The Pioneer Anomaly |
The Pioneer Anomaly |
Aug 16 2005, 04:27 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Rover Driver Group: Members Posts: 1015 Joined: 4-March 04 Member No.: 47 |
http://www.planetary.org/news/2005/pioneer_anomaly_faq.html
The planetary society may be checking it out... QUOTE The Planetary Society has committed to raise the funds to preserve the priceless Pioneer data from destruction.
After years of analysis, but without a final conclusion, NASA, astonishingly, gave up trying to solve the "Pioneer Anomaly" and provided no funds to analyze the data. The Pioneer data exists on a few hundred ancient 7- and 9-track magnetic tapes, which can only be read on "antique" outdated computers. The agency is going to scrap, literally demolish, the only computers able to access and process that data in the next few months! |
|
|
Sep 7 2005, 08:22 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1870 Joined: 20-February 05 Member No.: 174 |
I'd have to check, but I think the Apollo 17 instrument's name included the term "Tidal". They were looking at freequencies below those the seismometer would detect, at least in part... looking for whole-moon "ringing" frequencies, like the ringing of the whole earth after a Richter 8+ quake.
The instrument failed because it was balanced in 1 G with the aid of a loading mass or spring which was unloaded on the moon. The problem was an arithmetic booboo in the calculation of the design for lunar gravity.. the instrument had a "bias" range that was adjustable for a range of lunar gravities, or really more accurately, for a range of instrument sensitivities... The adjustable range of the instrument was such that actual lunar gravity (very well known) was outside the adjustment range. This is similar to the focus failure on Deep Impact's hi rez camera.. The camera was "focussed" from pre-launch out of focus conditions by heating the carbon-composite truss to drive out water vapor in vaccuum, intending to slow down and stop when the instrument approached and achieved perfect focus..... it never got there due to a ground base calibration problem. The actual focus point was outside of the adjustment range. |
|
|
Sep 7 2005, 09:42 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2488 Joined: 17-April 05 From: Glasgow, Scotland, UK Member No.: 239 |
QUOTE (edstrick @ Sep 7 2005, 09:22 AM) The instrument failed because it was balanced in 1 G with the aid of a loading mass or spring which was unloaded on the moon. The problem was an arithmetic booboo in the calculation of the design for lunar gravity.. the instrument had a "bias" range that was adjustable for a range of lunar gravities, or really more accurately, for a range of instrument sensitivities... The adjustable range of the instrument was such that actual lunar gravity (very well known) was outside the adjustment range. This is similar to the focus failure on Deep Impact's hi rez camera.. The camera was "focussed" from pre-launch out of focus conditions by heating the carbon-composite truss to drive out water vapor in vaccuum, intending to slow down and stop when the instrument approached and achieved perfect focus..... it never got there due to a ground base calibration problem. The actual focus point was outside of the adjustment range. Oooh, dear! Don't let a certain scientist-astronaut know, this may have wasted some of that precious EVA time during which rocks could have been examined. I can just imagine a series of unexplained murders, with the victims attended to with a balance spring tied between a gnomon and a lunar rake... -------------------- Remember: Time Flies like the wind - but Fruit Flies like bananas!
|
|
|
Sep 7 2005, 06:33 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Sep 7 2005, 04:42 AM) Oooh, dear! Don't let a certain scientist-astronaut know, this may have wasted some of that precious EVA time during which rocks could have been examined. I can just imagine a series of unexplained murders, with the victims attended to with a balance spring tied between a gnomon and a lunar rake... Oh, that particular scientist-astronaut was well aware of the problem -- for one thing, when the PI found his instrument wouldn't uncage, he *insisted* that this particular scientist-astronaut must have deployed it improperly, must not have leveled it right. So Houston told him to go back and re-level the experiment -- three times. When told it would not uncage, Schmitt even kicked it, hard, and then re-leveled it again. It still did not uncage. Schmitt was, indeed, *quite* angry that such a screw-up had cost precious lunar surface EVA time. From what I understand, though, even with the main beam caged, the LSG actexd as a fair one-axis seismometer... -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Sep 7 2005, 08:47 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2488 Joined: 17-April 05 From: Glasgow, Scotland, UK Member No.: 239 |
QUOTE (dvandorn @ Sep 7 2005, 07:33 PM) Oh, that particular scientist-astronaut was well aware of the problem -- for one thing, when the PI found his instrument wouldn't uncage, he *insisted* that this particular scientist-astronaut must have deployed it improperly, must not have leveled it right. So Houston told him to go back and re-level the experiment -- three times. When told it would not uncage, Schmitt even kicked it, hard, and then re-leveled it again. It still did not uncage. Schmitt was, indeed, *quite* angry that such a screw-up had cost precious lunar surface EVA time. From what I understand, though, even with the main beam caged, the LSG actexd as a fair one-axis seismometer... -the other Doug other Doug: Was the PI's body ever found? Bob Shaw -------------------- Remember: Time Flies like the wind - but Fruit Flies like bananas!
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st November 2024 - 12:19 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE 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. |