IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Viking sols?
J.J.
post Sep 21 2006, 10:13 PM
Post #1


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 94
Joined: 22-March 06
Member No.: 722



I was wondering if anyone here knew how many sols Viking 1 and Viking 2 operated on Mars, for comparison purposes. I know the basics (that Viking 2 went out in 1980, and Viking 1 two years later), but the actual numbers of sols would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

-J.J.


--------------------
Mayor: Er, Master Betty, what is the Evil Council's plan?

Master Betty: Nyah. Haha. It is EVIL, it is so EVIL. It is a bad, bad plan, which will hurt many... people... who are good. I think it's great that it's so bad.

-Kung Pow: Enter the Fist
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jamescanvin
post Sep 21 2006, 11:53 PM
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2262
Joined: 9-February 04
From: Melbourne - Oz
Member No.: 16



Wow, how many times has this question been asked here now? blink.gif

Viking 1 - 2245 sols
Viking 2 - 1281 sols

cf. Design liftime 120 sols

James


--------------------
Twitter
Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Sep 21 2006, 11:54 PM
Post #3


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4404
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



Viking 2 - 1281 Sols, after which its batteries failed.
Viking 1 - 2,245 Sols, when it was turned off by a bad command.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
centsworth_II
post Sep 22 2006, 02:27 AM
Post #4


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2173
Joined: 28-December 04
From: Florida, USA
Member No.: 132



QUOTE (tedstryk @ Sep 21 2006, 07:54 PM) *
... when it was turned off by a bad command.

I assume there is positively, absolutely no way this could happen with the MERs. . . . Right?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Sep 22 2006, 07:00 AM
Post #5


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14432
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



There's always a way where by you could turn a spacecraft actually off. BUT - it would have to be very very deliberate.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
edstrick
post Sep 22 2006, 08:31 AM
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Joined: 20-February 05
Member No.: 174



"Viking 1 - 2,245 Sols, when it was turned off by a bad command."

Viking 1 was in an entirely automated mission with the commanding team pretty much disbanded when it started to show signs of battery failure similar to those that killed (actually disabled) Lander 2 shortly before Lander 2's only link to Earth (via Orbiter 1, both direct-to-Earth-transmitters were dead).

A group was assembled to design and uplink a battery conditioning sequence and it was transmitted to the spacecraft, which was never heard from again. They believed that the code inadvertently overwrote the code for calculating the position of the Earth in the sky for automated transmissions in the blind to the ground.

They tried to calculate when Earth would be in the line of site of the mis-pointed antenna (apparently it was expected to be doing weird wanderings across the sky) and get new commands uplinked, but nothing they tried resulted in further contact. It's plausible -- even PROBABLE -- that battery failure finally caused the spacecraft to permanently safe-mode in some fashion, but we'll never know until and if the memory and tape recorder on the spacecraft are directly examined.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NoVi
post Sep 22 2006, 09:24 AM
Post #7


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 15-April 05
Member No.: 234



QUOTE (djellison @ Sep 22 2006, 07:00 AM) *
There's always a way where by you could turn a spacecraft actually off. BUT - it would have to be very very deliberate.

Doug



something like this

if actual_cost > budget
and budget_approval false
then shutdown_mer

biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
J.J.
post Sep 22 2006, 02:25 PM
Post #8


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 94
Joined: 22-March 06
Member No.: 722



Thanks much, all. smile.gif


--------------------
Mayor: Er, Master Betty, what is the Evil Council's plan?

Master Betty: Nyah. Haha. It is EVIL, it is so EVIL. It is a bad, bad plan, which will hurt many... people... who are good. I think it's great that it's so bad.

-Kung Pow: Enter the Fist
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
helvick
post Sep 22 2006, 02:28 PM
Post #9


Dublin Correspondent
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 1799
Joined: 28-March 05
From: Celbridge, Ireland
Member No.: 220



Sad and all as that code might be at least it would be better than some dodgy autonomous navigation code that caused Oppy to continue to driver over a cliff rather than stopping. Here's looking forward to plenty of sanity checking tests over the next few days. I'm in absolutely no hurry to see more pictures.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gndonald
post Sep 22 2006, 02:44 PM
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 212
Joined: 19-July 05
Member No.: 442



QUOTE (edstrick @ Sep 22 2006, 04:31 PM) *
They tried to calculate when Earth would be in the line of site of the mis-pointed antenna (apparently it was expected to be doing weird wanderings across the sky) and get new commands uplinked, but nothing they tried resulted in further contact. It's plausible -- even PROBABLE -- that battery failure finally caused the spacecraft to permanently safe-mode in some fashion, but we'll never know until and if the memory and tape recorder on the spacecraft are directly examined.


Do you know if anyone at NASA has tried to use any of their currently orbiting satellites (MGS/Mars:Odyssey) to listen for, or to beam signals to Viking One just in case it is still in a workable condition, however unlikely it may be?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Sep 22 2006, 03:21 PM
Post #11


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14432
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



I would be utterly amazed if MGS, Odyssey, MRO or MEX could use UHF in a way that would be compatable with the Viking landers.

(update - infact, it's a no. The Viking UHF was around 381Mhz, whereas modern Mars Relay operations are conducted at the 430ish range )

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Sep 22 2006, 07:28 PM
Post #12


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1729
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



QUOTE (tedstryk @ Sep 22 2006, 01:54 AM) *
Viking 2 - 1281 Sols, after which its batteries failed.


I may be wrong, but I remember that Viking 2 was shut off after its high gain antenna failed and the orbiter relay had to be discontinued due to... well, lack of orbiters!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Sep 22 2006, 08:46 PM
Post #13


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4404
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (gndonald @ Sep 22 2006, 02:44 PM) *
Do you know if anyone at NASA has tried to use any of their currently orbiting satellites (MGS/Mars:Odyssey) to listen for, or to beam signals to Viking One just in case it is still in a workable condition, however unlikely it may be?


Its RTG would have hit a level in the early 1990s where it wouldn't have had enough power to operate. Had Mars not gone 17 years without an orbiter, excluding the three month Phobos-2 interlude, this might have been possible, but the chance of it now is gone.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
edstrick
post Sep 23 2006, 10:43 AM
Post #14


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Joined: 20-February 05
Member No.: 174



Viking 2 suffered battery failure shortly before its last links to earth were severed by Orbiter 1 running out of attitude control gas and being shut down.

The vikings had "steady state" power output from the RTG's but could do essentially nothing on RTG power alone. They'd charge up the batteries and then run on the higher current they'd provide while doing something like running the cameras and storing the data to the tape recorder. They found that in battery failure, when VL2 tried to run the tape, it went undervoltage and would safe itself. Same thing would have happened to VL1. It might have been able to call home, but not do any useful science after the batteries failed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ljk4-1
post Sep 26 2006, 01:34 PM
Post #15


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2454
Joined: 8-July 05
From: NGC 5907
Member No.: 430



If the MERs had landed right where the Vikings had - or if the
Vikings had been equipped with wheels instead of landing pads -
what interesting sites could they have visited?

I am particularly wondering where Viking 2 could have gone
that would be of any interest, aside from already being on Mars.


--------------------
"After having some business dealings with men, I am occasionally chagrined,
and feel as if I had done some wrong, and it is hard to forget the ugly circumstance.
I see that such intercourse long continued would make one thoroughly prosaic, hard,
and coarse. But the longest intercourse with Nature, though in her rudest moods, does
not thus harden and make coarse. A hard, sensible man whom we liken to a rock is
indeed much harder than a rock. From hard, coarse, insensible men with whom I have
no sympathy, I go to commune with the rocks, whose hearts are comparatively soft."

- Henry David Thoreau, November 15, 1853

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th April 2024 - 07:15 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member.