James Webb Space Telescope

DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,509
Gwadien said:
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?
Click to expand...

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

Zarjazz

Identifies as a horologist.
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
2,417
DaGaffer said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,917
This thread is basically a battle of who's the bigger space nerd.
 
Gwadien

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,917
Ormorof said:
And i love it
Click to expand...
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

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,354
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:

en.wikipedia.org

Hubble Ultra-Deep Field - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

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

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,917
My mum told me it was all about the SF levels not the amount of layers.
 
Bodhi

Bodhi

Once agreed with Scouse and a LibDem at same time
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,346
First image is here!

svxWQJVf.jpg
 
Raven

Raven

Fuck the Tories!
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
44,832
Secondary mirror deployed now. Looks like main mirror tomorrow.
 
Tom

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,354
Yep, worth noting the secondary mirror is almost as big as the Spitzer Space Telescope's primary mirror.

This thing is huge.
 
Tom

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,354
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

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
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

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,723
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

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
Scouse said:
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?
Click to expand...

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

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,354
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

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
Tom said:
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.
Click to expand...

But havent all the major expeditions with landers made it?
 
Tom

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,354
The recent NASA missions have made it, but not without NASA staff bricking it while they awaited confirmation of a successful landing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top Bottom