James Webb Space Telescope

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,755
Can't other orbits fuck with it that far out? Or is that why it's life is shorter than Hubbell because it's going to have to make adjustments?
No because that's the really useful thing about Lagrange points, they are at the balance point between gravitational forces.
1641067053780.png

The danger with Lagrange points is if something does drift into one, it tends to stay put, so if we start using them seriously (there are loads of potential applications) we will need to keep them "clean" from all our crap.
 

Zarjazz

Identifies as a horologist.
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
2,237
The danger with Lagrange points is if something does drift into one, it tends to stay put, so if we start using them seriously (there are loads of potential applications) we will need to keep them "clean" from all our crap.
The Lagrange points aren't perfectly fixed. There's enough other pieces of matter out there in the solar system, such as the moon, which mean objects cannot remain there. It's why the JWST isn't parking exactly at the L2 point because it would need to constantly use it's fuel supply to remain locked there as the L2 moved around. Instead it is going into a halo orbit around the L2 point as that is much more fuel efficient.
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
18,758
This thread is basically a battle of who's the bigger space nerd.
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
18,758
And i love it
Same.

There's something great about watching a debate between people when you have no idea what they're talking about therefore no idea if they know what they're talking about.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,357
I'm no expert, it's just something I've been fascinated by for a long time. And as much as Hubble taught us, like determining the rate of increase in the speed the Universe is expanding, or discovering Pluto's moons, I think the James Webb will teach us a lot more.

You can bet that astronomers are going to be revisiting this area of the sky:


It annoys me sometimes how you'll see people on social media complaining, "what a waste of money when there's starving people here". What's the point of life, if not to learn new stuff?
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
18,758
My mum told me it was all about the SF levels not the amount of layers.
 

Raven

Happy Shopper Ray Mears
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
42,283
Secondary mirror deployed now. Looks like main mirror tomorrow.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,357
Yep, worth noting the secondary mirror is almost as big as the Spitzer Space Telescope's primary mirror.

This thing is huge.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,357
It's great news, but the drama isn't over yet as it still has a burn to do to reach its orbit, and it still has to actually work :)
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,046
Seeing as though this thread is full of space nerds, can some explain something ive never quite understood.

How do nasa, like control shit thats millions of miles away in space. Like, how do they land stuff on mars when there is obviously going to be a lag between pressing a button and the command reaching mars?

If im lagging when im playing fifa, im pretty much fucked so how do scientists manage to deploy landing gear when a probe is hurtling towards the surface of mars at like 20,000 miles per hour? Do they somehow factor in the time it takes the command to reach the target? How do they know at any one time where the object is exactly?
 

Scouse

Dennis Quaid lover
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
31,878
Maths and automation is the short answer @Marc :)

They don't need people to press the buttons any more. Software controls things and performs operations at the right time. Then it tells us how it's done and a few minutes later we get the readout/pictures.

If something fucks up we could probably send a "pause" to see if there's anything we can do (software wise) to help but other than that we do our engineering on earth, then send it on it's merry way.

Orbital mechanics / distances to mars etc - they're mathematical functions. We launch from A) it's got to get to B). We know that precicely. We allow some adjustment through burns - but we can work out when they need to happen. But when we sent the landers down to mars we just pressed "go" on the sequence and the lander did the rest.

How've you been?
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,046
Maths and automation is the short answer @Marc :)

They don't need people to press the buttons any more. Software controls things and performs operations at the right time. Then it tells us how it's done and a few minutes later we get the readout/pictures.

If something fucks up we could probably send a "pause" to see if there's anything we can do (software wise) to help but other than that we do our engineering on earth, then send it on it's merry way.

Orbital mechanics / distances to mars etc - they're mathematical functions. We launch from A) it's got to get to B). We know that precicely. We allow some adjustment through burns - but we can work out when they need to happen. But when we sent the landers down to mars we just pressed "go" on the sequence and the lander did the rest.

How've you been?
wow. That is impressive! But surely there must be a lot of unknowns to their calculations right? Must be a lot of variables out of their control?
Yeah I’m good man! Still lurk just never get the time to post as much. You ok?
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,357
There's always the chance for failure, but failure isn't in itself a complete disaster, because you can learn from failure.

Mars is extremely difficult to get to. Most probes don't make it.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,046
There's always the chance for failure, but failure isn't in itself a complete disaster, because you can learn from failure.

Mars is extremely difficult to get to. Most probes don't make it.
But havent all the major expeditions with landers made it?
 

Embattle

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
11,524

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,357
The recent NASA missions have made it, but not without NASA staff bricking it while they awaited confirmation of a successful landing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom