back to article BEELION-dollar lasso snaps, NASA mapper blind in one eye

The active radar portion of the “spinning lasso” antenna attached to NASA's SMAP satellite, launched in January, has stopped functioning and can't be recovered. Luckily for the space agency, it doesn't put an end to the entire near-billion-dollar mission, because the other half of the spacecraft's mission, a radiometer …

  1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    Clever idea with the spinning antenna.

    Interesting that it was not the "tricky" spinning bit but the relatively standard HPA (standard component most radar systems) part that did not live up to expectations.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Joke

    I found the warranty card!!!

    There is another problem though.

    The card state the goods must be returned to the store in the original packaging for any refund to be made.

    JOKE ALERT!!! (or is it??)

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    And this is why Science is a waste of money

    End of!

    1. Mark 85

      Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

      Thank you, Senator. You're from Texas, right?

    2. Afernie

      Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

      "And this is why Science is a waste of money End of!"

      I see. So presumably you posted your trollogram directly to Vulture HQ on stone tablets?

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. John Stirling

      Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

      @And this is why Science is a waste of money

      By the same argument, so is medicine.

      1. Sarah Balfour

        Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

        When did medicine stop being science…?

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

          When did medicine start being science…?

        2. TeeCee Gold badge
          Facepalm

          Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

          When they started offering "alternative" therapies on the taxpayer's pound?

          Personally I can't see the difference between that and teaching fairy stories as science, save for the fact that the former is our idiocy whereas the latter is one from the septics.

    4. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

      Re: And this is why Science is a waste of money

      Score 22 (and counting) for the troll.

  4. AustinTX

    Why buy two at just 110%

    When you can waste a billion dollars by not building redundantly? A penny saved is a billion lost. I grieve for our space program.

    1. John Robson Silver badge

      Re: Why buy two at just 110%

      The build cost is marginal on a project like this - the launch cost is virtually everything, so you could build two, but you won't get it at 110%, but more like 180% - 190%.

      This isn't the first instrument to fail before it's life end, and it won't be the last - but if you actually look at how good they are at these things now (*cough* spirit *cough* opportunity) then I think they know roughly what they're doing - it's called science, and it's things you don't expect that teach us what the universe is like...

      1. Tom Womack

        Re: Why buy two at just 110%

        The launch cost was about $140 million (NASA procured the last three Delta II launches for $412 million in 2012) http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1207/16delta2/), so there's still a very substantial saving if the backup craft costs half as much as the original to build.

        "Lasso snaps" is at best a misleading heading - as far as anyone knows the antenna is still spinning happily, the radar's not working because the transmitter burned out.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: Why buy two at just 110%

          The ground support, data analysis and research cost is 2x as high for 2 missions and any design fault will fail in both missions

      2. AustinTX

        Re: Why buy two at just 110%

        I obviously didn't mean to build two whole satellites and to conduct a separate launch upon failure of the first. I meant to have a marginally more heavy satellite with two redundant power supplies in it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Why buy two at just 110%

          Having "two redundant power supplies in it" would be particularly redundant as it is not the power supply that they're blaming.

          It's the amplifier (ie a bit between the oscillator and the antenna).

          There's no claim that the power supply is out of spec at all.

  5. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

    I know that it's a bit of a downer ...

    ... but after NASA's recent string of outstanding successes, it's almost reassuring to know that they can have mishaps.

    They were beginning to look almost infallible.

  6. Picky
    WTF?

    Site visit?

    Is the committee planning a site visit?

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Site visit?

      They were going to, right up until the time someone pointed out that the coffee would freeze, and the doughnuts would float away...

  7. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

    I wonder

    This satellite had a 6m radar mesh antenna spinning around every 4 seconds 685km above the earth, connected to some high-tech electronics. Two weeks after one of the biggest solar storms in ages, with spectacular auroræ at low latitudes, the electronics went pfffuut. Maybe there's a connection? Zapped by induced voltages?

    1. eswan
      Joke

      Re: I wonder

      Bad ground connection.

      1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: I wonder

        Bad ground connection.

        It's true you don't often hear about problems with satellites while they're earthed.

  8. knarf

    More Space Junk

    Its getting fairly busy up there with piles of useless junk spinning around.

  9. Little Mouse

    These [radar signals] penetrated a few centimetres into the soil...

    Anyone know how powerful the signal was? Perhaps we were we all being cooked from within...

    The whole thing looks more like a James-Bond-Villain Superweapon to me. I think we may all have just had a lucky escape.

    1. Grikath

      Re: These [radar signals] penetrated a few centimetres into the soil...

      You'd need a heck of a beam to get cooked by radar, us meatsacks are mostly transparent to the frequencies used, y'know...

      And it depends on where you live, but in an urban ( and quite often also not-so-urban) area you're quite likely to be bathed in radar frequencies anyway. Air traffic control, harbour/waterway control, ships, aircraft, long-range weather stations, speed traps.... the list goes on.. I doubt a piddly little satellite would add much...

      1. Dan Paul

        Re: These [radar signals] penetrated a few centimetres into the soil...

        We are not transparent to those particular frequencies. They reflect off water. Remind me again what percentage of H20 humans are composed of?

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    Punctuation !

    You missed the comma in this phrase, so it means the opposite of what you meant:

    "the mission will just have to continue without it , using the passive collector."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eats,_Shoots_%26_Leaves

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Is there a "G" in NASA?

    I'm sure I'm wrong, but why is NASA spending money staring at the ground so often of late? Aren't they the Aeronautic and Space administration? I think they're looking the wrong direction. Staring at the ground should be handled by the National Ground Staring Administration, not the people who are supposed to be taking us to the stars.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Is there a "G" in NASA?

      why is NASA spending money staring at the ground so often of late?

      Because there's a bottomless pit of money for climate change research, as long as it comes back with the right answer. Of course, if it comes back with the wrong answer, then the University of East Anglia will be able to help out.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Is there a "G" in NASA?

        Or just maybe because they are looking at the Earth from Space, which is part of the NASA name and mission.

    2. Gene Cash Silver badge

      Re: Is there a "G" in NASA?

      Because every time NASA proposes more space missions, such as to Mars, the Moon, or an asteroid, they get slapped down by Congress.

  12. IvyKing
    Boffin

    Antenna or amplifier?

    I may have misread TFA, but it sounds more like the problem was with the amplifier than the antenna.

  13. Hubert Thrunge Jr.

    Fix it...

    Just send up the Shuttle and a man in a white suit with some tools and swap the unit out.... Oh wait...

  14. dennis98290

    Yes it is unfortunate that a portion of this expensive satellite failed. I would think understanding its mission should be part of this discussion. Things like: Monitor Drought, Predict Floods, Assist Crop Productivity, Weather Forecasting, Linking Water and Energy and Carbon Cycles.

    http://smap.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/why-it-matters/

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like