Voyager 2 gone for good?

[glazbagun]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66371569

Guess we'll find out in October, but would be a real shame if lose touch until it comes back to kill us.

Someone must be feeling pretty bad at NASA!

[DodgyGeezer]

we'll get it returned at some point...





In all seriousness though - that seems to be the very definition of fubar!

[Simpo Two]

Ah terrific. Luckily somebody intelligent in 1977 told it to align to Earth several times a year, evidently predicting that some dumbass would fk it up one day.

[normalbloke]

Simpo Two said:

Ah terrific. Luckily somebody intelligent in 1977 told it to align to Earth several times a year, evidently predicting that some dumbass would fk it up one day.

Exactly, they’ve planned for this cock up.

[LordLoveLength]

The battery is due to expire in a couple of years, after nearly 50 years of service!
It’s a nuclear ‘battery’ and will have decayed sufficiently that it can no longer power the scientific experiments so I guess they will load shed and just try and keep in contact for as long as possible?
Absolutely amazing that it still works and can communicate over the vast distances involved.

[louiechevy]

Reading the updated story looks like they're receiving limited telemetry now so with any luck it will either get the updated command or sort itself out in October.

Amazing they thought of this when it was being designed

[Flooble]

LordLoveLength said:

The battery is due to expire in a couple of years, after nearly 50 years of service!
It’s a nuclear ‘battery’ and will have decayed sufficiently that it can no longer power the scientific experiments so I guess they will load shed and just try and keep in contact for as long as possible?
Absolutely amazing that it still works and can communicate over the vast distances involved.

They've already shed lots of load - think the camera was turned off long ago for example.

[skeeterm5]

I wonder if we will ever have ships that travel fast enough to catch it? That would be quite something,

[Eric Mc]

Star Trek - The Motion Picture

[Alias218]

skeeterm5 said:

I wonder if we will ever have ships that travel fast enough to catch it? That would be quite something,

It’s an interesting point. There’s debate in the value in sending a probe or even a generation ship on long interstellar journeys (if / when we reach that point technologically) as after 100 years when the craft is a fraction of the way there, we may have far superior technology that will overtake the original craft and reach the destination first, thereby making the original mission pointless! Likewise, the second craft could itself be superseded.

At what point do we consider it worth launching a mission that won’t be made obsolete before it completes it?

Not relevant to this thread, but I thought it worth mentioning!

[Mr Pointy]

skeeterm5 said:

I wonder if we will ever have ships that travel fast enough to catch it? That would be quite something,

No. We will never leave this planet - it's a state-level struggle just reach our moon. In 100,000 years there will little evidence we were ever here.

[Eric Mc]

Mr Pointy said:

No. We will never leave this planet - it's a state-level struggle just reach our moon. In 100,000 years there will little evidence we were ever here.

That's very pessimistic - and flies in the face of what is actually happening right now.

[cookie1600]

Mr Pointy said:

In 100,000 years there will little evidence we were ever here.

Nope, there will still be some PH'ers arguing over sustainable water or something........

[eliot]

LordLoveLength said:

The battery is due to expire in a couple of years, after nearly 50 years of service!
It’s a nuclear ‘battery’ and will have decayed sufficiently that it can no longer power the scientific experiments so I guess they will load shed and just try and keep in contact for as long as possible?
Absolutely amazing that it still works and can communicate over the vast distances involved.

It uses a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG) - a small nuclear reactor.

You will be unsurprised to learn that the Russians used these things in the far flung parts of the soviet union, which are now abandoned causing many problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT8-b5YEyjo

[Eric Mc]

eliot said:

It uses a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG) - a small nuclear reactor.

You will be unsurprised to learn that the Russians used these things in the far flung parts of the soviet union, which are now abandoned causing many problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT8-b5YEyjo

The Russians also used them on earth orbiting satellites - which is not a good idea as satellites that orbit the earth have a habit of falling back.

[eliot]

Eric Mc said:

The Russians also used them on earth orbiting satellites - which is not a good idea as satellites that orbit the earth have a habit of falling back.

I thing the view is that everything and everyone is expendable - as long as it doesn't hit an Oligarch's Luxury mansion or Yacht

[Eric Mc]

eliot said:

I thing the view is that everything and everyone is expendable - as long as it doesn't hit an Oligarch's Luxury mansion or Yacht

I am talking pre-oligarch days. But avoiding hitting a senior politburo's dacha would have been a top priority.

Canada, on the other hand -




Cosmos 954, containing an RTG, landed in Canada in 1978. There was a massive search for debris.

[Mr Pointy]

Eric Mc said:

Mr Pointy said:

No. We will never leave this planet - it's a state-level struggle just reach our moon. In 100,000 years there will little evidence we were ever here.

That's very pessimistic - and flies in the face of what is actually happening right now.

It isn't - it's accurate. Everything out there is inhospitable to our bodies. We can't stand the radiation. Lack of gravity ruins our bones & eyesight. We can't carry enough fuel to get off Mars if we do land there. We die before we've travelled more than 80 years. The lunar dust is horrendously abrasive & destroys our lungs.

We're adapted to live in a temperate environment with a protective atmosphere & magnetic shield.

There's no point going to the Moon or Mars as there's nothing there - we can't expand our colonies to live there freely without protective suits.

That's without Putin lobbing nukes or the certainty of an extinction-level asteroid event. You can't argue with statistics - an asteriod is coming for us.

Anyway, that's all wildy off topic. Let's hope Voyager calls home soon.

[Zetec-S]

Alias218 said:

It’s an interesting point. There’s debate in the value in sending a probe or even a generation ship on long interstellar journeys (if / when we reach that point technologically) as after 100 years when the craft is a fraction of the way there, we may have far superior technology that will overtake the original craft and reach the destination first, thereby making the original mission pointless! Likewise, the second craft could itself be superseded.

At what point do we consider it worth launching a mission that won’t be made obsolete before it completes it?

Not relevant to this thread, but I thought it worth mentioning!

Imagine embarking on a pioneering journey to colonise another planet. Board the spacecraft and get into your stasis pod and the autopilot takes over. 1000 years later you're woken, only to be greeted by 10th generation colonists

(Or more cynically, you arrive to find the planet ravaged by war after a split between the colonists who beat you there)

[Eric Mc]

Mr Pointy said:

It isn't - it's accurate. Everything out there is inhospitable to our bodies. We can't stand the radiation. Lack of gravity ruins our bones & eyesight. We can't carry enough fuel to get off Mars if we do land there. We die before we've travelled more than 80 years. The lunar dust is horrendously abrasive & destroys our lungs.

We're adapted to live in a temperate environment with a protective atmosphere & magnetic shield.

There's no point going to the Moon or Mars as there's nothing there - we can't expand our colonies to live there freely without protective suits.

That's without Putin lobbing nukes or the certainty of an extinction-level asteroid event. You can't argue with statistics - an asteriod is coming for us.

Anyway, that's all wildy off topic. Let's hope Voyager calls home soon.

I

We ARE going back to the moon - whether you think it's a good idea or not. And if governments don't fund it - someone else will. THAT is what I was referring to. There are at least three manned lunar programmes in various states of progress at the moment.