[HN Gopher] NASA Pulls Off Delicate Thruster Swap, Keeping Voyag...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       NASA Pulls Off Delicate Thruster Swap, Keeping Voyager 1 Mission
       Alive
        
       Author : Stratoscope
       Score  : 251 points
       Date   : 2024-09-12 03:22 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (gizmodo.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (gizmodo.com)
        
       | qingcharles wrote:
       | Great to see they bought her some more time.
       | 
       | I watched this excellent Voyager documentary recently:
       | 
       | https://www.itsquieterfilm.com/
        
       | a_e_k wrote:
       | I continue to be fascinated by how they:
       | 
       | 1. Are able to diagnose the problems remotely at such distances
       | and on such old hardware. How can they even measure the thruster
       | tube apertures here?
       | 
       | 2. Decide what actions to take. It's not like they have a local
       | test device to experiment on is it? (Even if they did I can't
       | imagine how they'd reproduce the conditions of the real thing.)
       | And if they choose poorly, I'd assume the mission's over. There's
       | no replacing Voyager 1 if they brick it.
       | 
       | 3. Have such fine control over the hardware. For something built
       | in the 70's when RAM was largely measured in kB, they seem to
       | have an insane amount of flexibility to remotely reconfigure the
       | equipment. Whatever they did, there must have been some real
       | foresight.
        
         | big-green-man wrote:
         | What blows my mind is the organizational knowledge needed after
         | so many years to keep it going. You don't just hand a guy some
         | man pages when he comes onto the project. I'm sure people have
         | aged out, yet they still understand the complexities in the
         | design. That is something we need to understand and prioritize
         | in the systems we build today.
        
           | tommiegannert wrote:
           | Startup: "Do you remember when we inserted this quirky module
           | running in AWS? We can use that to implement this next
           | feature. That was a useful decision!"
           | 
           | Voyager: "Do you remember when our parents inserted this
           | quirky module that has since left the solar system? We can
           | use that to turn it off and on again. That was a mission
           | critical decision!"
        
             | exe34 wrote:
             | that aws module isn't supported anymore though, we need to
             | npm install half the internet for the 2 line library that
             | replaces it.
        
             | HeatrayEnjoyer wrote:
             | Not parents for most of us. Grand or great-grandparents.
             | The senior engineers were highly educated and experienced,
             | implying ages 30-50s during development. They are in their
             | 80-100s now.
        
           | tverbeure wrote:
           | When Voyager failed last year with a CMOS memory error, one
           | of the big problems was that a bunch of low level information
           | was gone or conflicting. For example, they sometimes had to
           | guess assembler instructions because the code printouts were
           | low quality photocopied pages. Or because there were
           | handwritten comments or comments scratched out with pencil
           | without any clue about why it was done.
           | 
           | One saving grace was the fact that the architecture and the
           | code space was simple enough so that they could reason
           | through the symptoms and actions to take, something that
           | would have been much harder with modern spacecraft.
           | 
           | Check out this amazing talk:
           | https://youtu.be/dF_9YcehCZo?si=W_b3NJ7vgxaYS1__
        
           | methuselah_in wrote:
           | This thing hits me. True.
        
         | tomooot wrote:
         | I would imagine if the design/assembly information was broadly
         | available (internally) in the past, there's probably one or
         | several "digital twin" emulations of the craft, or at the very
         | least specific subsystems of it's computing resources. There
         | must be some kind of analog/simulation of it's software just
         | for proving "bugfixes" before upload, like the coms error and
         | subsequent setting of the "solar system record" for "furthest
         | distance remote code update" earlier this year.
        
           | onedognight wrote:
           | There isn't a simulator or digital twin for voyager. It has a
           | bespoke processor made with 74* style logic. One guy will
           | puts together a command and they will have a review where the
           | other engineers will try and independently verify it. Then
           | they copy and paste the command somewhere to "run it". It
           | happened, fairly recently, that the command had a typo that
           | was caught in review, but the "wrong" pre-review command was
           | used and the attitude became off by so much that they lost
           | contact. It was only by cranking up the power at Goldstone
           | that they got a command through. This fundamentally changed
           | their understanding of the largest angle for which they
           | _could_ still communicate with the spacecraft. They just
           | hadn't wanted to try larger angles before because it was too
           | risky.
        
             | wildzzz wrote:
             | That's the great thing about such a simple design, you can
             | actually sit down with pen and paper and verify operations.
        
           | tverbeure wrote:
           | Forget about a digital twin, they don't even have an
           | assembler for the CPUs. It's all hex values.
        
         | basementcat wrote:
         | In short, the Voyager spacecraft were designed (after
         | considerable design and operational experience from Mariner and
         | Pioneer spacecraft) to be able to operate for a long time
         | largely automatically without too much hand-holding. All major
         | systems are multiply redundant and may be remotely turned on
         | and off. While there has been personnel turnover on the
         | program, it has not been of a magnitude to jeopardize program
         | continuation. Finally, program management has been media savvy
         | and well politically connected ensuring that operations are
         | still funded. (Contrast with other missions such as Magellan to
         | Venus which was deorbited while it still had propellant reserve
         | leaving some portions of the planet unmapped)
         | 
         | JPL has (or had?) a "retiree badge" program that permitted
         | retired staff to continue to access their office. Many programs
         | benefited from highly knowledgeable personnel essentially
         | continuing to report to the office every day without pay (not
         | being paid comes with the luxury of not having to worry about
         | being laid off if your charge accounts don't have enough
         | funds!) It was an absolute privilege to learn from these
         | people.
        
           | SSLy wrote:
           | So, culture preservation is important for success of highly
           | technical endeavours. Don't tell it to your run of the mill
           | MBA.
        
             | basementcat wrote:
             | I think it is inevitable that organizational "culture"
             | changes. The tricky part is figuring out exactly what parts
             | need change and what parts don't.
             | 
             | For example JPL used to have beauty pageants ("Miss Guided
             | Missile"). More recently, management appears to be trying
             | to adopt policies and procedures from some venture funded
             | commercial space companies. It is not clear how helpful
             | these efforts will be given that these organizations are in
             | fundamentally different businesses.
             | 
             | https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/slice-of-history-70th-
             | annive...
        
             | ozim wrote:
             | Run off the mill MBAs are not allowed anywhere near to
             | stuff as important as Voyager.
             | 
             | All the web apps, that run of the mill devs are
             | implementing are nowhere near as important as voyager.
             | 
             | I think we are fine ;)
        
             | darby_nine wrote:
             | It also helps that JPL is a public good and not a wealth-
             | extraction machine
        
             | me_me_me wrote:
             | but if someone is paid $0 it must mean they are worthless,
             | surely the excel file doesnt lie
        
               | efitz wrote:
               | No, you need to think like an MBA.
               | 
               | It means that they are the most valuable employees,
               | because their productivity per dollar is infinite.
               | 
               | It also means that when you sort all the (non-executive,
               | of course!) employees by total comp in preparation for
               | layoffs to make the budget look better, they are at the
               | bottom of the list.
        
               | me_me_me wrote:
               | oh yes, you are absolutely right :D
        
           | tecleandor wrote:
           | Yeah! Being almost 50 years old it's not like people is not
           | working there anymore but that probably a bunch of people in
           | the original project has already died!
           | 
           | Great forward thinking
        
           | mistermann wrote:
           | Any idea how many people took advantage of the retiree badge
           | program, or any individual people who continued to put in
           | substantial hours?
        
             | wildzzz wrote:
             | We do something similar at my job for the greybeards that
             | were very influential on our current projects. They
             | "retire" but are retained as a very part time employee that
             | only get paid if we need to bring them in for a day or two
             | to help answer some questions. The managers love it because
             | they don't need to find work for this person, pay for any
             | benefits, or need to get approvals to pay them like
             | contractors. As long as we keep doing relevant work to
             | their expertise, they will continue being retained. There
             | is a limit for how many hours they can put in because these
             | people are incredibly expensive as they usually retire at
             | the top engineer level and retain the equivalent hourly
             | wage for that position.
        
         | olabyne wrote:
         | And quite recently they also recovered from a faulty ram
         | module, with a radio link speed that is maybe below the kbit/s
         | now !
        
           | lisper wrote:
           | And you should see the ping times.
        
           | liamwire wrote:
           | I suspect it's far lower than that.
        
           | stordoff wrote:
           | > Uplink communications is via S-band (16-bits/sec command
           | rate) while an X-band transmitter provides downlink telemetry
           | at 160 bits/sec normally and 1.4 kbps for playback of high-
           | rate plasma wave data.
           | 
           | https://science.nasa.gov/mission/voyager/spacecraft/
           | 
           | The data playbacks were initially transmitted at 7200 bps,
           | but this was dropped to 1400 bps in 2007
           | (https://voyager.gsfc.nasa.gov/Library/DeepCommo_Chapter3--
           | 14... - page 72).
           | 
           | RTT ~46 hours (one-way light time 22:49:59, per
           | https://science.nasa.gov/mission/voyager/where-are-they-now/)
        
         | selimnairb wrote:
         | > It's not like they have a local test device to experiment on
         | is it?
         | 
         | I would bet they have one or more simulators ("digital twin" in
         | the parlance of our times). I'd want one simulator to always
         | reflect the current state of the probe (with state data
         | assimilated periodically from the real probe). Then other
         | simulators can be used to test management changes to see how
         | the system might respond.
        
           | onedognight wrote:
           | > I would bet they have one or more simulators
           | 
           | Sadly they do not, but they are starting to write one.
        
         | ForHackernews wrote:
         | There's a documentary "It's Quieter in the Twilight" about the
         | team keeping the Voyager missions alive:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJT8AW0wYw
        
           | ornornor wrote:
           | Looks very interesting , thanks for sharing
        
           | whycome wrote:
           | Included with Amazon Prime in Canada
        
         | tverbeure wrote:
         | You should totally check out the talk from a few weeks ago that
         | I link to in my other comment. It answers your 3 questions and
         | more.
        
       | japanuspus wrote:
       | The Voyager mission is such a wild achievement. Both the sublime
       | design and craftsmanship that must have gone into the hardware,
       | and the deep institutional knowledge required to keep it running
       | is awe-inspiring.
        
       | litoE wrote:
       | It's been operating for 47 years and it still has fuel left to
       | make attitude corrections. I wonder how they managed that feat.
        
         | turblety wrote:
         | I presume solar power?
        
           | Tor3 wrote:
           | No, way too little sun out here. The sun is just a dot far
           | away. The Voyagers both use RTGs, radioisotope thermoelectric
           | generators. Decaying plutonium, essentially. That's for the
           | electrically powered systems. The thrusters use liquid
           | hydrazine, which is common for those kind of thrusters.
           | 
           | Edit: There's more about that in the NASA link in a sibling
           | comment.
        
           | krige wrote:
           | Solar has nothing to do with it. Voyager uses hydrazine, of
           | which over 80% has been used up over the years. They simply
           | use not that much of it as it's not for thrust, but for
           | aiming at Earth more or less.
        
           | meindnoch wrote:
           | Lol. How would that work exactly?
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _How would that work exactly?_
             | 
             | Light sails. Laser propulsion. Photon rockets. None of
             | which apply to Voyager. But none of which are laughably
             | dismissible.
        
           | gpderetta wrote:
           | Even with something like an ion engine (which I'm not sure
           | were available when Voyager was launched), you would need
           | leftover reaction mass.
        
         | Dennip wrote:
         | IIRC They have some type of nuclear power. Not like a reactor
         | but something much simpler that generates heat from radioactive
         | decay.
        
           | robbiep wrote:
           | the flow of electrons to allow systems to work is not the
           | same as the expulsion of gasses to provide thrust
        
           | reacweb wrote:
           | https://xkcd.com/2115/ The RTGs generated about 470 W of
           | electric power at the time of launch. In 2023, it was 260W.
        
         | magicalhippo wrote:
         | Not to downplay how impressive the Voyager probes are, but it
         | seems they packed a fair bit of hydrazine. From "Engineering
         | the Voyager Uranus mission":
         | 
         |  _While it was not a design requirement, the option for an
         | extended mission past Saturn was always protected, unless it
         | meant compromising a major mission objective at Jupiter or
         | Saturn._
         | 
         |  _Even though the probability of Voyager 2 lasting another five
         | years was calculated to be in the range of 60 to 70 percent --
         | well below NASA 's usual acceptable probability-of-success
         | threshold -- the decision was made to send Voyager on to
         | Uranus._
         | 
         |  _After its Uranus encounter, Voyager 2 still carried 48% of
         | the hydrazine initially loaded into its tanks, eight-and-a-half
         | years before._
         | 
         | [1]: doi:10.1016/0094-5765(87)90096-8 (can be found on the hub
         | of science)
        
       | NaOH wrote:
       | Probably a better link:
       | https://science.nasa.gov/missions/voyager-program/voyager-1/...
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | - _" A fuel tube inside the thrusters has filled up with silicon
       | dioxide, a side effect of age within the spacecraft's fuel
       | tank."_
       | 
       | Where the heck do you get SiO2 from on a spacecraft? Some kind of
       | silicone?
       | 
       | edit: _" clogged with silicon dioxide, a byproduct that appears
       | with age from a rubber diaphragm in the spacecraft's fuel
       | tank"_[0] --I'm guessing that is a silicone rubber. I didn't know
       | that rubber can decompose into sand.
       | 
       | [0] https://science.nasa.gov/missions/voyager-
       | program/voyager-1/...
        
         | tecleandor wrote:
         | Seems like silicone rubber is extracted from SiO2, so maybe
         | it's impurities? Or maybe the Si and O are doing something to
         | leave the polymer? (I have no idea if that last thing is even
         | possible)
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicone_rubber
        
         | numpad0 wrote:
         | They expel the Hydrazine(N2H4) fuel out of a spherical Ti tank
         | by inflating a rubber balloon that involve Teflon inside the
         | tank using helium supply. I guess N2H4 was potent enough to
         | degrade even those space age materials.
         | 
         | 1:
         | https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19810001583/downloads/19...
        
       | onewheeltom wrote:
       | Just another day at the office for the Voyager 1 team. Wow.
        
       | Buttons840 wrote:
       | I've heard good things about some Voyager documentaries, and I've
       | wanted to watch one with my daughter, but NASA keeps making the
       | documentaries out-of-date and incomplete. How many amazing
       | stories will there be to tell by the time Voyager is truly beyond
       | our knowledge?
        
       | Twisol wrote:
       | I had the _extreme_ pleasure of seeing Bruce Waggoner of the
       | Voyager team give a keynote at !!Con just last month. The
       | recording landed on YouTube just a couple days ago, so this is
       | great timing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF_9YcehCZo
        
       | tverbeure wrote:
       | 2 weeks ago, Bruce Wagoner from the Voyager program gave a talk
       | at !!Con about how they recovered from the CMOS memory issue that
       | they had a year ago.
       | 
       | It's basically blind debugging with a latency of 45 hours.
       | 
       | The talk is amazing and goes through the computer architecture of
       | the spacecraft as well as the challenges of dealing with
       | something that is so old, with so documentation that has
       | conflicting information or unreadable etc.
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/dF_9YcehCZo?si=W_b3NJ7vgxaYS1__
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Official release: https://science.nasa.gov/missions/voyager-
       | program/voyager-1/...
       | 
       | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41505008)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-12 23:01 UTC)