nasa NASA launches three Android smartphones into space

[Crisp]

NASA launches three Android smartphones into space

We hope roaming was switched off

THE UNITED STATES National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has launched three Android smartphones into space to see what they can do.

NASA calls it the Phonesat project, and it aims to demonstrate "the ability to launch the lowest cost and easiest to build satellites ever flown in space - capabilities enabled by using off-the-shelf consumer smartphones to build spacecraft".

The project's main goal is to prove that a satellite can be built for less than $1,000 using off the shelf equipment.

NASA picked three Google Nexus One handsets to go into space, apparently because that was the highest specification smartphone available when the project was the planning stages.

These Nexus One smartphones are currently hurtling around earth at an altitude of about 150 miles, the LA Times reports, having embarked on their mission on Sunday. The Android smartphones, which are encased in 4in metal cubes for protection, will take photos of earth and send back messages to NASA so the space agency can see whether smartphones can supply the "brains" of future satellites.

"Out of the box smartphones already offer a wealth of capabilities needed for satellite systems, including fast processors, versatile operating systems, multiple miniature sensors, high-resolution cameras, GPS receivers, and several radios," NASA explained.

Once the phones return back on earth, hopefully, in two weeks, that won't be the end of NASA's experiment. It has already planned its Phonesat 2.0 mission that will launch a higher specification Google Nexus S smartphone into orbit.

Unlike the ageing Nexus One, the Nexus S will be launched into space equipped with a two-way S-band radio that will allow NASA engineers to control it remotely. It will also feature solar panels to ensure that the mission will last longer, and magnetorquer coils - electromagnets that interact with the earth's magnetic field.

Source

I would love to build one of these, with a camera :)

[DocM]

There's a lot being made as to if multiple off the shelf computers arranged in fault tolerant voting systems can provide the high radiation environment performance of a high-cost / low availability radiation hardened computer system in space.

In a voting system if one computer shows an anomalous result, as from a radiation event ionizing part of the circuitry, the faulty systems result can be voted off the island.

SpaceX has chosen the voting system, and in a recent flight one computer was reset as Dragon passed over the South Atlantic Anomaly (where the inner Van Allen belt dips into low Earth orbital space.) The other computers, as expected, carried on the mission after they picked up the affected systems faulty resilt..

Here's an Aviation Week interview with SpaceX about their system -

http://www.aviationweek.com/blogs.aspx?plckblogid=blog:04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385&plckpostid=blog%3A04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385post%3Aa8b87703-93f9-4cdf-885f-9429605e14df

[Praetor]

the akward moment when NASA sends more mobiles phones to space then shuttles.

[fusi0n]

the akward moment when NASA sends more mobiles phones to space then shuttles.

This.

[DocM]

the akward moment when NASA sends more mobiles phones to space then shuttles.

This has more to do with enabling high schools, colleges, universities and smaller companies to build affordable satellites than NASA itself. These microsats are launched as secondary payloads to the main rocket payload. SpaceX and other launch providers launch them all the time.

As to the shuttle; it had flown ~20 years longer than originally planned, never met its utilization goals, was horrendously expensive compared to what's coming in the next couple of years, and was fundamentally unsafe.

Unsafe?

It had NO ability to safely abort the crew from once the solid boosters were lit to 3 minutes into the flight, and it had a delicate thermal protection system that could be damaged during launch OR in space. Those cost 14 lives.

On top of that a parachute system for the sealed crew cabin that could have saved the Challenger crew, who BTW survived the explosion, was omitted from the design before it went operational. Ditto for ejection seats.

ALL the coming new spacecraft; Orion, Dragon, Dream Chaser, and CST-100, will have launch abort from the ground all the way to orbit, and all but Orion will be capable of carrying a crew of up to 7 - as large as the shuttle. Orion will carry up to 6.

[Richteralan]

the akward moment when NASA sends more mobiles phones to space then shuttles.

Why it is awkward?

[Hum]

That's where Androids belong :D

[fusi0n]

That's where Androids belong :D

What if they start their own race and take over the universe?

[Praetor]

What if they start their own race and take over the universe?

shh.. Michael Bay might lissen to this.

[Mr. Gibs]

As to the shuttle; it had flown ~20 years longer than originally planned, never met its utilization goals, was horrendously expensive compared to what's coming in the next couple of years, and was fundamentally unsafe.

Fundamentally unsafe sure, but 2 accidents in 135 flights? That's pretty good when you consider a couple of things:

1. The technology on board that thing was ancient, my old casio watch is probably more advanced. But during that time it was (and probably still is) an amazing piece of work.

2. The unsafe environment the shuttle naturally lives in. Space, and getting to space, isn't some oh lets go take a walk in the park. It's a naturally risky job.

3. NASA's budget is ****ing tiny. They get about $18 billion a year to do everything that they do.

4. The unsafe bits that you talked about.

Space X may be able to launch stuff for less but they don't have to deal with the government bureaucracy that NASA has to. If NASA was able to shop around for the best deal for everything from chairs to rockets they could probably be a lot more efficient. But they simply can't because a government agency.

[Louisifer]

What if they start their own race and take over the universe?

Then we created the Borg D:

shh.. Michael Bay might lissen to this.

ST: Borg Origins? :p

[DocM]

Fundamentally unsafe sure, but 2 accidents in 135 flights? That's pretty good when you consider a couple of things:

1. The technology on board that thing was ancient, my old casio watch is probably more advanced. But during that time it was (and probably still is) an amazing piece of work.

Launch abort systems have existed since Yuri Gagarin, almost 20 years before the Shutgle flew.

2. The unsafe environment the shuttle naturally lives in. Space, and getting to space, isn't some oh lets go take a walk in the park. It's a naturally risky job.

All 14 deaths occurred below the Karman line that marks the beginning of space.

Launching at below zero temps the SRB seals are not designed for, something ATK engineers warned against, had nothing to do with space being dangerous and everything to do with poor management.

Designing a delicate thermal protection system left wide open within feet of tons of fragile foam insulation, or absent that condensed ice, over the liquid oxygen tank fails Systems Design 101.

They were killed by bad design and incompetence, not space.

3. NASA's budget is ****ing tiny. They get about $18 billion a year to do everything that they do.

Challenger happened when the Shuttle program was flush with money, and Columbia's destruction was due to a design problem that couldn't be corrected, only partially mitigated. Those and management that had blinders on. Money can't fix incompetance.

4. The unsafe bits that you talked about.

Which are part & parcel of 1-3.

Space X may be able to launch stuff for less but they don't have to deal with the government bureaucracy that NASA has to. If NASA was able to shop around for the best deal for everything from chairs to rockets they could probably be a lot more efficient. But they simply can't because a government agency.

NASA is indfficient because of 1) cost-plus contracting instead making greater use of COTS (commercial off the shelf), 2) having to spread their operations over as many congressional districts to please the Congress-critters instead of consolidating their infrastructure, 3) a mind-numbing top-down bureaucracy, and 4) innovations rarely making it into production ("that's how we've always done it!")

SpaceX has to comply with all the regulations NASA and the other aerospace contractors do, and whatever regulations NASA and the FAA tacks on, including human ratings standards which the Shuttle never had to comply with.

The SpaceX advantages are in a highly vertical integration, not doing things because that's how its always been done, and applying non-aerospace manufacturing methods (they borrow a lot from the suto industry.) Their Hawthorne factory takes raw materials in one end, and rockets & spacecraft come out the other end.

You know they're on to something when the Chinese say they can't compete with SpaceX, and Arieanspace's CEO can only grumble and talk of a simpler rocket down the road.

[Growled Member]

That's where Androids belong :D

I hope they don't meet up with V'Ger.

[DocM]

I hope they don't meet up with V'Ger.

Or Leviathan.

[Mr. Gibs]

They were killed by bad design and incompetence, not space.

I didn't say that, what I said was the stuff they do is inherently unsafe. And having 2 bad flights out of 135 is pretty good considering that risk.

Challenger happened when the Shuttle program was flush with money, and Columbia's destruction was due to a design problem that couldn't be corrected, only partially mitigated. Those and management that had blinders on. Money can't fix incompetance.

In 1986, NASA's budget was $7 billion, which is about $13 billion in today's money.

So basically NASA got as much money as the airforce did to repaint the f-22 fleet.

[Torolol]

NASA calls it the Phonesat project, and it aims to demonstrate "the ability to launch the lowest cost and

how much the cost would bloat if it using other OS like WindowsPhone OS ?

[DocM]

Nexus One uses Android, which is a flavor of Linux and Linux is gaining favor as an OS for rockets and spacecraft. NASA started looking at Linux variants ~2007. SpaceX uses a mix of Linux and VxWorks.

[laserfloyd]

Shuttle was originally designed to be a cheap way into low earth orbit and with great frequency such as a launch every month. What they quickly realized is that it was way more complicated. With it's complexities the cost went up and the launch turnaround went up too. It was never what it was supposed to be but it was plenty enough for a lot of other things.

If I had to pick a shining achievement for STS it would be Hubble. Yes, Hubble could have been launched via some other launch system but had that been the case, it would have been DOA. The mirror was off. It took humans going up on shuttle to correct it. Not only that but we went back four more times after that to upgrade and repair hardware. For astronomy, Hubble has been a boon of nearly immeasureable value.

Shuttle also did much of the heavy lifting for ISS. Say what you will about ISS but it's a superstructure that humans built... in space. I'm not so sure any other vehicle could have done the same things that shuttle did. In a lot of ways it was too far ahead of its time. A spacecraft that would go up and come back and then go back up again? That's science fiction. Maybe decades from now there'll be another space plane that's safer and more cost effective.

I was lucky enough to catch the final launch of shuttle, STS-135. For all it's shortcomings and all the great things it did, it boils down to a pretty emotional experience. You see this thing going up and you realize there are human beings on it. It really hits you. It might cost money to put people in space but you can't put a price on capturing the human imagination.

Ad astra per aspera

Oh and

Vorsprung durch Technik

:)