BREAKING-Russians: Possible 'Fatal Flaw' in Space Station (blame US)

Source: ABC News

Russians: Possible 'Fatal Flaw' in Space Station
Russian Sources Tell ABC News They Suspect Americans Damaged Computers

A source inside the Russian space agency has told ABC News that there could be a "fatal flaw" with the station's main computer.

After working for a couple of days, the Russians still have no idea what the problem is, and they are pointing the finger at the Americans. They say that setting up the solar array sent electromagnetic interference into the computer, shutting it down.

According to NASA, the computers aboard the Space Station appear to be sensitive to the noise created by the electrical interference from the solar arrays.

The story is getting almost no coverage in the Russian media.

On the positive side, the Russian space agency says that the station could fly for a few months without correcting its flight, meaning that even if the astronauts were forced to leave, there may be more time to fix the computer problems down the road. Russian astronauts wake up at 7 a.m. EDT to begin working again.


Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3281714

Looks like the Bush touch strikes again.

Everything these people touch turns to shit -- AFTER they've been paid, of course.

EVERYTHING. From the day he was born. And he's never been held responsible for any of it.

Besides, we have a WHOLE PLANETFUL of stuff that DOES bear his paw-prints. The man is wearing a "kick me" sign for the messes he's created.

We've seen evidence of his meddling at NASA on climate change. He's cutting budgets everywhere to fund his war in Iraq. I'm sure if you dig hard enough you'll find somewhere along the way they fucked with someone and made them cut corners. He's responsible for the overall functions of all the government agencies and right now things are pretty fucked up from stem to stern.

As a leader, you're expected to be held accountable for everything that happens on your watch. What do you expect from an incompetent idiot who cuts funding, puts pressure on NASA for unrealistic future goals while ignoring current needs, and tries to micromanage what NASA leaders say or do?

and it would be just as dumb to blame Clinton.

This stuff has been sitting in NASA warehouses for years and years. The ISS is so botched, so behind schedule (especially because of the diminished shuttle schedules) and so hamstrung by bureaucracy that Bush couldn't have meddled with it if he tried. He's too effin' stupid.

NASA is not a political agency. I'm not trying to be rude, but you're clearly ignorant of how NASA is funded, how it is administered, and how it has worked on the ISS in cooperation with international partners.

Don't let (justifiable) enmity toward Bush turn you into one of those raving paranoid wingnuts we saw blaming Clinton for everything from crop failures in Kansas to bank failures in Singapore back in '98 and '99. Hatred is strong ju-ju; it makes smart people believe dumb things.

My point is not that the pResident is or is not a subterranean evil shadow within NASA. My point is much more generic: we look stupid when we say this kind of stuff, because it shows the debilitation of sense that's brought by flat-out military-grade hatred.

I would like progressive views to be taken more seriously by those who aren't as progressive. Without them on board, we have no political powers. So this really is important. As well as mentally hygienic.

What happened? It's 2007...we're supposed to have something besides a pitiful, underfunded space program by now.

And concentrate on robotic exploration in the public sector.

imho

:evilgrin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshimi_Battles_The_Pink_Robots

I thought with the outstanding success of the robotic pathfinder mission the logical next step was a fleet of robotic exploration vehicles. Hoping in my lifetime I could see robotic vehicles exploring the moons of Jupiter. Instead Bush switches to trying to fund manned missions. I didn't see the benefit. I figure it had a lot more to do with funding who he wanted than "logic".

(Don't get me wrong I would LOVE to see someone kickin the dust around on Mars too but the cost verse the return doesn't seem to be correct)

I actually think we should put more money into manned spaceflight, and actually have some competent people from the private sector such as Burt Rutan come together in an international effort to come up with practical and relatively cheap spacecraft. We're doing it half-assedly now, and there's more interest in funneling money into some aerospace corporation's pockets than there is in expanding human presence beyond the earth. A human on Mars would be able to discover more in a week than all of the rovers and landers we sent over the last 40 years have. a As for the cost...yes manned spaceflight is expensive but its a long term investment. I believe it will more than pay off in the future. Of course, we probably could have been to Mars and back several times now for the cost of the Iraq War. :(

I'll leave it at that since the robotics vs manned spaceflight argument is one that has been repeated over and over on this board. I don't think it has to be one or the other.

Manned spaceflight not only drives advancement, but gives allows people, young and old, to dream beyond the confines of this crazy world.

things constantly falling in Zero G.. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightlessness

"Objects left alone will 'fall' toward the densest part of the spacecraft. When they eventually touch the spacecraft, they will stop moving and feel weight."

In other words, everything in the ISS is attracted to everything else.

I'm always amused by those who say they've experienced "zero-g" on a roller coaster, when all that happened is that for a few moments the roller coaster's descent produced a downward vector slightly greater than the passenger's. For it to be true zero-g both the horizontal and vertical motion vectors of the coaster and passenger would have to be exactly equal. Going over a hump in the track briefly reduces a passenger's "weight" and gives the perception of zero-g, but if they were truly weightless passengers would be floating above their seats (and tossing up the chili fries they had for lunch). Doesn't make roller coasters any less fun, though.

Gravity doesn't exist -- the world just sucks. 1960s saying

Looking at spaceflightnow.com looks like the computers were built in Germany for the Russians
Maybe the old Russian tech on Mir would be better at handling this type of thing... the usual fix was to hit them with a spanner I believe. Lets hope they fix it and it wasn't a power surge that fried anything critical.

:wtf:

Makes me wonder what the test plan was for ensuring additional solar panels, and electrical systems were not causing electromagnetic interference (EMI) with the other systems aboard the space station.

Guess it's time to tune into the NASA station with some popcorn and watch the drama.

and simple shielding would do the job of protecting the computers. This doesn't sound right to me.

How would a simple PV system cause this kind of interference? Until they put the PV output through an inverter, it would be DC. Don't they harden the computers against cosmic rays anyway?

Specifically "switched voltage regulator" circuits that generate a pulse modulated waveform, sometimes with a kickback coil in there. Poorly designed output stages on those could throw noise into the power system. Of course a well designed power system should filter such noise when merging power from other sources, but it may have been the case that the tolerances of the power system was exceeded either by a faulty design, or a miscommunication as to what those tolerances were.

Most solar systems use DC-DC power conversion (with maximum power point tracking) to change the voltage/current levels. In a house system that circuit is in what's called a "charge controller" between the batteries and the panels.

A DC-DC converter is the probable design used here to reduce likely variations in raw output based on solar orientation ... It is easier to regulate the known output voltage of DC-DC Converter than a straight up DC system ...

It is obvious that a number of steps could (should) have been taken to verify system integrity PRIOR to the integration of this new power source to ISS systems:

1) FILTER FILTER FILTER ! ..... I mean ... Cmon .... IF you are going to use DC/DC, you had better filter out the spikes inherent in such a system ... All commercial PC power is DC/DC, and the effects are well known at that level .... BFC = Big F*CKING Capacitors .... (yeah .. I know they arent everything in a filter, but they are the primary voltage damping components )

2) Robust space certified computing systems should have local filtering in any case ... transients can exist in ANY power system, and should be accounted for up front ...

3) Was no system testing performed ? .... Any real world simulations to in situ environments just to get the warm fuzzies ? ... NASA usually OVERtests there stuff ....

How do I know ? .... I worked on all of the shuttles (Rockwell), and spent many hours of tedious testing, troubleshooting and repairing of shuttle electrical systems: From OMS deck, to ECLSS, to PINCH, to RCS, to Mid Deck to Flight Deck to Airlock to ODS ... NASA (in the old days) took care of this shit ... (well .... mostly) ....

To blame Bush is kind of laughable (as much as I despise his arse), but they (NASA and USA) surely had enough funding to add some decent filtering .... and to test it out .... Rockwell, as primary systems integrator, (now Boeing through the United Space Alliance) also has a big responsibility to perform system verification prior to delivery and installation ....

The latest theory I've heard is that the solar panels picked up a huge electrostatic charge when they were deployed. The design calls for the panels to be grounded so that a potential charge can't build up, but evidently that got FUBAR'd.

Which, without proper filtering (big capacitors?), could have fried some circuit boards.

Which would be bad.

NASA would have practiced this first, in the old days.

Or would we have to fly some up on a special shuttle mission? That would certainly be exciting.

Source: Associated Press


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070615/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle

Source: Associated Press


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070615/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle