![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The Kepler space telescope was a marvelous instrument and performed great science however it has now failed due to the loss of 2 reaction wheels it requires 3 to function. As designed Kepler only had one backup wheel. It can no longer do the job it was intended to do. My question is why didn't the engineers that designed Kepler put in duel redundant reaction wheels for each axis? The reaction wheels are the weak link they only have a limited lifespan. putting 3 backup wheels for each axis would have extended Kepler's life for many many years to come. the cost compared to the overall cost of Kepler would have been negligible. It just seams to me the engineers would have taken lessons learned from hubble (gyroscopes and reaction wheels fail). in the past NASA has embraced the dual redundant theology why not now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.111.151 ( talk) 02:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
We should split the "objective and methods" section of this article into subsections as follow:
-- Artman40 ( talk) 09:25, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
FWIW - Seems NASA will be announcing a "new discovery" made by the Kepler (spacecraft) on Thursday, April 17, 2014 at 2 p.m./et/usa - perhaps interestingly, Science (journal) has "embargoed the findings" until the time of the news conference - more =>
< ref name="NASA-20140415">Clavin, Whitney; et al. (April 15, 2014). "NASA Hosts Media Teleconference to Announce Latest Kepler Discovery". NASA. Retrieved April 15, 2014.
{{ cite web}}
: Explicit use of et al. in:|author=
( help)</ref>
in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 19:08, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Should the article have a section on studies of Kepler planet host-stars?
This article is getting rather long. Should we split it? -- Artman40 ( talk) 04:10, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV - Monday, July 14, 2014 (2:00-3:30pm/et/usa) - panel of leading experts to discuss plans leading to the "discovery of potentially habitable worlds among the stars" => < ref name="NASA-20140710">Brown, Dwayne (July 10, 2014). "MEDIA ADVISORY M14-117 - Leading Space Experts to Discuss the Search for Life Beyond Earth". NASA. Retrieved July 10, 2014.</ref> - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
FWIW - NASA to answer questions about the Kepler and K2 missions [1] on Reddit [2] on Monday, October 27, 2014 at 10 am/pdt/usa (1 pm/edt/usa) - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:17, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
C1 observes F1, C2 observes F2. Where will C3 and C4 point? Diagram and text don't seem to say. Chart seems to imply that each campaign is aimed at a different target field. Any likelyhood or benefit to re-observing a field on a later campaign ? What are the limitations of 80 day campaigns compared to the original multi-year mission ? - Rod57 ( talk) 14:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
While certainly the increasing population of possibly-Earth-like planets is very exciting, the size and position of the newly added image KeplerExoplanets-NearEarthSize-HabitableZone-20150106.png here and in Exoplanet is too intrusive. This is made worse by the limited amount of information the image *does* convey – just the identifications of the planets and their relative sizes. I have no objection to including such a family portrait (although over the long run the number of planets on such an image will become untenable), but I do wonder how it will get updated, so as to stay current. IMO, it just needs to be smaller, and someplace else. Rwessel ( talk) 21:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
NASA-Audio - Kepler mission - re new exoplanet discoveries - News TeleConference (12 noon/et/usa, Thursday, 7/23/2015) [1] - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 01:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
References
Why "dozens"?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiowa Ryan ( talk • contribs) 02:10, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
EPIC, the Ecliptic Plane Input Catalog is the input catalog used for K2, as KIC was used for K1, so this should be covered here also -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 08:25, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Update: K2 Campaign 9 will be started in April 2016 and will be dedicated to a study of gravitational microlensing events with K2 and from Earth.
Cheers, BatteryIncluded ( talk) 00:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm surprised that no in depth discussion about the mission's failure. It was planned to have a 3.5 yr life-time and it didn't. It was supposed to obtain significantly better data, and it didn't. Whether this is because of poor management of the Discovery (aka "cheap") program, incompetence in Ball's manufacturing processes, (not to mention incompetence in design), you would expect this would have been investigated and reported. So, where is it? Abitslow ( talk) 15:34, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The entry into emergency mode on April 7 is now described in two places, at the end of Mission results to date and at the end of Mission status (the immediately following section. I suggest that the first mention be removed, as this appears to have been a transitory event, and so is not really relevant to the Mission results (unlike the second reaction wheel failure, which while getting primary mention in the second section, does deserve mention in the first). Rwessel ( talk) 03:42, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
This reads like a fanboy page. The goals, initially, and then at launch, as well as the revisions post-launch due to its noisy acquisitions and mechanical failures should, and its accomplishments, as well as its cost up to launch, then since launch, should be succinctly described. Also, the article doesn't do a good job of distinguishing between "possible" exos observed and confirmed. Abitslow ( talk) 18:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
In the original mission, due to the fixed high gain antenna, Kepler had to reorient to send data (once a month, eg 6 hours for 12 GB). (Not clear how much fuel that would use.) In the K2 mission each campaign is about 2.5 months, so is less data collected or is there one or more reorientations (for science data communications) within each campaign ? - Rod57 ( talk) 06:46, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Apparently (after computer glitch that probably put it in safe mode) heaters turned off, fuel froze so it couldn't control attitude, then emergency mode kicked in as scope drifted to point to sun. - Presumably emergency mode restarted the fuel/line heaters in time to kill the drift ? - Rod57 ( talk) 06:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
K2 Campaign 9 microlensing experiment has been updated now data has been collected. (Field map seems to show a second pair of CCDs red - failed ?) Mentions a mid-campaign break. - Rod57 ( talk) 07:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 16 external links on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
C1 observes F1, C2 observes F2. Where will C3 and C4 point? Diagram and text don't seem to say. Chart seems to imply that each campaign is aimed at a different target field. Any likelyhood or benefit to re-observing a field on a later campaign ? What are the limitations of 80 day campaigns compared to the original multi-year mission ? - Rod57 ( talk) 14:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
In the original mission, due to the fixed high gain antenna, Kepler had to reorient to send data (once a month, eg 6 hours for 12 GB). (Not clear how much fuel that would use.) In the K2 mission each campaign is about 2.5 months, so is less data collected or is there one or more reorientations (for science data communications) within each campaign ? - Rod57 ( talk) 06:46, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Apparently (after computer glitch that probably put it in safe mode) heaters turned off, fuel froze so it couldn't control attitude, then emergency mode kicked in as scope drifted to point to sun. - Presumably emergency mode restarted the fuel/line heaters in time to kill the drift. - Rod57 ( talk) 06:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
K2 Campaign 9 microlensing experiment has been updated now data has been collected. (Field map seems to show a second pair of CCDs red - failed ?) Mentions a mid-campaign break. - Rod57 ( talk) 07:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/home/122602884.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
$600 million included first 3 years of operations, so design, build and launch cost about $530 million. About $70 million to operate the primary 3.5 year mission. + About $80 million for 2012-2016. How does the $18-$20 million/yr breakdown ? - Rod57 ( talk) 20:12, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Could split out the main mission results Mission results to date and Data releases as they seem related to observations up to 2013. Perhaps put in Kepler mission results ? - Rod57 ( talk) 14:50, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
I can think of two widely reported summary statements derived from the - and perhaps define the - success of the Kepler mission.
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The Kepler space telescope was a marvelous instrument and performed great science however it has now failed due to the loss of 2 reaction wheels it requires 3 to function. As designed Kepler only had one backup wheel. It can no longer do the job it was intended to do. My question is why didn't the engineers that designed Kepler put in duel redundant reaction wheels for each axis? The reaction wheels are the weak link they only have a limited lifespan. putting 3 backup wheels for each axis would have extended Kepler's life for many many years to come. the cost compared to the overall cost of Kepler would have been negligible. It just seams to me the engineers would have taken lessons learned from hubble (gyroscopes and reaction wheels fail). in the past NASA has embraced the dual redundant theology why not now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.111.151 ( talk) 02:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
We should split the "objective and methods" section of this article into subsections as follow:
-- Artman40 ( talk) 09:25, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
FWIW - Seems NASA will be announcing a "new discovery" made by the Kepler (spacecraft) on Thursday, April 17, 2014 at 2 p.m./et/usa - perhaps interestingly, Science (journal) has "embargoed the findings" until the time of the news conference - more =>
< ref name="NASA-20140415">Clavin, Whitney; et al. (April 15, 2014). "NASA Hosts Media Teleconference to Announce Latest Kepler Discovery". NASA. Retrieved April 15, 2014.
{{ cite web}}
: Explicit use of et al. in:|author=
( help)</ref>
in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 19:08, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Should the article have a section on studies of Kepler planet host-stars?
This article is getting rather long. Should we split it? -- Artman40 ( talk) 04:10, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV - Monday, July 14, 2014 (2:00-3:30pm/et/usa) - panel of leading experts to discuss plans leading to the "discovery of potentially habitable worlds among the stars" => < ref name="NASA-20140710">Brown, Dwayne (July 10, 2014). "MEDIA ADVISORY M14-117 - Leading Space Experts to Discuss the Search for Life Beyond Earth". NASA. Retrieved July 10, 2014.</ref> - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
FWIW - NASA to answer questions about the Kepler and K2 missions [1] on Reddit [2] on Monday, October 27, 2014 at 10 am/pdt/usa (1 pm/edt/usa) - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:17, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
C1 observes F1, C2 observes F2. Where will C3 and C4 point? Diagram and text don't seem to say. Chart seems to imply that each campaign is aimed at a different target field. Any likelyhood or benefit to re-observing a field on a later campaign ? What are the limitations of 80 day campaigns compared to the original multi-year mission ? - Rod57 ( talk) 14:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
While certainly the increasing population of possibly-Earth-like planets is very exciting, the size and position of the newly added image KeplerExoplanets-NearEarthSize-HabitableZone-20150106.png here and in Exoplanet is too intrusive. This is made worse by the limited amount of information the image *does* convey – just the identifications of the planets and their relative sizes. I have no objection to including such a family portrait (although over the long run the number of planets on such an image will become untenable), but I do wonder how it will get updated, so as to stay current. IMO, it just needs to be smaller, and someplace else. Rwessel ( talk) 21:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
NASA-Audio - Kepler mission - re new exoplanet discoveries - News TeleConference (12 noon/et/usa, Thursday, 7/23/2015) [1] - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 01:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
References
Why "dozens"?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiowa Ryan ( talk • contribs) 02:10, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
EPIC, the Ecliptic Plane Input Catalog is the input catalog used for K2, as KIC was used for K1, so this should be covered here also -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 08:25, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Update: K2 Campaign 9 will be started in April 2016 and will be dedicated to a study of gravitational microlensing events with K2 and from Earth.
Cheers, BatteryIncluded ( talk) 00:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm surprised that no in depth discussion about the mission's failure. It was planned to have a 3.5 yr life-time and it didn't. It was supposed to obtain significantly better data, and it didn't. Whether this is because of poor management of the Discovery (aka "cheap") program, incompetence in Ball's manufacturing processes, (not to mention incompetence in design), you would expect this would have been investigated and reported. So, where is it? Abitslow ( talk) 15:34, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The entry into emergency mode on April 7 is now described in two places, at the end of Mission results to date and at the end of Mission status (the immediately following section. I suggest that the first mention be removed, as this appears to have been a transitory event, and so is not really relevant to the Mission results (unlike the second reaction wheel failure, which while getting primary mention in the second section, does deserve mention in the first). Rwessel ( talk) 03:42, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
This reads like a fanboy page. The goals, initially, and then at launch, as well as the revisions post-launch due to its noisy acquisitions and mechanical failures should, and its accomplishments, as well as its cost up to launch, then since launch, should be succinctly described. Also, the article doesn't do a good job of distinguishing between "possible" exos observed and confirmed. Abitslow ( talk) 18:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
In the original mission, due to the fixed high gain antenna, Kepler had to reorient to send data (once a month, eg 6 hours for 12 GB). (Not clear how much fuel that would use.) In the K2 mission each campaign is about 2.5 months, so is less data collected or is there one or more reorientations (for science data communications) within each campaign ? - Rod57 ( talk) 06:46, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Apparently (after computer glitch that probably put it in safe mode) heaters turned off, fuel froze so it couldn't control attitude, then emergency mode kicked in as scope drifted to point to sun. - Presumably emergency mode restarted the fuel/line heaters in time to kill the drift ? - Rod57 ( talk) 06:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
K2 Campaign 9 microlensing experiment has been updated now data has been collected. (Field map seems to show a second pair of CCDs red - failed ?) Mentions a mid-campaign break. - Rod57 ( talk) 07:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 16 external links on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
C1 observes F1, C2 observes F2. Where will C3 and C4 point? Diagram and text don't seem to say. Chart seems to imply that each campaign is aimed at a different target field. Any likelyhood or benefit to re-observing a field on a later campaign ? What are the limitations of 80 day campaigns compared to the original multi-year mission ? - Rod57 ( talk) 14:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
In the original mission, due to the fixed high gain antenna, Kepler had to reorient to send data (once a month, eg 6 hours for 12 GB). (Not clear how much fuel that would use.) In the K2 mission each campaign is about 2.5 months, so is less data collected or is there one or more reorientations (for science data communications) within each campaign ? - Rod57 ( talk) 06:46, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Apparently (after computer glitch that probably put it in safe mode) heaters turned off, fuel froze so it couldn't control attitude, then emergency mode kicked in as scope drifted to point to sun. - Presumably emergency mode restarted the fuel/line heaters in time to kill the drift. - Rod57 ( talk) 06:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
K2 Campaign 9 microlensing experiment has been updated now data has been collected. (Field map seems to show a second pair of CCDs red - failed ?) Mentions a mid-campaign break. - Rod57 ( talk) 07:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/home/122602884.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kepler (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
$600 million included first 3 years of operations, so design, build and launch cost about $530 million. About $70 million to operate the primary 3.5 year mission. + About $80 million for 2012-2016. How does the $18-$20 million/yr breakdown ? - Rod57 ( talk) 20:12, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Could split out the main mission results Mission results to date and Data releases as they seem related to observations up to 2013. Perhaps put in Kepler mission results ? - Rod57 ( talk) 14:50, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
I can think of two widely reported summary statements derived from the - and perhaps define the - success of the Kepler mission.