Well, you can't win 'em all, can you? Still, all things considered, an amazing mission. Anyone even thinking about calling it a failure? Better keep quiet - you have no idea...
Philae's phinal phlop: Lonely lander didn't answer wakeup signal
Sunday's attempt to make contact with the Philae lander on Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko has not succeeded. As we reported yesterday, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) yesterday on Sunday sent a command to Philae, suggesting it spin up its flywheel. That command was hoped to either lead to the lander shifting so its solar …
COMMENTS
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
Tuesday 12th January 2016 08:51 GMT Mark 85
A failure? Not at all. It traveled, it landed, it sent back science. Other than a failure to communicate.... it is great.
Since the command was sent as a "suggestion" per the second sentence in the article... I wonder if the little lander just being petulant that it can't come back to a ticker-tape parade? I do wish the designers of this achievement could get a parade in their honor.
-
-
-
Tuesday 12th January 2016 15:00 GMT Stevie
Bah!
A noble attempt but allow me to point out (again) that the only successful part of the probe part of the mission was the bit that depended mostly on maths. Just about all the crucial engineering involved failed spectacularly.
The harpoon/tether did not work, the probe bounced and skidded across the comet *because* the harpoon gizmo was so important to the entrprise and the probe only ended up on the comet in the end because it crashed into a ravine where it lay unresponsive for lo these many months.
Yes it was a very noble effort, but someone deserves a big fat "D-" for wasting everyone else's time.
-
-
Tuesday 12th January 2016 16:34 GMT Stevie
Miracle
Come on, go look up how the lander was sent to the comet and how the lander was released ... it is a miracle that the lander managed to get 10 000kms close to the comet, let-alone land on it!!!!
And I said the part that depended on maths was well done indeed. We pretty much understand how to do orbital mechanics and how to harden computers well enough to handle the on-board changes well enough to cope with the variables the comet's nature introduced. The science part was well done.
But there was a single point of failure in the mission critical path: The harpoon/tether, which did not work. From that, the wreck of the entire mission can be traced. Sayin' it ain't so doesn't help get the next mission funded.
If you don't think I was cheering this mission on from the sidelines you are badly mistaken. Big space nut., me. Mum pulled me out of school to see Yuri Gagarin's victory parade through red square - in the days before Telstar made international TV a common thing. Hell, we watched on a TV set my dad had made from parts sourced from Radiospares. A European mission to a comet? It doesn't get better than that.
But rose-tinting the obvious failure doesn't help anyone.
And as for "re-taking GCSE A levels", well, my A level physics grades were not good as I lacked some of the insight that has come from watching physics work in the real world, and hadn't stretched my maker legs much (money was tight). I could do better today I reckon, but sad to say I never took a GCSE.
They hadn't been invented when I sat my A levels.
I still have my Nelkon and Parker though.
-
-
-
Wednesday 13th January 2016 01:28 GMT Steven Roper
Re: Yes, Very nice ...
That incident was the final straw that turned my raw hatred of feminists and their SJW allies up to psychopathic levels. I'm glad I don't know any in real life because I'd likely have to serve time for what I'd do to those sanctimonious cunts if I ever met one in the flesh.
-