much to ask submissions be re-written to a point and not just blatant copying and pasting from the source?
What, you don't see the pictures?
Great achievement (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The assholes there were the SJWs who reduced Matt Taylor to tears for wearing the shirt. If I had been running the mission I would have had the whole staff wear "New Gunner Girls" for every press conference after that.
It crashed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Even though we say that projectiles land, I think that when we use the word "land" for any controlled craft, we mean that it alighted and came to rest in a controlled manner - otherwise we tend to use the word "crash".
Using "landing" for a deliberate crash seems somewhat wrong to my language ear, much like saying a car parked in a brick wall, or a boat beached at the sea bottom.
Re:that was a close call... (Score:5, Funny)
You forgot the xkcd link [xkcd.com]