Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Russia Launches, Loses, Finds Military Satellite

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the found-in-sofa-cushions dept.

Government 88

eldavojohn writes "According to Interfax reports, a GEO-IK-2 spacecraft launched yesterday from Plesetsk went missing hours after launch. Its intended purpose is to measure specific curvature of the Earth to aid Russia's military in building excellent 3D maps. Early today, Russia announced that they found it, but unfortunately it's in the wrong orbit. China's state media called the launch 'successful.' Reuters reminds us of a GLONASS mishap, which resulted in Medvedev firing two top space officials."

cancel ×

88 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well, then I'm happy, sad, happy for them (0)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079226)

In *old* Soviet Russia, satellite find you.

Re:Well, then I'm happy, sad, happy for them (1)

Journe (1493651) | more than 3 years ago | (#35087370)

In *old* Soviet Russia, satellite find you.

That's what ol' Ebenezer MCoy said, too...

Excellent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079248)

Most excellent maps!! Woahhh!!

Re:Excellent (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079486)

My first thought exactly. :) Excellent Dude! *Air Guitar*

So it's on a wrong way road? (1)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079296)

Maybe the CHP will give it a ticket.

Measurements (1)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079322)

Not another imperial / metric mess up of units?

Re:Measurements (4, Informative)

msauve (701917) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079474)

Russia never used imperial units ("imperial" normally meaning customary British imperial), and the traditional Russian units (arshins, etc.) haven't been used for a long time. The Soviets went metric in 1924.

Technological independence (2)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079328)

FTFA:

The incident follows the loss of three GLONASS navigation satellites that crashed into the sea in December provoking outrage from the Kremlin, which is trying to build Russian technological independence.

Ironic, coming from the country that launched the first artificial satellite.

Re:Technological independence (1)

Monkeyman334 (205694) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079384)

So... did someone else launch a natural satellite?

Re:Technological independence (1)

TheThiefMaster (992038) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079468)

No, that hasn't happened yet.

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079520)

Monkeys and dogs are pritty natural.

Re:Technological independence (3, Funny)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079678)

did someone else launch a natural satellite?

Yes [wikipedia.org]

Re:Technological independence (-1, Troll)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079860)

This "god did it" stuff is getting ridiculous ...

Re:Technological independence (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35084252)

Pray noone launches another one.

Especially of comparable size.

Re:Technological independence (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 3 years ago | (#35084326)

That's no moon.

Oh wait

Yes.. yes it is a moon.

Re:Technological independence (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079896)

Yeah about 4 billion years ago

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081088)

Damn Martians.

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079974)

Yes it's called the moon...

Re:Technological independence (1)

kellyb9 (954229) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080174)

So... did someone else launch a natural satellite?

Is that a serious question? The moon is a natural satellite.

Re:Technological independence (1)

egomaniac (105476) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080518)

So... did someone else launch a natural satellite?

Is that a serious question? The moon is a natural satellite.

Yes, it is natural. But it wasn't launched by man. That's sorta the point -- if a satellite was 'launched', you already know that it's artificial so it's redundant to say that.

Re:Technological independence (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080648)

Luna can be considered as essentially launched from Earth, most likely, via Giant Impact Hypothesis...

Re:Technological independence (1)

toddestan (632714) | more than 3 years ago | (#35099240)

But who launched the moon?

I would think that any satellite that someone launched would be, by definition, an artificial satellite.

Re:Technological independence (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079394)

Not only that, but the first man in orbit, first woman in orbit, space rendez-vous, first pictures of the dark side of the moon, first automated sample return from the moon, etc... Venus probes, you name it. I like Russians.

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079622)

One has to simply love them for all of these achievements. And not to forget these Slavic beauties ;)

Re:Technological independence (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079704)

Here's a picture of the dark side of the moon [photobucket.com] .

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079944)

That would have to be "no" on the first space rendezvous. The first space rendezvous was done by the U.S. [wikipedia.org] , on Gemini 7/6.

Re:Technological independence (2)

guruevi (827432) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079946)

The Russians did a lot of space exploring. Too bad the Soviet Union was run the way it was. If it had been more democratic or a more social form of communism it would've still been kicking the US'es butt. The only extraordinary thing the US did accomplish in it's space program was put a man on the moon first but then it kinda petered off into a more corporate weapon-based space program vs. the nationalistic science-based space program of the USSR. The USSR was first in a lot of things including going bankrupt because of it's uncontrolled spending in that age.

Re:Technological independence (1)

Notquitecajun (1073646) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080100)

Not just uncontrolled spending, but an economic model that didn't allow them to make enough money to be able to afford it

Re:Technological independence (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080526)

I think the new-look Slashdot may be messing up threads. Are you talking about the USSR or the USA?

Re:Technological independence (1)

waerloga01 (308176) | more than 3 years ago | (#35090826)

I imagine both. But the USSR did have a lot of firsts compared to the USA :)

Re:Technological independence (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080118)

At least it had the decency to notice going bankrupt and folding down, instead of going on spending frenzy and trying to keep the rest of the world from minding it too much...

Who knows what we would have if some ignorant Soviet generals didn't insist on matching (nonexistent) "strategic advantage" given by STS (one might wonder if that wasn't the main point of the Shuttle, to provoke the Soviets into massive pointless spending on "counterpart" program; but in that case - why was it allowed to suck NASA dry for 2 decades after fulfilling its goal?). I wouldn't be too surprised if (for much less than what Energia-Buran cost them, working out the quirks of N-1 instead of scrapping it just when v2 was almost ready) they would be able to maintain small lunar base for the last ~3 decades. Though that would probably require them not having hiccups along the way, winning the initial Moon Race ... which in the end could be great! The US would probably aim for the next "big mission" in such case, and we could have some short term Mars landings by now. More fun all around.

(and you know, the growth of China in the last 3 decades is not precisely due to "more democratic or a more social form of communism")

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081932)

"The only extraordinary thing the US did accomplish in it's space program was put a man on the moon first"... Are you kidding us with that? How about the first (and so far only) probes to the outer planets -- Pioneers 10,11; Voyagers 1,2; Galileo orbiter of Jupiter; Cassini orbiter of Saturn, still sending data? How about Mariner 9, the first Mars orbiter? How about the Viking landers/laboratories on Mars in the mid-70s? The USSR put a lander on Mars first which failed after less than a minute -- that doesn't compare to the Vikings which took thousands of pictures over a couple of years. How about Mariner 10, the first flyby of Mercury? Look at Skylab from the early '70s. What about the Hubble Telescope? And those are just off the top of my head. All of those have to count as "extraordinary". I know it is fashionable to bash NASA and claim Apollo was all they did, but in reality, Apollo was so great that it overshadowed the many other truly extraordinary accomplishments to such an extent that they seem to be forgotten.

Re:Technological independence (1)

jittles (1613415) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080090)

Not only that, but the first... pictures of the dark side of the moon

I thought that Pink Floyd was a British group... are you saying they worked for the Russians?

Umm are you sure? (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081296)

From the wikipedia. "
First successful rendezvous
Gemini 7 photographed from Gemini 6 in 1965
Rendezvous was first successfully accomplished by US astronaut Wally Schirra on December 15, 1965, who maneuvered the Gemini 6A spacecraft within 1 foot (30 cm) of its sister craft Gemini 7. The spacecraft were not equipped to dock with each other, but maintained station-keeping for more than 20 minutes. Schirra later commented:
"Somebody said ... when you come to within three miles (5 km), you've rendezvoused. If anybody thinks they've pulled a rendezvous off at three miles (5 km), have fun! This is when we started doing our work. I don't think rendezvous is over until you are stopped - completely stopped - with no relative motion between the two vehicles, at a range of approximately 120 feet (37 m). That's rendezvous! From there on, it's stationkeeping. That's when you can go back and play the game of driving a car or driving an airplane or pushing a skateboard — it's about that simple."[2]
"
First satellite yes, first man yes, first woman yes, space rendezvous? I would say not so much. And the first automated sample return from the moon was well after first sample return from the moon and the first manned landing. The Venus probes also a yes. They did a lot but don't give them false credit. I wouldn't give the US criedit for the first man in space based on the X-2, X-15 or a balloon flight.

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35086096)

Uhm:
1965 December 15 - Gemini 6. Flight Time: 1.08 days. First rendezvous of two spacecraft. http://www.astronautix.com/articles/manirsts.htm

1966 March 16 - Gemini 8. Flight Time: 0.45 days. First docking of two spacecraft.

Oh, and there is no "dark side of the moon". Well, there is the album...

Yep, your definitely drinking the Russian Kool Aid.

Re:Technological independence (2)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079450)

Probably mostly an "interpretation" added by "reporting"...

And the partial failure is of Rockot. Considering those launch vehicles are basically inexpensive, surplus, repurposed ICBMs - they still have quite decent success ratio.

Re:Technological independence (1)

Zorpheus (857617) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079580)

That can onlybe about the independence from the GPS system.

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081108)

Reuters reminds us of a GLONASS mishap, which resulted in Medvedev firing two top space officials.

Out of a cannon, into the sun.

Re:Technological independence (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081350)

But makes sense for a country that is trying to get European nations to pay to clean up Chernobyl. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12335595 [bbc.co.uk]

Re:Technological independence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081724)

Yes, but Chernobyl isn't in the Russian Federation.

Re:Technological independence (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#35085720)

Ironic, coming from the country that launched the first artificial satellite.

The country that launched the first artificial satellite doesn't exist anymore.

(as a point of comparison, USSR at the time of dissolution had a population of ~290 million; Russia, immediately after the dissolution, had a population of ~150 million)

Re:Technological independence (1)

slackbheep (1420367) | more than 3 years ago | (#35089134)

But...but... they're The Reds!

It's not their fault (5, Interesting)

dremon (735466) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079478)

Blessing just didn't work [imageshack.us]

Re:It's not their fault (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079572)

But ... but ... godless commies ... does not compute!

BRILLIANT! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079718)

That's awsome, dremon!
They brought out their voodoo priest to bless what some would argue is the epitome of Science! .
Silly humans, rocket does not care about your ignorant superstitions!

Re:BRILLIANT! (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079768)

I'm not sure what they're doing is very unique ... not a far as, for example, the crew of Apollo 8 or some activities (secretly, this time) of Buzz Aldrin on the surface of the Moon are concerned. Or ritualistically watching White Sun of the Desert and urinating on the launch pad.

Re:BRILLIANT! (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#35085742)

The difference is that this one was requested by and sponsored by the state.

Re:BRILLIANT! (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35085250)

Voodoo priest?

Re:It's not their fault (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079876)

Given the difficulty of getting rockets to work, I'd take just about anything to tip the odds in my favor.

Re:It's not their fault (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080004)

Readiness to "take just about anything to tip the odds in my favor" might take attention from, or even obscure some things which actually are important.

It's not like they're not doing something right, having the most reliable ... most frequently used launch vehicle in the world [esa.int] (with most of its history in times when Russian Orthodox Church wasn't so openly cooperating with / used by the authorities)

Re:It's not their fault (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35084502)

You are mistaken. It was.

http://www.pravmir.ru/na-vsex-nuzhna-odna-pobeda-russkaya-pravoslavnaya-cerkov-i-nachalo-velikoj-otechestvennoj-vojny/ [pravmir.ru]

I will translate some numbers - the financial contribution of the Russian church towards the war budget was 300 million rubles - the equivalent of 1500 fully equipped T-34 tanks. The last pic going down is the 1944 equivalent of the orthodox deacon blessing the ICBM. Though in this case he ain't blessing anything. He is merely getting a medal for blessing quite a few german trains with dynamite.

Re:It's not their fault (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35084992)

Of course (heck, it's the same shit at my place / they're neighbors); but for most of the time in question, during the Soviet service of R-7 rocket family, Church wasn't used much(*), was mostly frowned upon (and note "openly"... clergy never stopped being useful informants, of course). Only in the last dozen+ years the theatricality seems to have returned.

(*)The thing to really wonder about - what if it were? Could it, of all things, keep the Union together? ;p

Re:It's not their fault (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080200)

WEll no wOnder. H'es using the right hand not the left that's wrong omg do I have to set everything straight around here

Re:It's not their fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35083992)

Instant flashback:

WOLOLO WOLOLO

3D maps... well, that's ambitious. (1)

SockPuppetOfTheWeek (1910282) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079514)

How the hell do they expect to make accurate 3D maps if they can't even keep track of the satellite's own position?!

Magnets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079840)

How the hell do they expect to make accurate 3D maps if they can't even keep track of the satellite's own position?!

They plan on using magnets.

Re:3D maps... well, that's ambitious. (1)

L7_ (645377) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082146)

when things move as fast as satellites move, you never really know where they are. even a 0.01% uncertainty in velocity of a typical satellite going ~2000m/s... after about a minute the resulting position would have a bounding box of 12 meters. Now, after an hour, a day? It's not too difficult to lose track of where you need to point your radars to find your bird.

[Calculation is very general, I pulled that 0.01% velocity uncertainty from my ass]

Re:3D maps... well, that's ambitious. (2)

SockPuppetOfTheWeek (1910282) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082352)

If that was true, GPS would be horribly broken and could never work.

China don't go to space anymore... (1)

earthsmurf (1965458) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079534)

Of course China would call the missing Russia launch successful when compared to their own space program. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test [wikipedia.org]

Re:China don't go to space anymore... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079680)

Its cheaper to bribe officials or contribute to their campaigns than it is to fund a space program.

Fix the comments! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35079538)

Would whoever gives a shit here, please FIX THE FUCKING COMMENT SECTION?

I can't drill down to replies because it just loops me back to the parent. Javascript on, javascript off, logged in, logged out, it makes no difference - almost anything below the parent is NOT VIEWABLE.

You broke it - again.

Re:Fix the comments! (1)

thomasdz (178114) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079730)

turn off Javascript, then it works
or go to Reddit

Re:Fix the comments! (1)

present_arms (848116) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079962)

Am I really the only one not having issues with /.'s new skin? sorry for the off comment post, just so ya know running chromium 9.0.570.1 (64589) under pclinuxos. just asking coz all i see in the comment threads (apart from the normal comments) are ppl bashing, yet i've personally havn't had any issues :D

Re:Fix the comments! (1)

_0xd0ad (1974778) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081908)

This sort of fixes it. Bookmark it and use it (once) on every Slashdot topic page.

javascript:if(window._1x);else{window._1x=true;window.addEventListener("keydown",function(){var%20t=setTimeout(function(){for(var%20d=document.getElementsByTagName('div'),i=0,e,c=0;i<d.length;i++)if(d[i].className=='currcomment'){e=d[i].id.split('_').pop();i=[e];while(document.getElementById('tree_'+e)&&document.getElementById('tree_'+e).parentNode.id!='commentlisting')i.push(e=document.getElementById('tree_'+e).parentNode.id.split('_').pop());while(i.length>1)if(document.getElementById('tree_'+(e=i.pop()))&&document.getElementById('tree_'+e).className.indexOf('oneline')>=0)D2.setFocusComment(Number(e));setTimeout('D2.selectParent('+i.pop()+');',500);i=d.length;}},100);},false);};void(0);

Re:Fix the comments! (1)

_0xd0ad (1974778) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083218)

Yikes. (I broke commenting.) No, try this instead.

javascript:if(window._1x);else{window._1x=true;window.addEventListener("keydown",function(e){if(e.target.tagName=='TEXTAREA'||e.target.tagName=='INPUT')return;var%20t=setTimeout(function(){for(var%20d=document.getElementsByTagName('div'),i=0,e,c=0;i<d.length;i++)if(d[i].className=='currcomment'){e=d[i].id.split('_').pop();i=[e];while(document.getElementById('tree_'+e)&&document.getElementById('tree_'+e).parentNode.id!='commentlisting')i.push(e=document.getElementById('tree_'+e).parentNode.id.split('_').pop());while(i.length>1)if(document.getElementById('tree_'+(e=i.pop()))&&document.getElementById('tree_'+e).className.indexOf('oneline')>=0)D2.setFocusComment(Number(e));setTimeout('D2.selectParent('+i.pop()+');',100);i=d.length;}},100);},false);};void(0);

Re:Fix the comments! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35083170)

Mod it into oblivion, assholes. Hiding it does nothing to FIX THE FUCKING COMMENTS SECTION. Click any reply under a parent and it LOOPS THE FUCK BACK TO THE PARENT.

Yep, I can see it's not universal - but Firefox on Linux ought to work some damn way.

You fucking BROKE IT. Idiots.

In Soviet Russia... (-1, Redundant)

RevWaldo (1186281) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079748)

...you find satellite!

(I hereby apologize to everyone, everywhere.)

.

Summary's Bill & Ted Style (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079866)

The satellite aids Russia's military in building a most excellent 3D map. Then the satellite was lost, totally bogus. Then is was found again, party on dudes!

Must be true (2)

necro81 (917438) | more than 3 years ago | (#35079890)

China's state media called the launch 'successful.'

Well, if Chinese state media reports it, it must be true!

Re:Must be true (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081304)

Repeat to yourself, "If the New York Times|BBC|NBC|CBS|Al-Jazeera reports it, it must be true!" and contemplate just fucked up things are.

Re:Must be true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35084044)

Are you implying that the western non-state run news outlets will not report this?

Re:Must be true (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35084534)

It may be.

Provided that there is no film footage attached.

Missing Time (1)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080048)

Maybe another government found the satellite and that has something to do with it disappearing for a while.

They're the ones supplying the ISS (1)

qzjul (944600) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080094)

I don't understand how they're having such failures when it appears they're the only ones who can continue to supply and change crew at the ISS when the Space Shuttle is done; and most of the supplying has been done by them for a while. I realize it's probably totally different rockets, but you think they could go from "most reliable rocket" to something other than three or four mishaps.

Re:They're the ones supplying the ISS (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080162)

The rocket in question is an inexpensive, surplus, repurposed old ICBM. Out of 18 launches as Rockot it had 1 catastrophic failure and 1 partial failure (this one) - pretty decent.

Re:They're the ones supplying the ISS (1)

qzjul (944600) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080558)

Ah my bad; that's what I get for skimming TFS; I somehow misread the "firing two top space..." as meaning lost two satellites previously.

Re:They're the ones supplying the ISS (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083596)

Oh, but they did lost (three, actually) satellites previously - but again, it was a different rocket, Proton (their heavy workhorse, also with great success ratio; coincidentally, also envisioned at one point as an ICBM - one for Tsar Bomba!)

Generally, ISS is serviced by another launch vehicle (different manufacture lines, launch facilities, et al) - "the most reliable ... most frequently used launch vehicle in the world" [esa.int] . The other discussed rockets aren't even meant for launching people. Proton does launch larger ISS segments, but that's a rare thing and the rocket is even in different configuration then, without the part which failed now (upper stage, basically an exoatmospheric tug to place one or several smaller satellites in desired orbits; this list [wikipedia.org] gives a good idea; coincidentally, that's also the part which failed in Rokot now... (but different, unrelated upper stage, and in this case more integral to the rocket type, apparently)). Also: Proton was cleared for another (successful) flight mere 2 weeks after that failure.

Russians are damn good at this stuff. It might be largely our propensity to notice patterns which aren't there, in your impression of this "sequence"

Curvature of the earth? (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080426)

Of course they lost it. The earth is flat and the satellite just went over the edge for a while.

In sovjet russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080636)

in sovjet russia, you find spy satelite.

Whats thproblem here.. (1)

drewsup (990717) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081168)

The incident follows the loss of three GLONASS navigation satellites that crashed into the sea in December provoking outrage from the Kremlin, which is trying to build Russian technological independence

Wow how hard can this be? It's not like it's rocket scien.. Oh wait.....

Re:Whats thproblem here.. (1)

GioMac (862536) | more than 3 years ago | (#35085064)

On the failed GLONASS launch it was typical problem on the "Breeze M" accelerator module of the "Proton M" commercial rocket, and because of this rocket didn't push satellite to the required attitute. This rocket is known for one of the most successful rockets and even on the background of my Russia-hating psycho, it's developers and maintainers deserve highest honor in technology, but our Mr. genius president of Soviet Russia told us that there was a mistake made by math scientists. Come ooon!!! Do they use paper to count the orbit and load of it? It's bullshit. Even in case of incorrect trajectory, this rocket has enough power and acceleration to put all the satellites to the GEO orbit and higher. If they will continue this way - soon they will lose all their engineering power.

btw, GLONASS has great mini device, you can use it as hammer for nailing your lovely wall, so there is at least one plus in it, and it doesn't need any satellite, works without it!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Glonass-reciever.jpg [wikimedia.org]

Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081502)

China's state media called the launch 'successful.'

Perhaps the Russian satellite just got owned by the PRC?

Bad coders (1)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081654)

This happened because all the GOOD coders are busy working for the mafia in fraud schemes and CC manipulations.

Re:Bad coders (1)

alexmin (938677) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082244)

Most of good coders (and not only coders) had left long time ago and are busy making money working for US companies. All what's left in Russia is a sediment on the bottom of the barrel.

my guess, it was successful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082166)

and the story put out about the wrong orbit, is just a cover for placing a spy satellite up. it is actually probably in the exact orbit they intended it to be.

Re:my guess, it was successful (1)

angomcha (1019520) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082410)

and the story put out about the wrong orbit, is just a cover for placing a spy satellite up. it is actually probably in the exact orbit they intended it to be.

....yeah that makes at least some sense.

New satellite troubleshooting procedure in Russia (1)

Shompol (1690084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082210)

Problem?
    |  yes
1. Fire top TWO space agency officials
2. Promote new officials
3. Make another satellite
4. Launch
   |
Problem again? Go to step 1.

Re:New satellite troubleshooting procedure in Russ (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35084614)

That is the medvedev algorithm

The Putin version is:

Problem?
        | yes
1. Invite top twp space agency officials for a conversation
2. Talk to them quietly
3. Make another satellite
4. Launch
      |
Problem again? You really do not want to know what the step is. That is why usually it never happens.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>