Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,674 posts)
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:40 AM Sep 2012

35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars

Source: AP-Excite

By ALICIA CHANG

PASADENA, Calif. (AP) - Thirty-five years after leaving Earth, Voyager 1 is reaching for the stars.

Sooner or later, the workhorse spacecraft will bid adieu to the solar system and enter a new realm of space - the first time a manmade object will have escaped to the other side.

Perhaps no one on Earth will relish the moment more than 76-year-old Ed Stone, who has toiled on the project from the start.

"We're anxious to get outside and find what's out there," he said.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20120904/DA12T06O1.html





This artists rendering provided by NASA shows the Voyager spacecraft. Launched in 1977, the twin spacecraft are exploring the edge of the solar system. Thirty-five years after leaving Earth, Voyager 1 is reaching for the stars. Sooner or later, the workhorse spacecraft will bid adieu to the solar system and enter a new realm of space _ the first time a man-made object will have escaped to the other side. (AP Photo/NASA)

67 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars (Original Post) Omaha Steve Sep 2012 OP
just amazing when you consider the way they must control it - with all the old bells & whistles tomm2thumbs Sep 2012 #1
Actually, sonny, we used to get up off the couch and turn the dial on the tv set... rfranklin Sep 2012 #3
heh heh heh - tomm2thumbs Sep 2012 #4
I remember those. And my grandmother used to have a crystal candy bowl... Ian David Sep 2012 #23
omg - that must've been hilarious the day you figured that out tomm2thumbs Sep 2012 #32
My dad had three remote controls... awoke_in_2003 Sep 2012 #21
Geesh - I *must* be old. 38. mwooldri Sep 2012 #22
I remember when Missycim Sep 2012 #24
Heck, our first TV wth a remote had a wire! Archae Sep 2012 #38
In 1960, we rented a modest shore house in NJ but it had an electric antenna! rfranklin Sep 2012 #44
I will admit we could have got more channels when I was younger. mwooldri Sep 2012 #57
Worse than that oldsarge54 Sep 2012 #65
No full-time staff on the job. enough Sep 2012 #17
Must be lots ot trips to the surplus JPL hardware bins to get parts tomm2thumbs Sep 2012 #31
Delete. roamer65 Sep 2012 #54
What's powering the spacecraft...too far for solar power isn't it? rfranklin Sep 2012 #2
Radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) n/t Wilms Sep 2012 #7
Nuclear-powered. Each has an eight-track tape recorder. And 68 kilobytes of memory. Auggie Sep 2012 #5
We're sending eight-track tapes to the stars? JustABozoOnThisBus Sep 2012 #11
You know whats sad? Missycim Sep 2012 #25
Also read as "GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!" :P octothorpe Sep 2012 #47
I am only 42 I will have you know :p Missycim Sep 2012 #48
I've worked with a robotic 8-track system before... Ian David Sep 2012 #26
I dont remember that far back but I think either I had one of these or a friend did. lol Missycim Sep 2012 #49
We also sent a gold plated 70's era laser disc daleo Sep 2012 #64
"To boldly go where no man has gone before..." Surya Gayatri Sep 2012 #6
And oldsarge54 Sep 2012 #8
It's not set in an orbit. It won't be coming back unless we somehow retrieved it. Fearless Sep 2012 #13
You didn't see the first Star Trek movie? Missycim Sep 2012 #27
Lol, I hadn't thought of that. Touche' Fearless Sep 2012 #41
Worst costume design I have ever seen Missycim Sep 2012 #42
*Shudders* Fearless Sep 2012 #45
Sorry oldsarge54 Sep 2012 #29
It'll have Firewire ports N/T tonekat Sep 2012 #63
We might christx30 Sep 2012 #67
V'ger . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Sep 2012 #9
I will just give up the information N/T Throckmorton Sep 2012 #12
Sorry Missycim Sep 2012 #28
Harse Mistress reference oldsarge54 Sep 2012 #30
Adam Selene will speak at the Democratic Convention, I hope. nt Bernardo de La Paz Sep 2012 #35
Or Prof Paulie Sep 2012 #46
We'll see it again, perhaps. We simply need to master fusion energy and new propulsion drives. Selatius Sep 2012 #10
Ahhh, the good old minimal tech days. geckosfeet Sep 2012 #14
Actually, that was Maximal Tech .... Mustellus Sep 2012 #16
Of course. But engineers always strive to sqeeze the last bit of performance out of everything. geckosfeet Sep 2012 #19
11 billion mile message in a bottle IADEMO2004 Sep 2012 #15
Great stuff. I also recommend a visit to the Voyager mission page at NASA: Robb Sep 2012 #18
At Voyager's speed it would take 50,000 years to reach the nearest star Baclava Sep 2012 #20
re:35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars allan01 Sep 2012 #33
re:35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars allan01 Sep 2012 #34
I thought Pioneer 10 had already left the solar system... EX500rider Sep 2012 #36
Nope. Voyager is faster. AtheistCrusader Sep 2012 #39
Massive scale of the universe. Nearest star is 270,000 AU away SWTORFanatic Sep 2012 #50
I'm heading to a presentation about the Voyagers at JPL tonight. Kablooie Sep 2012 #37
I'm jealous! neverforget Sep 2012 #52
Here's a video of the whole presentation. Kablooie Sep 2012 #58
and no sign of heaven yet LOL snooper2 Sep 2012 #40
sad we never used nuclear pulse propulsion. we could still get to alpha centauri in my lifetime SWTORFanatic Sep 2012 #43
Those 2 spacecraft amaze me. Odin2005 Sep 2012 #51
Video Tribute to a lonely Space Probe ThoughtCriminal Sep 2012 #53
I am assuming that New Horizons will eventually overtake the Voyagers...maybe? roamer65 Sep 2012 #55
Voyager's doing 17km/sec to New Horizon's 13 or 14. (nt) Posteritatis Sep 2012 #56
You can view the daily current Voyager data on the web. Kablooie Sep 2012 #59
That's what can happen when "planned obsolesence" is taken out of the equation Duer 157099 Sep 2012 #60
Voyager is one of the best things we've done burrowowl Sep 2012 #61
who said 8-track tapes would not come back? ChairmanAgnostic Sep 2012 #62
A beacon of our existence...nt and-justice-for-all Sep 2012 #66

tomm2thumbs

(13,297 posts)
1. just amazing when you consider the way they must control it - with all the old bells & whistles
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:44 AM
Sep 2012

must be like changing channels on the TV with a hairdryer

 

rfranklin

(13,200 posts)
3. Actually, sonny, we used to get up off the couch and turn the dial on the tv set...
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:47 AM
Sep 2012

We old folks remember those days wheb there were only three stations.

tomm2thumbs

(13,297 posts)
4. heh heh heh -
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:49 AM
Sep 2012

I remember we had a remote that used a sound clicker to turn the power on and off -- like a tuning fork or something inside... but lo and behold, it worked!

Dad used to build Heathkits so there was always a garage full of goodies around

Ian David

(69,059 posts)
23. I remember those. And my grandmother used to have a crystal candy bowl...
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 09:34 AM
Sep 2012

... and if you tapped it with a spoon, the TV would change channels.

tomm2thumbs

(13,297 posts)
32. omg - that must've been hilarious the day you figured that out
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:09 AM
Sep 2012

crazy how far and fast things have come

mwooldri

(10,303 posts)
22. Geesh - I *must* be old. 38.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 09:32 AM
Sep 2012

I remember having 3 channels until about 1985... though I got a snowy glimpse of the fourth earlier than that.

Archae

(46,340 posts)
38. Heck, our first TV wth a remote had a wire!
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 12:01 PM
Sep 2012

Oh yeah! Mid 1960's, the remote was connected to the TV with a 15 foot cord.

 

rfranklin

(13,200 posts)
44. In 1960, we rented a modest shore house in NJ but it had an electric antenna!
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 04:48 PM
Sep 2012

We could get NY stations or turn the antenna and get Philly as well! That was the height of technology in those days!

mwooldri

(10,303 posts)
57. I will admit we could have got more channels when I was younger.
Wed Sep 5, 2012, 09:23 AM
Sep 2012

I grew up with BBC 1, BBC 2, and Southern (later TVS). London stations were available with a large outdoor antenna, forbidden in our neighborhood at that time. So we had the three South Coast stations. Channel 4 came to the South very late - we moved in the later 80's and we finally got Channel 4 with an antenna pointed at London. Along with Thames (weekday) and London Weekend TV (well... weekends).

Ireland had it worse - two channel land for most of the country at that time. Many households in Dublin had antennas on very high poles pointed at Wales to get the British channels.

oldsarge54

(582 posts)
65. Worse than that
Thu Sep 6, 2012, 05:31 AM
Sep 2012

When I was a kid my father was stationed in Berlin (just before the Wall went up. We had one TV station, and it was in German from the Communist side. Our "cartoons" were having the Sunday comics read on AFN radio.

enough

(13,260 posts)
17. No full-time staff on the job.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:08 AM
Sep 2012

snip from the article>

These days, a handful of engineers diligently listen for the Voyagers from a satellite campus not far from the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which built the spacecraft.

The control room, with its cubicles and carpeting, could be mistaken for an insurance office if not for a blue sign overhead that reads "Mission Controller" and a warning on a computer: "Voyager mission critical hardware. Please do not touch!"

There are no full-time scientists left on the mission, but 20 part-timers analyze the data streamed back. Since the spacecraft are so far out, it takes 17 hours for a radio signal from Voyager 1 to travel to Earth. For Voyager 2, it takes about 13 hours.

snip>

tomm2thumbs

(13,297 posts)
31. Must be lots ot trips to the surplus JPL hardware bins to get parts
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:08 AM
Sep 2012

or perhaps they haven't had anything to upgrade - just letting it work the way it always has -- figured the further it was away, the more sophisticated the receiver had to be on earth to collect the data

still, entirely amazing

 

rfranklin

(13,200 posts)
2. What's powering the spacecraft...too far for solar power isn't it?
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:45 AM
Sep 2012

anybody know?

On edit: nuclear powered according to the article at the link.

JustABozoOnThisBus

(23,355 posts)
11. We're sending eight-track tapes to the stars?
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 07:32 AM
Sep 2012

I wonder what those advanced civilizations will think of the BeeGees and Led Zeppelin? Oh, the inhumanity!

 

Missycim

(950 posts)
25. You know whats sad?
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 09:36 AM
Sep 2012

The beeGees and Led Zeppelin is better music then 99% of the crap thats out there today

 

Missycim

(950 posts)
48. I am only 42 I will have you know :p
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:08 PM
Sep 2012

but the music does stink and this is coming from someone who grew up in the 80's I know bad music.

 

Missycim

(950 posts)
27. You didn't see the first Star Trek movie?
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 09:38 AM
Sep 2012

Voyager 6 fell through a black hole and ended up near a world ran by machines and those machines built a HUGE space craft for Voyager.

christx30

(6,241 posts)
67. We might
Thu Sep 6, 2012, 04:17 PM
Sep 2012

Have to worry about Voyager I, buy Voyager II will be destroyed by the Klingons in about 200 years (opening mi utes of Star Trek V). Stupid turtle heads and their target practice.

Throckmorton

(3,579 posts)
12. I will just give up the information N/T
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 07:43 AM
Sep 2012

Nothing like a bald robot that looks like your ex-girlfriend in your shower asking you for information.

Must be a little like alimony payments.

Selatius

(20,441 posts)
10. We'll see it again, perhaps. We simply need to master fusion energy and new propulsion drives.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 07:29 AM
Sep 2012

And we need to muster the will to stop destroying each other and the planet. So much potential and energy is eaten up in man's quest to destroy himself and everything around him.

geckosfeet

(9,644 posts)
14. Ahhh, the good old minimal tech days.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:00 AM
Sep 2012

35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars

Voyager 1 is currently more than 11 billion miles from the sun. Twin Voyager 2, which celebrated its launch anniversary two weeks ago, trails behind at 9 billion miles from the sun.

They're still ticking despite being relics of the early Space Age.

Each only has 68 kilobytes of computer memory. To put that in perspective, the smallest iPod - an 8-gigabyte iPod Nano - is 100,000 times more powerful. Each also has an eight-track tape recorder. Today's spacecraft use digital memory.

The Voyagers' original goal was to tour Jupiter and Saturn, and they sent back postcards of Jupiter's big red spot and Saturn's glittery rings. They also beamed home a torrent of discoveries: erupting volcanoes on the Jupiter moon Io; hints of an ocean below the icy surface of Europa, another Jupiter moon; signs of methane rain on the Saturn moon Titan.

Mustellus

(328 posts)
16. Actually, that was Maximal Tech ....
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:06 AM
Sep 2012

.. just at the time it was designed.

As a Rocket Scientist in the real world, I am always painfully aware how far behind we are.. by the time of launch.

The shuttle's main computers were 8 bit word, 1 megahertz cycle rate, 64 K main memory. (Yes, I said 64 K! )

geckosfeet

(9,644 posts)
19. Of course. But engineers always strive to sqeeze the last bit of performance out of everything.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:23 AM
Sep 2012

And those who remember the days of 64k ram and 1M hard drives may still retain their frugal digital habits.

I chuckle when people complain that their .5Tb hard drive is full. They probably use about 1% of the data.

Robb

(39,665 posts)
18. Great stuff. I also recommend a visit to the Voyager mission page at NASA:
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:11 AM
Sep 2012
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/voyager/index.html

It's amazing they're still controlling it, inasmuch as it can be controlled. They turned off an instrument heater in January to reduce power usage.
 

Baclava

(12,047 posts)
20. At Voyager's speed it would take 50,000 years to reach the nearest star
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:37 AM
Sep 2012

Just maybe long enough for us to build up our starfleet to repel the alien armada.




allan01

(1,950 posts)
33. re:35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:31 AM
Sep 2012

and mittens, the colonials built that , not you.( i had to slip that in)
god speed Voyager 1. may you beam us back all kinds of good info.
vger needs the information

allan01

(1,950 posts)
34. re:35 years later, Voyager 1 is heading for the stars
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:33 AM
Sep 2012

any of you all ever in your lifetime build a crystal set radio? kf6uxj here .

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
39. Nope. Voyager is faster.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 12:22 PM
Sep 2012

Eventually, Pioneer 10 and 11 will join it, but they are just reaching or in the heliosheath.


On November 17, 1998, Voyager 1 overtook Pioneer 10 as the most distant man-made object from Earth, at a distance of 69.419 AU (1.03849×1010 km). It is currently the most distant functioning space probe to receive commands and transmit information to Earth. The spacecraft's mission now is its eternal mission, to study and wander the interstellar medium. At 17.26 km/s (10.72 mi/s)[15] it has the fastest heliocentric recession speed of any man-made object.[16]

SWTORFanatic

(385 posts)
50. Massive scale of the universe. Nearest star is 270,000 AU away
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:19 PM
Sep 2012

Voyager was 60 AU in 97 and about 120 AU in 2012.

Too bad it was launched with chemical rockets and not nuclear pulse propulsion.

Kablooie

(18,637 posts)
37. I'm heading to a presentation about the Voyagers at JPL tonight.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 11:58 AM
Sep 2012

If I can get a seat. I'm sure it will be crowded.

The auditorium has a full scale replica of voyager in the corner and a display of the photos and sounds that the spacecraft carry.

Kablooie

(18,637 posts)
58. Here's a video of the whole presentation.
Wed Sep 5, 2012, 12:56 PM
Sep 2012

It was very interesting.
I learned some things I didn't know about the mission.

Did you know they received some startling unexpected data just last week!

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/25191976

SWTORFanatic

(385 posts)
43. sad we never used nuclear pulse propulsion. we could still get to alpha centauri in my lifetime
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 02:28 PM
Sep 2012

If we launched today (maybe, im 32 and if it took 50 years)

roamer65

(36,745 posts)
55. I am assuming that New Horizons will eventually overtake the Voyagers...maybe?
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:10 PM
Sep 2012

It was launched in 2006 and is less than 3 years away from Pluto now. It speeds by Pluto in July 2015. Then through the Kuiper Belt and on to the stars as well.

Only thing that would give Voyager 1 a leg up on New Horizons is the gravity assists from Jupiter and Saturn.

Kablooie

(18,637 posts)
59. You can view the daily current Voyager data on the web.
Wed Sep 5, 2012, 01:07 PM
Sep 2012
http://voyager.gsfc.nasa.gov/heliopause/heliopause/recenthist.html

This is where the scientists get their data each day.
If you want to learn more about what this data is, watch the video of the JPL presentation given on Tues. Sept 4.
It's pretty interesting.

http://www.ustream.tv/nasajpl2

Duer 157099

(17,742 posts)
60. That's what can happen when "planned obsolesence" is taken out of the equation
Wed Sep 5, 2012, 01:10 PM
Sep 2012

Imagine if all of our cars etc were as reliable?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»35 years later, Voyager 1...