|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
Henry Spencer wrote: In article , Brett O'Callaghan wrote: JPL folks were much cheerier today, they have been successfully commanding Spirit in a mode that avoids use of some of its memory modules -- 'Flash memort' -- which is suspect. Has Flash RAM been used in past space probes in any significant way? Quite successfully on Deep Space 1, as I recall. Where might one find technical information on the rover such as details on the computer hardware and software? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
You won't find this information because it's bull****. But you go ahead and
search for it. When you can't get it, ask yourself WHY. Or do like all the other good citizen sheep do and make excuses for the lack of proof. And be sure to precede each fact with "They probably used..." or "more than likely it's..." That way, you'll be believable - And a good presidential candidate! Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack ) wrote in message ... Henry Spencer wrote: In article , Brett O'Callaghan wrote: JPL folks were much cheerier today, they have been successfully commanding Spirit in a mode that avoids use of some of its memory modules -- 'Flash memort' -- which is suspect. Has Flash RAM been used in past space probes in any significant way? Quite successfully on Deep Space 1, as I recall. Where might one find technical information on the rover such as details on the computer hardware and software? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
"Qwerty Yuiop" wrote in message ... You won't find this information because it's bull****. But you go ahead and search for it. When you can't get it, ask yourself WHY. Or do like all the other good citizen sheep do and make excuses for the lack of proof. And be sure to precede each fact with "They probably used..." or "more than likely it's..." Gee, can't use google? http://www.axonchisel.net/etc/space/...hts.html?s=ut1 That way, you'll be believable - And a good presidential candidate! Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack ) wrote in message ... Henry Spencer wrote: In article , Brett O'Callaghan wrote: JPL folks were much cheerier today, they have been successfully commanding Spirit in a mode that avoids use of some of its memory modules -- 'Flash memort' -- which is suspect. Has Flash RAM been used in past space probes in any significant way? Quite successfully on Deep Space 1, as I recall. Where might one find technical information on the rover such as details on the computer hardware and software? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
... "Qwerty Yuiop" wrote in message ... You won't find this information because it's bull****. But you go ahead and search for it. When you can't get it, ask yourself WHY. Or do like all the other good citizen sheep do and make excuses for the lack of proof. And be sure to precede each fact with "They probably used..." or "more than likely it's..." Gee, can't use google? http://www.axonchisel.net/etc/space/...hts.html?s=ut1 Hey... his mind's made up... don't confuse him with facts! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
"Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )" Has Flash RAM been used in past space probes in any significant way? Quite successfully on Deep Space 1, as I recall. Where might one find technical information on the rover such as details on the computer hardware and software? Here's a description of the single-board computer at least: http://www.iews.na.baesystems.com/sp...0/rad6000.html Joe |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:02:29 GMT, "Joe Knapp"
wrote: Here's a description of the single-board computer at least: http://www.iews.na.baesystems.com/sp...0/rad6000.html Funny how they call that "low cost" and yet one of those boards will set you back a few million. Still, there is the best board around should you like other space hardware manufacturers wish to put the current best radiation hardened hardware in your space orientated system. Cardman http://www.cardman.com http://www.cardman.co.uk |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
Cardman wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:02:29 GMT, "Joe Knapp" wrote: Here's a description of the single-board computer at least: http://www.iews.na.baesystems.com/sp...0/rad6000.html Funny how they call that "low cost" and yet one of those boards will set you back a few million. Still, there is the best board around should you like other space hardware manufacturers wish to put the current best radiation hardened hardware in your space orientated system. Cardman http://www.cardman.com http://www.cardman.co.uk How do you know that the board is "several million"? That quote sounds a bit speculative. I designed bios for carrier class systems and the system boards were mever over 10K. I can't see testing and rad-hardening adding more that 10X to the price. 2 Mil? Really??? That's 200 times the price of a highly tested, six nines system. Jim Davis. Why is NASA buying from BAE? That STINKS! Note to self, Write congress and call press. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:02:11 -0800, jimmydevice
wrote: Cardman wrote: Funny how they call that "low cost" and yet one of those boards will set you back a few million. Still, there is the best board around should you like other space hardware manufacturers wish to put the current best radiation hardened hardware in your space orientated system. How do you know that the board is "several million"? Well for one that is quite obvious seeing that this is the most advanced radiation hardened computer system around. That very board is used in the majority of modern satellites and other space applications, when its 32-bit architecture and price was well ahead of previous choices. Even the place where that hardware was made was subject to a $91 million upgrade a couple of years ago. They don't make such expenses back by charging peanuts. That quote sounds a bit speculative. It is, but I am also not far wrong. Each of these MERs cost $300 million each, where you can rest assured that this very brain of these rovers took up at least several of those million dollars. If you wish to know the real price, then see if you can obtain from NASA a cost breakdown on these MERs. After all since that is public money, then so should NASA be accountable for how it is spent. And unless their contract with BAE banned them for revealing the exact price (not that they should care), then sure enough you will be able to see the exact dollar price tag for yourself. Well worth the cost as well I can say, when there is no other better value option. I designed bios for carrier class systems and the system boards were mever over 10K. I can't see testing and rad-hardening adding more that 10X to the price. 2 Mil? Really??? That's 200 times the price of a highly tested, six nines system. Well, you should see what goes into these systems, when they need to be very fault tolerant when a high energy cosmic ray can come along and mess up any part of it. The Japanese probe that was headed for Mars and did not quite get there after a long detour shows you what happens when your computer control system is not radiation hardened and fault tolerant. Having to make an entire unique system aimed and well tested to survive solar storms like that powerful one seen a few months ago is what does it. Jim Davis. Why is NASA buying from BAE? That STINKS! Note to self, Write congress and call press. NASA would have made a serious mistake if they did not get this board, when it is fast, reliable and well tested. Cardman http://www.cardman.com http://www.cardman.co.uk |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
jimmydevice wrote:
Funny how they call that "low cost" and yet one of those boards will set you back a few million. How do you know that the board is "several million"? That quote sounds a bit speculative. That's higher than the numbers I saw, but it was seven figures. I designed bios for carrier class systems and the system boards were mever over 10K. I can't see testing and rad-hardening adding more that 10X to the price. 2 Mil? Really??? That's 200 times the price of a highly tested, six nines system. You have an engineering division producing custom boards, processors, other chips. To space rated specs. The product volume is, roughly, one flightset per year. You work out the numbers... Why is NASA buying from BAE? That STINKS! Note to self, Write congress and call press. It was originally a Lockheed division; they sold it to BAE. I believe they're physically located in the US, however. Manassas, Virginia, to be precise. -george william herbert |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Good news" -- Spirit responds in 'cripple mode'
Joe Knapp wrote: "Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )" Has Flash RAM been used in past space probes in any significant way? Quite successfully on Deep Space 1, as I recall. Where might one find technical information on the rover such as details on the computer hardware and software? Here's a description of the single-board computer at least: http://www.iews.na.baesystems.com/sp...0/rad6000.html Thanks. I noticed that this board has a PCI bus. Don't tell me they actually have PCI cards in the Mars rover. Good grief! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
No U.S. Hab Module may be good news | Peter Altschuler | Space Station | 5 | July 27th 04 12:59 AM |
More good news | Scott Lowther | Policy | 95 | January 15th 04 02:08 PM |
comment from Spirit news briefing my brush with greatness | Brian Gaff | Policy | 0 | January 5th 04 12:53 PM |
Good news for space policy | Greg Kuperberg | Policy | 61 | August 4th 03 03:42 AM |