NASA's interstellar Voyager 1 spacecraft isn't doing so well — here's what we know

There must be more to this story. Let me see if I have this right.

They can receive a carrier. But the modulator gives them junk. Or possibly the processor's memory.

And they can send new software. New instructions. So, why not simply use the packet data, to key the carrier on and off. OOK On and Off Keying.

Telegraphy.
 
NASA's Voyager 1 deep space probe started glitching last year, and scientists aren't sure they can fix it.

NASA's interstellar Voyager 1 spacecraft isn't doing so well — here's what we know : Read more
Voyager 1 and for that matter voyager 2 were originally designed and sent out to get us closeup information on Jupiter and Saturn.

They worked so well that instead of just forgetting about them NASA decided to use them to try and get as much whatever, other closeup, information they could get from the on everything else all the way and up to the edge of the heliosphere.

Much to their surprise they were still working remarkably well even as they continued to move away, from even that lofty goal. Basically, glitches were, and or are, an expected result of their journey.

The fact they are seeing glitches and not a complete loss of communications; is another win for the program.
 
Modulating the carrier wave would do no good unless the carrier knew what information to send us. The unit that failed takes the raw data and then tells the carrier what to say. Without the modulation unit there is no data to send.
 
I wish something would kick one of them back to us. I would love to see an analysis of every cubic cm of it.
Now that would be something.

I suppose we might not want a scenario ala Star Terk V-ger where an advanced sentient technology sends it back to us and instead of wanting to deliver and comply with its programing it wants to find and merge with its creator.

Not that a scenario (also Star Trek) ala The Final Frontier finds the Klingons using Pioneer-10 for target practice.
 
I read that they were not sure if it was the modulator or the packet memory. The packet buffer. If they can send patch, it's easy to relocate that buffer into another section of memory. This can be done at several different memory locations to verify if it is a memory problem.

If that works, then the modulator is ok. If the modulator fails with all those buffers, then it's the modulator.

Turn off modulator. Just enable the carrier for a certain duration for a 1 bit. And turn it off for that certain duration for a 0 bit. One simply rotates that buffer string thru the accumulator at the duration rate, and use status flags to key the transmitter. Very simple and very short code.

The packet is nothing more that a 128 BYTE or multiple size string of 1s and 0s.

OOK is a very common wireless modulation.

That's why I commented on more must be going on.

And I would like to see what 30 years naked in space does to man molded matter.
 
I read that they were not sure if it was the modulator or the packet memory. The packet buffer. If they can send patch, it's easy to relocate that buffer into another section of memory. This can be done at several different memory locations to verify if it is a memory problem.

If that works, then the modulator is ok. If the modulator fails with all those buffers, then it's the modulator.

Turn off modulator. Just enable the carrier for a certain duration for a 1 bit. And turn it off for that certain duration for a 0 bit. One simply rotates that buffer string thru the accumulator at the duration rate, and use status flags to key the transmitter. Very simple and very short code.

The packet is nothing more that a 128 BYTE or multiple size string of 1s and 0s.

OOK is a very common wireless modulation.

That's why I commented on more must be going on.

And I would like to see what 30 years naked in space does to man molded matter.
Data storage chips/memory boards, on the Voyagers had a capacity equal to 4,096 words if that translates as a 128 byte use aka a quad word then we’re taking storage capacity in the 1 KB range. My assumption as I was unable to find definitive information on the subject.

If that is the case, then the three onboard computers had a combined total capacity of 3 KB. So, if robotic/probe vehicle exploration is the key to exploration of the cosmos. Shouldn’t we be well on the way toward sending the next voyager type probes with, oh I don’t know, a minimum 3 – 2TB memory chips wherein each one would have, I don't know, four redundant controller/ instruction sets which could be activated if/when one fails.
 
I think they should make another space craft and have it pick up voyager 1 and bring it back the info it went through would very valuable to stellar travel
Again, presupposing the information is/was correct on the structure/storage capacity of the memory chips, (I wouldn't mind revising my assumption if someone can provide me with a link) or can otherwise share the relative data with me.

Having a newer more capable probe that could be instructed to intercept (if possible, even if by haps stance) one the voyager probes and bring it back shouldn't present a programable problem.

I mean if I am correct in my storage capacity conversion. Then the scenario I've put forward should give each of the three onboard computers: the Computer Command System (CCS), the Flight Data Subsystem (FDS), and the Attitude and Articulation Control System (AACS). close to 500 times the storage capacity, in each of the quad redundant (cores?), of the original voyagers.
 
The newer forms of memory can't be used easily in outer space as their feature size is too small and too easily corrupted by a cosmic ray. Very large, bulky features keep spacecraft memory far smaller than what earthbound computers can enjoy.

As far as returning one of the Voyagers to Earth, it would take several thousand years using available technology. Better to wait for more advanced propulsion technologies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Classical Motion
The newer forms of memory can't be used easily in outer space as their feature size is too small and too easily corrupted by a cosmic ray. Very large, bulky features keep spacecraft memory far smaller than what earthbound computers can enjoy.

As far as returning one of the Voyagers to Earth, it would take several thousand years using available technology. Better to wait for more advanced propulsion technologies.
Metallurgy not being my strong suit I was assuming our advances in that area were advanced enough to where if the components in and of themselves were not sturdy enough to handle the environment of interplanetary travel. That they were robust enough were a simple shielding of two or three inner spaced, tin foil sheets(?), would provide the necessary umph. Oh well so much for my thought that NMVe.2 structure and architecture might do the trick.

Then again, I am assuming damienassurre was not speaking in terms of getting it back in our life time.
 
Last edited:
Cosmic rays require many feet of lead to stop them, it cannot be done on a spacecraft. Instead, transistors are made large enough such that a single cosmic ray cannot flip the state. Also, a lot of redundancy is built in.

Retrieving a Voyager spacecraft would take many hundreds, if not thousands of human lifetimes and would require technology vastly superior to what we have on the drawing boards.
 
I have worked with electronics all my life, minus the last ten years. The difference in the tech of Voyager and your cell phone is....... well let's just say it's galactic.
Yes, the difference over the last half century is astronomical. However, it has been achieved by making transistors ever smaller, which makes them more and more vulnerable to cosmic rays. On the surface of the Earth, we enjoy shielding effects equivalent to 40 feet of water. Only low z shielding is effective in slowing cosmic rays. An equivalent amount of lead just causes secondary radiation which is just as damaging.
 
If we used old fashion magnetic amplifiers instead of solid state, radiation wouldn't be such a problem. Mag amps have many advantages. If solid state had not come to be, logic circuits with mag amps would have been developed. And we might be using analog computers.

And mag amps are the toughest, most dependable circuits ever built. They are truly amazing and should have been improved upon. But were completely thrown away when solid state arrived. And mag amps would have also decreased in size and power and with study and improved function, just like digital.

And so now, everything is digital. But in the past, mechanical analog computers ruled the day. If any are interested, search for WWII battleship fire control and/or V2 rocket control, and magnetic amp industrial control. There is info available for mag amp audio amps, and mag amp radio amps. Battleship computers had ~30 changing analog inputs into it. For a one solution changing output.

Watch out. Today some have tried to rebrand the name. And adv as mag amps. I am referring to the true magnetic amplifiers of decades ago.
 
Magnetic amplifiers are the most rugged there is, nothing but copper wire and steel laminations. There are two problems however, they are much larger than transistors and they have a very low frequency response. This is why the transistor supplanted them in the '50s.
 
Seems to me we're going to have to wait until modern science and technology once again catches up with science fiction. (I'm thinking Jules Vern)

Like something which could be used to even be able to travel at the fictional speed (in Star Trek’s) of impulse speed. Without having to build a ship the size of the moon to where we might intercept, capture, and come back with our price.

If I may borrow from science fiction again:

Orb of Crestachia a quarter inch diameter size spear --which can provide enough power, to power the whole of North America with more than enough continuous power for over 200 years. All we need is to figure out how and where to attach “the sand with soda, lime, and other ingredients” we already knew how to manufacture.
 
Last edited:
What you say is quite true, but there are many other aspects and possibilities. Our digital capabilities took decades to achieve. Digital also started out slow.

Mag amps can handle spectrums, not just a bit of info. Mag amps might have given us cubits, decades ago.

If we had put decades into research into mag amps like we did with digital, it's anybodies guess what we might have.

And it's the same with mechanical diodes. Structure alone checks current flow. There is a mountain of old tech that needs to be explored and improved. It's hard to tell what we might find.
 
Jan 28, 2023
125
15
585
Visit site
Just make a new generation probe, with better and more number of scientific instruments, install a powerful enough reactor and generator and improved versions of the Hall effect engine, or VASIMR, and accelerate that ship to 10X the speed of Voyager 1. It will much faster and more meaningful than doing anything with the dying Voyager 1 and 2.
 
Last edited:
What you say is quite true, but there are many other aspects and possibilities. Our digital capabilities took decades to achieve. Digital also started out slow.

Mag amps can handle spectrums, not just a bit of info. Mag amps might have given us cubits, decades ago.

If we had put decades into research into mag amps like we did with digital, it's anybodies guess what we might have.

And it's the same with mechanical diodes. Structure alone checks current flow. There is a mountain of old tech that needs to be explored and improved. It's hard to tell what we might find.
The ebb and flow of things ... wind power for the first ships that sailed our seas, followed by steam power, followed by refined oil, followed by nuclear power etc.
 

Latest posts