It takes a probe approximately ten years to get to Pluto for example, from Earth. By the time it arrives to Pluto, its technology is to be considered archaic (old).
Do scientists which build that probe consider that by the time it will arrive to its destination, its technology will be considered old compared of that on Earth?
Answers:
It may be old but the techonology they are equipped with today will still be very adjectives when it reaches Pluto or outter places. Im sure they are gonna wish they had the up to date stuff but the old stuff provides a lot of what we need to know.
The odds are very good that any spacecraft's technology is at tiniest partly out of date by the time they LAUNCH it, since it takes years to design, build, and question paper.
The truth is, they don't really care, it's irrelevant. They design probes to perform functions, with expected duration spans, and they build it as well as they can. They neither care nor can do anything about the certainty the technology might be old by the time the probe reaches its destination. As long as it works, what difference can that form?
They do the best they can. 1969 technology be good enough to land family on the Moon so I guess 1999 technology is good enough to go to Pluto.
They consider it but nearby isn't much that they can do about it. They can only work with what they own at the time of launch. The Voyager probes are still functioning and they were launched in the 70's.
This is something that must be considered. But let's not underestimate the engineers who build these probes and the scientists and computer geeks that operate them. They are always finding ways to capture more our of technology than what it was designed for. Here are a few examples.
When the Galileo probe was launch and sent to Jupiter,it's high gain antenna failed to open completely. The guys (and gals) on Earth found a passageway to reprogram and work around this potentially disastrous malfunction.
In 1989 Voyager II (which was built on 70's technology) had to be completely reprogrammed within order for it's cameras to take images of Neptune. Voyager's camera's not designed to pocket pictures in very low light conditions. Not lone was the probe was reprogrammed to lift longer duration images. The camera's motion and direction had to be controlled in such a route that the images were not blurred during a long duration shot.
The NEAR-Shoemaker was never intended to house on Eros, but did it successfully.
The Mars' rovers Spirit and Opportunity, intended to last 90 days, going in 5 years!!
The list go on and on. Yes, the physical technology many be 'outdated', but never underestimate the ingenuity of the people on the ground to get every possible bit of information out of these probes.
Related Questions:
What is the most rationalized type of solar power?
a parabolic dish reflecting sunlight onto a stirling engine (or a similiar form of concentrating sunlight and using heat energy from that), a standard photovaltaic system, a solar updraft tower( the kind that places the turbines at the lip of the base, not directly in the tower, or the gentle with both turbines, or...
CAN A SOLAR PANEL FROM A CALCULATOR POWER A FLASHLIGHT BULB?
TRY TO DO A PROJECT FOR SCHOOL not likely- a calculator is based on metal oxide semiconductors- they are voltage driven devices and require very low power levels. If you are thinking of using a standard frothy bulb they are incandescent and have a dramatically higher power demand. you might return with...
Do scientists which build that probe consider that by the time it will arrive to its destination, its technology will be considered old compared of that on Earth?
Answers:
It may be old but the techonology they are equipped with today will still be very adjectives when it reaches Pluto or outter places. Im sure they are gonna wish they had the up to date stuff but the old stuff provides a lot of what we need to know.
The odds are very good that any spacecraft's technology is at tiniest partly out of date by the time they LAUNCH it, since it takes years to design, build, and question paper.
The truth is, they don't really care, it's irrelevant. They design probes to perform functions, with expected duration spans, and they build it as well as they can. They neither care nor can do anything about the certainty the technology might be old by the time the probe reaches its destination. As long as it works, what difference can that form?
They do the best they can. 1969 technology be good enough to land family on the Moon so I guess 1999 technology is good enough to go to Pluto.
They consider it but nearby isn't much that they can do about it. They can only work with what they own at the time of launch. The Voyager probes are still functioning and they were launched in the 70's.
This is something that must be considered. But let's not underestimate the engineers who build these probes and the scientists and computer geeks that operate them. They are always finding ways to capture more our of technology than what it was designed for. Here are a few examples.
When the Galileo probe was launch and sent to Jupiter,it's high gain antenna failed to open completely. The guys (and gals) on Earth found a passageway to reprogram and work around this potentially disastrous malfunction.
In 1989 Voyager II (which was built on 70's technology) had to be completely reprogrammed within order for it's cameras to take images of Neptune. Voyager's camera's not designed to pocket pictures in very low light conditions. Not lone was the probe was reprogrammed to lift longer duration images. The camera's motion and direction had to be controlled in such a route that the images were not blurred during a long duration shot.
The NEAR-Shoemaker was never intended to house on Eros, but did it successfully.
The Mars' rovers Spirit and Opportunity, intended to last 90 days, going in 5 years!!
The list go on and on. Yes, the physical technology many be 'outdated', but never underestimate the ingenuity of the people on the ground to get every possible bit of information out of these probes.
Related Questions:
What is the most rationalized type of solar power?
a parabolic dish reflecting sunlight onto a stirling engine (or a similiar form of concentrating sunlight and using heat energy from that), a standard photovaltaic system, a solar updraft tower( the kind that places the turbines at the lip of the base, not directly in the tower, or the gentle with both turbines, or...
CAN A SOLAR PANEL FROM A CALCULATOR POWER A FLASHLIGHT BULB?
TRY TO DO A PROJECT FOR SCHOOL not likely- a calculator is based on metal oxide semiconductors- they are voltage driven devices and require very low power levels. If you are thinking of using a standard frothy bulb they are incandescent and have a dramatically higher power demand. you might return with...