SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
After going into Fault Protection Mode on January 28th, Voyager 2 will soon return to normal operation.
On January 25th, Voyager 2 was instructed to perform a magnetometer calibration maneuver which would cause the spacecraft to rotate itself a full 360 degrees, however the maneuver was delayed causing two power hungry systems to be on simultaneously. The maneuver was not completed.
There's a tight power budget on Voyager 2, because its radioisotope thermoelectric generators are running down. To protect itself, the spacecraft went into its fault-protection mode. In that mode, it shut down scientific instruments to make up for the power deficit. By January 28th, engineers had successfully shut down one of the two high-power-drawing systems, and turned its science instruments back on.
The probe is currently approximately 18.5 billion kilometers from Earth, with a time lag of 34 hours for signals to make a round trip.
Voyager 2 is still running, but its power situation is precarious. Mission engineers are constantly evaluating the status of the power system, and they know that it's losing about 4% of its power each year. A lot of power is needed to keep systems on the spacecraft from freezing, including fuel lines. If those lines froze, and broke, then Voyager 2 would no longer be able to point its antenna towards Earth, and the mission would effectively be over.
NASA Tweeted the following regarding the issue
An update on our twin @NASAVoyager spacecraft, still operating in interstellar space. After software designed to automatically protect it was triggered, engineers successfully turned Voyager 2's science instruments back on. Normal operations resume soon: https://t.co/UEvQBfMHJt pic.twitter.com/GUCZamVZ0Q
— NASA (@NASA) January 30, 2020
In the past NASA has indicated Voyager 2 will go dark in 'roughly 2020' so even though this isn't the end for the spacecraft, it is not far off.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Coward, Anonymous on Monday February 03 2020, @07:11AM (5 children)
I don't think the US should be the world police who decides which countries can have nuclear weapons. In multiple cases, fear of the US drives countries towards the weapons, because the US has never attacked a nuclear power.
I also don't think we should ignore that a strongly pro-nuclear-energy policy would put the technology and eventually weapons in the hands of many more people.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Monday February 03 2020, @03:16PM
In the interest of discouraging non-nuclear powers from acquiring nuclear weapons, the US should definitely attack one or more nuclear powers. From orbit. In a surprise attack. It's the only rational thing to do.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 04 2020, @05:22PM (3 children)
Who should? Or is it not that important to you?
(Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Tuesday February 04 2020, @06:15PM (2 children)
It is important to me. But when a relatively small group of people elevates itself above the others to say its word is law, the others get angry and fearful. That situation is not sustainable. Find a broader consensus.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 04 2020, @07:20PM (1 child)
One will be able to say that no matter how the law is created.
So what?
(Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Tuesday February 04 2020, @08:18PM
OK, but America lording it over the world is like if Pennsylvania making rules for the rest of the US. It would cause legitimate and destabilizing resentment, even if there were nothing especially wrong with PA.
I guess I care about the long-term global strength of the US, and believe we are squandering it because national-security and other busybodies keep inventing flimflam causes for the public to rally behind.