Comments on: Armageddon was a walk in the park...

Armageddon was a walk in the park...

NotMyselfRightNow — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:37:19 -0800

Because spaceflight, in and of itself, is just way to easy. On 08 August 2001, NASA launched Genesis. It was a spacecraft that would spend 1125 days in space, including 884 days collecting 0.4 milligrams of solar particles. At that point, it would launch a 500 lbs return vehicle that would travel 600 mph back to earth. When it enters the atmosphere, at approximately 11:55am EST on Wednesday of this week, it will be going close to twenty-five thousand mph. Oddly enough, this is the easy part of the mission.

Because then, two minutes later, NASA is going to catch it. In mid-air. With a helicopter. Really.

By: inksyndicate

inksyndicate — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:39:32 -0800

Their fatal mistake was using protomatter...

By: jacquilynne

jacquilynne — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:48:41 -0800

I enjoyed your write up for this post. It is amazing to me that a plan this complex has been hatched to recover less than a milligram of material. It also seems odd that it must have cost a huge amount of money to launch the mission, but they couldn't add a few extra bucks to pad the thing for landing.

By: Songdog

Songdog — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 09:04:23 -0800

jacquilynne, they're worried about the contamination of that tiny amount of (very hard to get) material. The spacecraft is designed to spend most of its time in the relative vacuum of space. As it falls through the atmosphere the rising pressure outside will tend to push air and other materials into the spacecraft. That's why they want to snag it as high up as they can and get it into something sterile and sealed.

By: NotMyselfRightNow

NotMyselfRightNow — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 09:38:51 -0800

[Thumping head into wall as he realizes it should be "too easy" and not "to easy"] D'oh!

By: fenriq

fenriq — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 09:42:33 -0800

I hope they've got some really strong people holding onto the netting to catch the craft. Oh wait, you didn't mention a parachute to slow them down, geez, that makes it a little easier. I think both pilots should have to do it blindfolded and drunk to really make it worth watching. And can we get Joe Rogan to provide commentary?

By: cameldrv

cameldrv — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:11:15 -0800

Believe it or not, this sort of thing used to be routine. Before the invention of the CCD, spy satellites would take pictures on film, and it would parachute down, to be snatched up by a passing airplane with a big hook.

By: esch

esch — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:12:07 -0800

From a USA Today article: "The stunt pilots say their biggest challenge will be flying at 40 mph nearly a mile over the Utah desert without any visual reference points to judge distance or speed as they close in with hook and cable on the capsule, which will be descending 400 feet a minute at a forward speed of 20 mph. Because of that, the pilots rate the difficulty of the maneuver at an 8 or 9 on a scale to 10." Blindfolded and drunk indeed.

By: raygun21

raygun21 — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:34:00 -0800

c'mon, the corona system (america's first spy satellite program under eisenhower) did it.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 14:24:45 -0800

Couldn't they have the capsule dropped off at the ISS or Space Shuttle?

By: dejah420

dejah420 — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:16:31 -0800

I watched them practice for it today on NASA tv. It was pretty damn cool.

By: lazy-ville

lazy-ville — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 04:50:22 -0800

five fresh fish: It's probably coming in pretty fast and would need to slow down somehow to get into low earth orbit. The atmosphere is a quite convenient braking device.

By: Songdog

Songdog — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 07:32:46 -0800

Yes, aside from the technical difficulty of a rendezvous with the extremely fast-moving and relatively small ISS or shuttle versus aiming for a presumably more forgiving reentry window there's the risk. Why take the chance of a collision or spend an additional fortune engineering a way to prevent one when you can do a conventional parachute reentry and an unconventional but relatively cheap midair catch? Especially if you've done it before. I'm looking forward to photos and videos of this trick, though!

By: yupislyr

yupislyr — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:05:09 -0800

FYI, it impacted on the desert floor, not due to any fault of the pilots though. The chutes failed to deploy.

By: riffola

riffola — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:07:27 -0800

It crashed, the parachute failed. That sucks.

By: riffola

riffola — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:11:59 -0800

It looks like the capsule split open on impact. $250 million mission, 2.5 years of work, all might be wasted.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:15:45 -0800

Plus the mutant spores are now free...THE GENESIS STRAIN!!!!

By: NotMyselfRightNow

NotMyselfRightNow — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:23:16 -0800

Umm, whoops.

By: dejah420

dejah420 — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:23:23 -0800

NASA is saying that they don't think the sample containers have been damaged because the capsule was designed to cushion them in the event of a crash. Or, ya know...Paris is right and mankind is doomed...DOOMED! (I'm gonna sing the doom song now...) And doesn't that desert look like Mars? At least from the overhead shots? Are they using an orange filter for some reason?

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:28:08 -0800

BBC Science correspondent, Fergus Walsh, on the reaction of the NASA team: 'It hasn't sunk in yet.' Sadly, from what I can see, it has....

By: ulotrichous

ulotrichous — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:57:35 -0800

Utah or bust, indeed. Don't miss the overly optimistic URL

By: crunchland

crunchland — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:10:04 -0800

There's a good video of the crash over on MSN.

By: fluffycreature

fluffycreature — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:36:56 -0800

Am I the only one that is waiting that mission control has lost contact with the crew around the capsule ?

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:53:56 -0800

Helicopter pilots were presumably lucky they didn't get creamed by a 25 000kmh capsule, eh?

By: zeoslap

zeoslap — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:57:47 -0800

If they think it's undamaged after plumeting at 100mph into the desert floor why even bother to try and catch in with a helicopter in the first place?

By: youhas

youhas — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 11:38:29 -0800

fluffycreature: Heh - that's the first thing that sprung into my mind, too.

By: ulotrichous

ulotrichous — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 12:06:17 -0800

why even bother to try and catch in with a helicopter in the first place And thus, two bold men ended their careers as Hollywood Stunt Pilots, and became PR Stunt Pilots.

By: elpapacito

elpapacito — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 12:18:41 -0800

Hey give NASA a break : while THEY land safely delicate devices traveling at mad crazy speeds in extreme conditions with the odds of a failure being close to playing national lottery, the most many of YOU can do is land you car in parking spot and you suck at that too !

By: LeiaS

LeiaS — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 12:42:21 -0800

Zeoslap: The first story linked in this thread states: "This daring retrieval method will protect the samples and sensitive instruments during reentry. A crash landing, even at the capsule's relatively slow speed of 9 mph, could ruin some of the data collected during the mission." Also, from the mission's FAQ: "What if you miss catching it and it parachutes to the ground? If the sample return capsule lands on its own, some of the delicate collector materials will likely break, making the sample more difficult to identify and categorize. The sample would still be valuable, but it would take longer for scientists to sort through the broken pieces."

By: homunculus

homunculus — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 12:53:20 -0800

I know who I blame for this.

By: Jart

Jart — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 13:40:52 -0800

Best part of the CNN article is this quote: "Whether there will be enough science left inside remains to be seen." SCIENCE!

By: seanyboy

seanyboy — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 14:04:39 -0800

I really wanted the chute to deploy after the capsule had hit the ground. You know, like in the cartoons. That would have been brilliant.

By: lazaruslong

lazaruslong — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 19:47:44 -0800

seanyboy: laughing so hard right now, in doubtful taste but loudly nonetheless.