×

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!

GOCE Satellite Is Falling To Earth But Nobody Knows Where It Will Land

Unknown Lamer posted about 5 months ago | from the coming-to-a-roof-near-you dept.

Space 122

Virtucon writes "The Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer or GOCE Satellite is expected to fall to Earth this weekend. It weighs over a ton and unfortunately the Scientists don't exactly know where it will land. You can track it here. It should re-enter sometime between Sunday night and Monday morning. Makr Hopkins, chair of the National Society's Executive Committee said: 'The satellite is one of the few satellites in a Polar Orbit. Consequently, it could land almost anywhere.' The GOCE mission was to create an accurate gravity map of the Earth."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

122 comments

The tracking website is down... (5, Funny)

ClaraBow (212734) | about 5 months ago | (#45378407)

I"m sleeping in the basement tonight!

Re:The tracking website is down... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378485)

And that's news? :)

Re:The tracking website is down... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 months ago | (#45378791)

The difference this time is that the pizza guy is too scared to deliver

Re:The tracking website is down... (0)

The nickname is (3426225) | about 5 months ago | (#45380141)

I'd like to learn about TOP and you seem the best source. Could you email me at tables@mailinator.com so I check can my understanding over email?

Re:The tracking website is down... (1)

sootman (158191) | about 5 months ago | (#45379805)

Good plan. One-ton satellite at thousands of miles an hour... that extra floor oughtta do the trick. :-)

Use the map (5, Funny)

david999 (941503) | about 5 months ago | (#45378423)

You would think they could use the gravity map the satellite was creating to predict where the satellite would fall.....

Re:Use the map (5, Funny)

Brad1138 (590148) | about 5 months ago | (#45378453)

I know not of this "Gravity" you speak of, but "Intelligent falling" is hard to predict.

Re:Use the map (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 months ago | (#45378457)

You would think they could use the gravity map the satellite was creating to predict where the satellite would fall...

Whoever it lands on will certainly get the ultimate lesson in gravity.

Define "irony" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378507)

"A satellite used to map gravity being destroyed by its inability to resist gravity."

Re:Define "irony" (4, Informative)

Immerman (2627577) | about 5 months ago | (#45378531)

It's not gravity that's the problem - it's air resistance. Earth's atmosphere doesn't have a distinct edge, and you have to get pretty frelling far out before the particle count drops low enough not to matter to things going 10,000+mph. Certainly a lot farther than the measly few dozen miles to low Earth orbit.

Re:Define "irony" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378991)

Yeah, well maybe they should've mapped that instead

Re:Define "irony" (3, Funny)

niftymitch (1625721) | about 5 months ago | (#45379267)

It's not gravity that's the problem - it's air resistance. Earth's atmosphere doesn't have a distinct edge, and you have to get pretty frelling far out before the particle count drops low enough not to matter to things going 10,000+mph. Certainly a lot farther than the measly few dozen miles to low Earth orbit.

Well the orbital path does make large parts of the globe safe.

That is why Carly and I are flying my jet to Nova Scotia just to be safe.

Re:Define "irony" (5, Informative)

Deadstick (535032) | about 5 months ago | (#45378749)

What Immerman said. A satellite deals with gravity just peachy, but air kills it.

No artificial satellite is completely outside the atmosphere. There are still traces of air even hundreds of miles out, and every time a satellite hits an air molecule it loses an eensy-teensy bit of energy. Each loss makes the orbit a little bit lower, and a little bit faster. (Yes, orbital mechanics is a curious realm where you can slow down by applying thrust and speed up by applying the brakes.) The lower it gets, the more often it hits a molecule, and the energy loss gradually begins to snowball.

You can't predict the precise impact point without precise knowledge of the air density the satellite is encountering, and we don't have that information because it varies with all manner of factors, like solar wind and terrestrial weather. The principal means of prediction is the change in the length of an orbit. When you start seeing a measurable time difference from one orbit to the next, things are starting to happen.At that point, you can predict the time of impact with a precision on the order of weeks, and as time goes on you can narrow it down further.

Right now, we know when GOCE will come in give or take a handful of hours -- and since it can circle the world a couple of times in that interval, we have very little idea of where it will hit. As time passes, the error factor shrinks...when Skylab came in, NASA knew it would hit "somewhere in Australia" three or four hours before it hit.

An intentional reentry is different, because you use a retro-rocket to dump a nice big packet of energy and skip right over the protracted decay time, and make it land where you want.

In the interest of perspective, keep in mind that Nature throws rocks at us from space all the time -- meteors big enough to survive the trip through the atmosphere hit the earth dozens of times per day. Yet there are only a handful of cases on record where a person was injured, or even saw one hit -- simply because you and I and all the other people cover a VERY tiny fraction of the earth's surface. We are little bitty spots on a great big dartboard.

Re:Define "irony" (1)

torsmo (1301691) | about 5 months ago | (#45382127)

No artificial satellite is completely outside the atmosphere.

What? Even geostationary satellites?

Re:Use the map (2)

mcgrew (92797) | about 5 months ago | (#45378955)

Whoever it lands on will certainly get the ultimate lesson in gravity.

Yes, it would be a grave situation.

If anyone seriously thinks this is a threat, buy a lottery ticket.

I saw a really weird shooting star once while traveling. It was shooting upwards, was a really bright green, and flashed as it went.

The next day I read in the paper that the Russians had thrown a very large old computer out of the MIR. This one ought to be a hell of a shooting star if it comes down at night anywhere where anyone can see it.

Re:Use the map (1)

cffrost (885375) | about 5 months ago | (#45380565)

I saw a really weird shooting star once while traveling. It was shooting upwards, was a really bright green, and flashed as it went.

It sounds like you might have witnessed upper-atmospheric lightning [wikipedia.org]. If you're unfamiliar with these phenomena, please see some of the rare* videos that have been captured. Although it might** have been MIR's jettisoned computer, (which might explain the green color (i.e., burning copper wire)), UAL would account for both the color and the upward trajectory.

* Although witnessed for decades by pilots, their stories had been dismissed. UAL has only recently been recognized as being "real," and research is in its infancy. As such, the number of pictures and video clips that have been collected so far are few in number.

** I say "might" because I'm not familiar with the appearance of artificial satellite re-entries.

Legal aspect (1)

melikamp (631205) | about 5 months ago | (#45378437)

If it lands on someone's head, would it not be, technically speaking, a homicide?

Re:Legal aspect (5, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 5 months ago | (#45378477)

Well, it all depends.

If it lands in the US, it could be considered a lawsuit.
If it lands on South Korea, it could be construed as a blow from the Sacred Unicorn of the North.
If it lands in Russia, it will end up on You Tube for weeks.

If it lands anywhere else, it will be Obama's fault.

Re:Legal aspect (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378653)

If it lands anywhere else, it will be Obama's fault.

I don't care who you blame, but you don't seem to know that this is a European satellite.

Re:Legal aspect (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379079)

Then it proves the socialist experiment has failed! End ObamaCare!

Re:Legal aspect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45382109)

In that case it's Hitler's fault. (Via Werner von Braun!)

Re:Legal aspect (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 5 months ago | (#45378535)

yeah..

manslaughter, involuntary(debatable if it's unplanned I suppose, since they knew it would land somewhere when they shot it up) homicide - but technically yes.

however, if you can't get them on trial for intentional killings done by bombs dropped from the sky on civilians - in a country with which they are not in war with, which doesn't have warzone status by any definition.. how the fuck could you get anyone on the hook for this? "it was just a bomb that was supposed to hit a terrorist but which unfortunately missed its target".

Re:Legal aspect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378801)

I suppose it would be, but the Earth is 3/4ths water. The chances of this hitting land, let alone someone's head, is remote.

Re:Legal aspect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378965)

If it lands on someone's head, would it not be, technically speaking, a homicide?

Collateral damage.

How many people die on the roads each year with the excuse "I didn't see them". If people can't be held accountable for that, satellites dropping out of the sky will never be. And they shouldn't be. There are far more danger in the world than orbital experiments so just deal with it.

fall to Earth (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 5 months ago | (#45378451)

Won't it burn up on reentry?

Re:fall to Earth (5, Insightful)

Toad-san (64810) | about 5 months ago | (#45378537)

"The octagonal, 1100-kg satellite with a cross-sectional area of only 1m is configured to keep aerodynamic drag and torque to an absolute minimum. GOCE is symmetrical about its flight direction and two winglets provide additional aerodynamic stability. "

She might just penetrate like a spear, with the front burning away as she slows down. Sounds like she's built very solidly as well. So we should still have a nice big solid chunk of debris for impact. Possibly even salvageable for the museums!

But I'm afraid sleeping in your basement won't make a whole lot of difference.

Arrr! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379103)

She?

Re:Arrr! (1)

Longjmp (632577) | about 5 months ago | (#45379443)

She?

You see, in English language basically everything that can't run away and hide up on a tree on its own is considered female.
And this thing is even flying towards us, which qualifies double, especially for slashdotters.

Re:fall to Earth (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about 5 months ago | (#45378561)

Metal doesn't burn easy, and this is likely moving a *lot* slower than most iron meteors that manage to burn up anyway. Most likely any antennas and other large surfaces will be ripped off by the hot ionized plasma "wind" of reentry, and the main structure itself may be break up as well. But that'll be chaos in action, hard to predict beforehand.

Re:fall to Earth (2)

icebike (68054) | about 5 months ago | (#45380041)

Metal doesn't burn easy, and this is likely moving a *lot* slower than most iron meteors that manage to burn up anyway.

Really?
Here's what we send up: http://i.space.com/images/i/000/010/556/original/Sacriflight_AW.jpg?1309195668 [space.com]

Here's all we got back:
http://i.space.com/images/i/000/003/207/original/080228-cs-02.jpg?1292266925 [space.com]

Here's what it looked like coming back:
http://www.wfaa.com/video/featured-videos/RAW-VIDEO--189393891.html [wfaa.com]

Metal burns just fine, and light aluminum burns extremely well. I once saw a guy welding on the tongue of an airstream trailer, and the structure caught fire. Before the fire department could get there, the entire trailer structure was a white ball hovering above the ground, too bright to look at for more than a second or two.

Re:fall to Earth (5, Informative)

qvatch (576224) | about 5 months ago | (#45378571)

Some, but not all of it. http://www.spaceflight101.com/goce-re-entry.html [spaceflight101.com] : With its fins and aerodynamic shape, GOCE will maintain a stable position in orbit as it approaches entry. During entry, the spacecraft will likely remain in that position for the initial phase of re-entry until it breaks up. Following the destruction of the spacecraft, most of its components will harmlessly burn up in the atmosphere. However, it is known that about 20 to 40% of a re-entering satellite's total mass reach Earth's surface. Dense components of satellites usually impact 800 to 1,300 Kilometers downrange from the Orbital Decay Point. Their journey back to Earth is strongly influenced by atmospheric properties like crosswinds that play a major role during atmospheric descent.

Re:fall to Earth (4, Informative)

qvatch (576224) | about 5 months ago | (#45378579)

and http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/2013/09/14/european-satellite-goce-uncontrolled-reentry/ [spacesafetymagazine.com] his will be the first uncontrolled reentry of an ESA satellite since Isee-2, in 1987. Unfortunately, it will not be the last, considering that the bus-size Envisat’s altitude is gradually decaying in Low-Earth Orbit without control. According to ESA, up to 25% of GOCE’s mass will survive the extreme reentry conditions to fall to the ground. However, the risk for populated areas is very small since the majority of the Earth is covered by oceans. “The major part of what survives to the surface will be the core instrument,” says Dr. Floberghagen. “From the original mass which we have now in space, we have estimated that about 25%, about 250 kilos, will reach the surface, and these 250 kilos will be distributed over between 40 and 50 fragments.” The fragments that survive will hit the ground in a 900 km long footprint. The reentry will be a good test for debris monitoring systems and fragmentation models.

Re:fall to Earth (0)

icebike (68054) | about 5 months ago | (#45380135)

Interesting how ESA bills this as "good test for debris monitoring systems and fragmentation models", but had a US satellite landed anywhere in the EU, they would be holding investigations, demanding reparations, and publicly chastising NASA for poor planning and reckless disregard of human safety.

Re:fall to Earth (3, Interesting)

FatLittleMonkey (1341387) | about 5 months ago | (#45379135)

With its fins and aerodynamic shape, GOCE will maintain a stable position in orbit as it approaches entry.

Why don't they use the reaction wheels make it tumble before reentry? The higher in the atmosphere it breaks up, the more of the internal components will burn up before impacting.

Re:fall to Earth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45380207)

I am an aerospace engineer, though I haven't run the math down on this. My guess is that you wouldn't be able to get it to keep tumbling--the shape is fairly aerodynamic and the velocity is too high, so the craft would aerodynamically stabilize until more of it comes apart.

Re:fall to Earth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45381711)

GOCE is/was very special as far as polar orbiting satellites go. Normally they circle at around 650km, but GOCE has been going at around 260km before being lowered to 230km and now heading for Earth.
From the ground segment view, this has some challenges. Firstly the tracking antennas are not designed to track objects this low and the degrees per second you have the track it are on the limits of what we are capable of.
Secondly the RF levels are increasing as the altitude is decreasing. This can saturate the tracking receivers and make it hard to track the spacecraft.

The main problem for GOCE though, is that the spacecraft is close to exceeding the total amount of RF it is allowed to radiate towards Earth per day. This is due to the fact that the signal received on Earth is getting stronger and because ESA is now using more ground stations in the last critical phase.
The teams uploads commands to pacify the spacecraft daily and then cancel them if they are able to reach it on the next orbit. So they go on and on to make sure it is switched off when re-entry occurs.

look on the bright side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378473)

It's one less piece of space junk.

Random chance of live/property destruction? (1)

Barryke (772876) | about 5 months ago | (#45378491)

Time to up my karma..

Re:Random chance of live/property destruction? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379261)

Schroedinger insurance: When you open to paperwork to check wither you are covered, an exclusion clause spontaneously appears.

Once the rocket is up, (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 5 months ago | (#45378523)

who cares where it comes down...

I'm sure you all know the rest...

I can't belive the news I heard (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378527)

I just woke up out of a 2 year long comma and the doctor's told me they cut off Angelina Jolie's tater tots. Is this true? Because if it is I don't want to live anymore and I home that satellite fall on my head.

from the GOCE home page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378547)

Clarified by Isaac Newton in the 17th century, gravity is a fundamental force of nature.

Here comes the spin: And just as Newton was inspired to invent much of classical mechanics after an apple landed on his head...

Fine, I'll say it (0)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 5 months ago | (#45378589)

Really? Nobody thought up this gem yet?
If it was carefully mapping Earth's gravity, shouldn't they know where it's going to land?

Re:Fine, I'll say it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379147)

It's also not very "steady-state" any more.

cant they Shoot it down (1)

mattlamb (150678) | about 5 months ago | (#45378701)

would be a good test for those nice missiles they have, blow it up over the ocean!
hope they have insurance if it hits a city...

Excuse me? (1)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 5 months ago | (#45378777)

Wait now... what the fuck? How is this okay? They're saying that rocket scientists cannot plan such an event? Not even a tiny weency bit of fuel in reserve for re-entry? It's totally ok to allow something to fall onto the planet, possibly killing 1 or more? What if it hits an airline? The article isn't very informative, and leaves you with the assumption that if it hits you or any of your stuff (they specified a Honda?) it's covered by The U.N., and all you have to do is get with your local government. uhh...

Hell, what if it killed Obama?!

Re:Excuse me? (1)

AliasMrAlias (1445453) | about 5 months ago | (#45378971)

RE fuel: Not really; GOCE only has an ion engine which has nowhere near enough (instantaneous) thrust to effect a controlled re-entry (over realistic timescales)

RE prediction:Again, not really - there are too many variables; you can get a landing ellipse once re-entry has begun but before that, for a satellite this size, its really hard to get a handle on things more than a few days in advance.

Having said this, the initial article is a tad misleading, they'll be able to say pretty accurately soon if not now. It's probably fine.

Re:Excuse me? (1)

FatLittleMonkey (1341387) | about 5 months ago | (#45379163)

What if it hits an airline?

Damn I wish people would learn about scale. Or, knowing they don't understand scale, not comment on space related issues.

Re:Excuse me? (1)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 5 months ago | (#45380851)

Not sure what you mean, maybe I'm off beat here (out of scale?). But what I'm talking about is the liability involved with putting things into orbit, but not have a sure-fire way to determine where it's going to eventually end up, or not have some safety mechanism in place, like we do with everything else. Maybe it's a lot harder than I can imagine. But who pays the bill if shit goes tits-up, falls out of space, and hits a large airliner killing 250 people?

I didn't mean to offend anyone, much less a fat little monkey.

Re:Excuse me? (2)

Deadstick (535032) | about 5 months ago | (#45380585)

What if it hits an airline?

Same thing that happens if a meteor hits it...only meteors are more common.

NASA Satellite Falls On Car (3, Funny)

Rick Richardson (87058) | about 5 months ago | (#45378805)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgTyiaDmytw

Re:NASA Satellite Falls On Car (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379479)

Russian satellites does this as well http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNbv2CT1uSQ (link is in German)

No fly zone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45378835)

I have to take flight to Asia on Sunday night, maybe I should wait until this baby hits the ground until I travel. It would probably cut the plane in half if it had a direct hit! Mama Mia is nowhere safe these days.

No fly zone (1)

Ciaran Kelly (3426175) | about 5 months ago | (#45378841)

I have to take flight to Asia on Sunday night, maybe I should wait until this baby hits the ground until I travel. It would probably cut the plane in half if it had a direct hit! Mama Mia is nowhere safe these days.

Re:No fly zone (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379001)

If 2 objects like that can collide in mid-air, you shouldn't be mad, that's amazing.

Sunday Night? (1)

CanadianMacFan (1900244) | about 5 months ago | (#45379023)

Which Sunday night would that be? Sunday night with respect to the ESA, Sunday night in Canada since it was a CBC article, or Sunday night where ever the satellite falls? Because Sunday night in Sydney, Australia is different than Sunday night in Seattle, Washington.

GOATSE Satellite? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379153)

Had to say it.

No problem (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379169)

As long as it doesn't contain a toilet seat...

Timezone? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 5 months ago | (#45379171)

TFS mentions the times when this thing might come down, but bot the timezone those times apply to. Considering that there is a full 24 hours between extremes of timezone the window is pretty meaningless.

Re:Timezone? (1)

richlv (778496) | about 5 months ago | (#45379233)

don't scientists use utc for these things ? if not, they definitely should :)

Re:Timezone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45380263)

don't scientists use utc for these things ? if not, they definitely should :)

Some use UTC, some use TAI [wikipedia.org] and some use TT [wikipedia.org].

Reason to live (3, Funny)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 5 months ago | (#45379203)

So you mean there's a chance it could come down on my mother-in-law's head?

Re:Reason to live (1)

xianzombie (123633) | about 5 months ago | (#45379371)

I hadn't thought of it that way....how quick can we plot its impact and organize a get together for our In-Laws?

Re:Reason to live (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379663)

So you mean there's a chance it could come down on my mother-in-law's head?

About the same chance of hitting your mother-in law's son-in-law...

The fact that thereis not a law (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45379431)

Making them be guide-able to the ocean is really scary.
This just fall out of the sky willy nilly is wrong.

Not the solution (4, Funny)

Hamsterdan (815291) | about 5 months ago | (#45379667)

There's probably a better way to research gravity than randomly throwing satellites at the earth...

Re:Not the solution (1)

AliasMrAlias (1445453) | about 5 months ago | (#45379691)

I know you're probably being flippant, but prior to the whole re-entry shenanigans this thing was boss. The gyros alone contain the roundest thing ever built by humans (anecdotal, from my Prof). Ridiculously fine sensing apparatus

Re:Not the solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45381513)

I think the current winner for roundness is The Avogadro Project.

Re:Not the solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45380803)

Any research involving gravity and orbits should at least involve balls of steel.

Re:Not the solution (1)

ignavus (213578) | about 5 months ago | (#45381431)

There's probably a better way to research gravity than randomly throwing satellites at the earth...

Yeah. We should clearly be throwing satellites at the earth in a systematic fashion!

Find out if you might get hit (3, Informative)

ral (93840) | about 5 months ago | (#45379753)

Check out the prediction web site [n2yo.com] to see if it might land near you. Be sure to click the "show all passes" button to see the daylight passes in addition to the night passes. It calculates your lat/long from your ip address, then builds a table of overhead passes in the next 5 days. Look at the "El" column. That's the maximum degrees from the nearest horizon. If you see a number near 90 between Sunday night and Monday morning, watch out. Otherwise, rest easy.

Obvious impact point (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | about 5 months ago | (#45379765)

Am I really the only Slashdotter who thinks it's going to land in Alaska, [wikipedia.org] killing a camper? And, if I'm not mistaken the casket's going to be really, really weird looking!

All of this has happened before (1)

Solandri (704621) | about 5 months ago | (#45380171)

All of this will happen again.

I guess most of you weren't around when Skylab fell back to Earth [history.com]. Skylab was a much bigger satellite, but its equatorial orbit somewhat narrowed down the possible landing site locations. Everyone said it would probably fall into the sea. When pressed why, they'd admit they had no idea where it would come down. It was just that the majority of the surface area of the swath of the earth covered by Skylab's orbital inclination was ocean.

Nowadays they try to maintain enough propellant to steer the satellite into a forced re-entry over the ocean. From what I gather, GOCE only had an ion engine so this wasn't an option.

The conspiricist would have said somebody knows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45380239)

where it is NOT going to land.

but you don't know that either. and THAT makes you angry.
because we are created equal.
and it goes downhill from there.

Hope it's a conservative satelite. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45381961)

Hope all the liberals in the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives are wearing targets somewhere on their person Sunday and Monday!

No chance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45382353)

of it landing anywhere near he(*&^%$£$%^&*(

carrier lost

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...