A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

fbc, moores law, and planning cycles



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #22  
Old December 29th 03, 07:05 PM
Gene DiGennaro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

(Derek Lyons) wrote in message ...

Um, no. The space program drove such technologies little if at all.


Um, no
see the first paragraph of
http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/...ibmrd2001C.pdf

You might try reading the line above that, and the title above that.
You'll note that the publication *isn't* a computer history, but a
history of NASA and computers. It's hardly suprising that such a puff
piece includes the standard NASA claim to have developed everything
but sliced bread.



Yes, but aren't microelectronics the result of the military's need of
sophisticated guidance for ICBM's? It was always my understanding that
because our early rockets couldn't lift much, electronics engineers
were driven to develop smaller and lighter packages. I always thought
that this is what led us to the IC chip.

While this was not NASA driven it was driven by military space needs.
As far as NASA being on the leading edge, I'm not so sure. As stated
earlier, the needs of military spysats drove the development of things
like the CCD camera. The civilian space program has always borrowed
heavily from the military space program.


Gene DiGennaro
Baltimore, Md.
  #23  
Old December 29th 03, 09:15 PM
Curtis Croulet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

um, no. refer to moore's law. every space probe that took more than two
years, (from lock down to reaching the target) by definition was
significantly behind by the time it arrived on target.


About 10 years ago I toured the attack nuclear submarine USS Jefferson City,
based in San Diego. Some of the ship's electronic systems used an XT-level
computer (literally -- there was an XT sitting there, connected to whatever
electronic system we were viewing), and one of the systems used a 386 which had
been bought by the crew. The officer giving the tour explained that there's
such a long period between design and commission of such a ship, that specified
and installed components often become obsolete. This is not to say, of course,
that these "obsolete" computers weren't perfectly adequate for their required
tasks.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33° 27' 59" N, 117° 05' 53" W


  #24  
Old December 29th 03, 10:13 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

"Giovanni Abrate" wrote:

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...

Camera's No UV or deep IR at the Shack... Gyroscopes suitable for
inertial nav? Not at the Shack. Rad-hard computers? Not at the
Shack.


Just one point: there are now guidance gyroscopes that are available to the
general public (for instance to aero modellers) and that cost under 100
dollars. I am thinking of piezoelectric Gyroscopes and also of new, low cost
fiber-optic laser-diode gyros.


I'm aware of those, but do not believe that they are capable of
performing in a launch/orbital enviroment.

An effective IMU can be had, today, for unmanned applications, for under
1000 dollars and it weighs under a kilogram.


And it's characteristics are?

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.
  #25  
Old December 29th 03, 10:20 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

"Curtis Croulet" wrote:
About 10 years ago I toured the attack nuclear submarine USS Jefferson City,
based in San Diego. Some of the ship's electronic systems used an XT-level
computer (literally -- there was an XT sitting there, connected to whatever
electronic system we were viewing)


Guaranteed that wasn't a tactical system, but more likely was one of
the nice-to-have support systems. (You started seeing some support
systems being based on COTS as early as the late 1970's. In the
mid-80's we had a 1978 era HP sitting next to our 1958/1978 era
torpedo fire control system.)

The officer giving the tour explained that there's
such a long period between design and commission of such a ship, that specified
and installed components often become obsolete. This is not to say, of course,
that these "obsolete" computers weren't perfectly adequate for their required
tasks.


The computers were obsolescent, not obsolete. The latter term is all
too often used when the former is what is actually meant, they are not
really interchangeable.

Keep in mind that the military cares less about whether the computer
is the latest-and-greatest, and more about whether it will operate in
it's intended enviroment, and whether it can be supported and
maintained.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.
  #27  
Old December 29th 03, 11:26 PM
Jonathan Silverlight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

In message , Anthony Frost
writes
In message
Jonathan Silverlight
wrote:

Guildford University's early UOSATs were also built using off-the-shelf
parts. In particular, to get the NiCad batteries with the right
specification they simply bought a whole lot and tested them.


[University of Surrey rather than Guildford University] They did
something similar with the solar panels for one of the satellites. When
they went back for some more for the next one they found the price had
gone up dramatically because they were now "space qualified"...


Ack! Blame a temporary short circuit between the ears :-) I live five
miles from the place and I've visited several times, so I don't have any
other explanation. Thanks for the story.
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.
  #28  
Old December 30th 03, 12:07 AM
Henry Spencer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

In article ,
Derek Lyons wrote:
But I still don't believe the original poster is correct. What useful
science instrument can be built or hacked using Radio Shack
components? (And I do mean *useful*. While lofting a digital camera
into orbit is a cool hack, it's usefulness is marginal.)


There's quite a bit that could be done in the way of radio-based science,
e.g. topside sounding of the ionosphere, lightning detection, etc.

That digital camera actually could be useful, not so much as a camera but
as a particle-radiation sensor. Of course, in the orbits where this would
be *most* scentifically useful, you'd have to have quite a bit of
shielding mass around the rest of the Radio Shack electronics to give them
a useful lifetime, but although that is unorthodox it is technically
feasible.

The dust/micrometeorite/micro-debris environment around Earth is also not
as well mapped as it could be -- there are hints of structure to it, but
little is known -- and a large thin metal plate with microphones bonded to
it might make a usable sensor for that.

Yes, it's a struggle, and I think the original poster overstates the
situation somewhat, but he's not *totally* wrong.

Radio Shack is a bit excessive, but you could get almost all of MOST's
electronic components from Digi-Key. (In fact, a fair number of them
probably came from there.) Not the solar cells or the CCDs, and maybe not
a few other electronic odds and ends, and of course there's the optics.
But if you're not in a high-radiation orbit (or if you can afford a lot
of shielding mass), the electronic side of a spacecraft no longer needs
anything very special.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |
  #29  
Old December 30th 03, 03:23 AM
Hop David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles



Henry Spencer wrote:

Radio Shack is a bit excessive, but you could get almost all of MOST's
electronic components from Digi-Key. (In fact, a fair number of them
probably came from there.) Not the solar cells or the CCDs, and maybe not
a few other electronic odds and ends, and of course there's the optics.
But if you're not in a high-radiation orbit (or if you can afford a lot
of shielding mass), the electronic side of a spacecraft no longer needs
anything very special.


ISTR John Carmack saying his guidance system was less than $20,000 and
consisted of Crossbow fiber optic gyros, PC104, and Linux as the
operating system.

--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

  #30  
Old December 30th 03, 11:09 AM
Jonathan Silverlight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fbc, moores law, and planning cycles

In message , Henry Spencer
writes

The dust/micrometeorite/micro-debris environment around Earth is also not
as well mapped as it could be -- there are hints of structure to it, but
little is known


That's odd, considering that missions such as Pegasus have been flying
since the 1960s.
But it's better than the situation for Mars, where we don't know
anything, AFAIK :-)
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.