hello NASA, using the old junk box?

We can hope.

When I worked on the spaceborne "black box" data recorder for the Shuttle, one goal was to limit the multi-pin connector (certified for thousands of connect/disconnect cycles) to exactly two connects and two disconnects. Why? Because we could, and it reduces the chance of damage slightly. We did this:

("-->>--" is a connector)

A B C TEST SET-->>-->>-->>--RECORDER

A B C SHUTTLE-->>-->>-->>--RECORDER

By always connecting/disconnecting B, we could almost always limit A and C to two connects and two disconnects.

Remember the Shuttle O-Ring? I was part of the team that made the system that tested them for flaws. Alas, the joint designers allowed the O-Rings to see conditions that were out of spec; our temerature limits did not allow direct contact between the O-ring and the flame from a solid-fuel booster rocket. :(

Now I know who to thank for ordering a redesign of the 17 inch disconnect for the external fuel tank. I made a lot of money on that one. Not that it was wasted, though; the 17" disconnect is one of the places where there is no redundancy - a failure to close will bring down a shuttle.

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:06:33 GMT) it happened "Morituri-|-Max" wrote in :

Same government it is!

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:20:35 +0000) it happened Guy Macon wrote in :

You are supposed to hit

And *I* never crashed a space shuttle. Website is a good place to start on the journey of knowing yourself. You have only limited time.

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:20:35 +0000) it happened Guy Macon wrote in :

No idiot, I did not write that. You cannot even read a posting it seems.

And you do all the things you mention above. But you do not work for NASA.

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:08:50 GMT) it happened "Morituri-|-Max" wrote in :

You are using the royal 'we', however you are only one moron, unless you just had the brain split. Oh, not possible, needs at least 2 neurons :-)

I gave a link to the place I intended to.

Neither did I. Are you really this stupid, or is it an act?

Case in point.

Hmm, let me see,have I got this right?

1) NASA or the contractor spent zillions on testing systems, and they couldn't do a redundant PSU test properly. I hate to think what the other test were like. 2) "fastest space qualification ever" So why did everything else take so long?

martin

Watch this, uh, space.

-- jm

------------------------------------------------------

Note: My E-mail address has been altered to avoid spam

------------------------------------------------------

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:17:06 +0000) it happened Guy Macon wrote in :

So did I.

Who is stupid here, you talk no physics, no astro and not electronics related, Try /dev/zero

I'm not sure that they *have* to but sure, light aircraft engines are the last bastion of the magneto.

Graham

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:18:21 +0000) it happened Guy Macon wrote in :

EDUCATION:

EDUCATION: I am self taught; I started as an assembler and worked my way up to technician, then engineer. I do not have a degree, but I do have over twenty years of experience and a proven record of accomplishment in the area of product development. It shows. You need a shave.

First of all, they knew the path of the comet. Second of all, it tooks years to achieve this. Much harder to do it in say, a half minute window.

Back in the 50's I think it was, the Army claimed they hit the moon with a ball bearing shot from a Redstone Rocket or something to that effect. I don't think there was such a thing as a uP then. toobs, maybe?

Al

On a sunny day (Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:42:27 GMT) it happened Al wrote in :

There were little metal toobs, 'nuvistor??? ah here:

But that was end fifties. There were other small tubes too, before the transistor. The name 'nuvistor' sort of looks like it was a last attempt to challenge the first transistors (1958 was it these came?). But of cause mechanical gyroscopes were there long before, also in the V2 in WW2. I have seen nuvistors used only once IIRC, typical application was preamp in a capacitor microphone.... These mikes were big and still around in the sixties.

between

expenses

happened

"A couple of thousand......." Um, yeah. Like you have a clue about it.

Ken

I am guessing a $1000 redesign will probably take 10 years and millions of dollars to test and certify .... Well it would if you use the software testers I used to work with....

Wouldn't it also have to be specifically space certified, and hence tested against long term radiation exposure? Also, I would have thought that the repeated acceleration (G force) testing of a space certified part would be have to be far more extensive. $250k as a conservative starting point looks about right.