> Proba-3, works just like a real solar eclipse. One spacecraft, which is roughly circular when viewed from the front, orbits closer to the sun, and its job is to block the bright parts of the sun, acting as the moon would in a real eclipse. It casts a shadow on a second probe that has a camera capable of photographing the resulting artificial eclipse.
> Having two separate spacecraft flying independently but in such a way that one casts a shadow on the other is a challenging task. But future missions depend on scientists figuring out how to make this precision choreography technology work, and so Proba-3 is a test.
Oh wow, they've potentially rescued this (very cool!) mission for both probes
I'm genuinely curious: I'm sure you know about the existence of ad blockers. They're not exactly new technology. I'm sure you also know that everyone here knows about ad blockers. So I'm genuinely wondering: what does it do for you to complain about the ads here? Especially in a way that some will no doubt take as you never having heard of ad blockers?
I have used 1Blocker for years and it has worked great. There are many others all using the same principle. It also allows me to have a custom rule to disable JS entirely on some sites.
Use U-Block origin. At this point I consider it a necessity for accessibility. I find it impossible to read anything with animated or video adverts. I truly cannot focus on the text. It's user-hostile, ableist, and content producers that continue using them can go fuck themselves. I have no ethical qualms about depriving them of revenue.
The ads delivery ecosystem billing is generally structured around impressions not click through rate (which depends a lot on the nature of the ad). So yes it does.
It says the spacecraft was tumbling, but implies that due to regaining solar power it has achieved a stable position. I'm curious about the missing steps there...
The European Space Agency, not 'Europe'. Just as annoying as calling the EU Europe, and calling both Europe despite different membership is just confusing.
It's such an interesting mission too, keeping the spacecraft synchronized enough with incredible precision so that one can cast a shadow in just the right place on the other, all while the orbital mechanics of gravity are constantly insisting otherwise
"Given the diameter of the occulter disk on the OSC and the intended corona observation regions, the CSC must be approximately 150 meters from the OSC and maintain this position with millimetric accuracy, both in range and laterally"
I doubt there's anyone in the small group of people that actually need to care about the distinction between EU and ESA spacecraft who doesn't already know this is an ESA mission anyway, and if such a person exists they can probably read as far as the first four words...
> Its a common term for the USA that has no other meaning
Except, you know, the only “other” meaning of “America” is just literally the alternative name for Americas, both continents. Here is an obscure link to the description [0]. Even if you want to refer to North America, what about Mexico and Canada?
ESA is one of the largest space agencies in the world. There’s nothing opaque about calling it ESA especially in a title. We wouldn’t use initialisms if everything had to be expanded all the time.
Personally I would prefer to call it "Roscosmos/ESA connects..." than "Russia/Europe connects". It adds information for free while keeping it short, just put it in the title. ESA is more specific than Europe or EU, so why make the title more generic and opaque than needed? It tells you it's not a random team of "Europeans", it's not an amateur hacker in the backyard, or some intelligence agency.
The expansion isn't really needed when it's a "household name" in the field. If you read a title about space industry there's no need to expand or explain NASA, ESA, Roscosmos, maybe not even for ISRO or JAXA, although I can see how some of these wouldn't be the most familiar for people in the West even when they have some interest in space news.
> Proba-3, works just like a real solar eclipse. One spacecraft, which is roughly circular when viewed from the front, orbits closer to the sun, and its job is to block the bright parts of the sun, acting as the moon would in a real eclipse. It casts a shadow on a second probe that has a camera capable of photographing the resulting artificial eclipse.
> Having two separate spacecraft flying independently but in such a way that one casts a shadow on the other is a challenging task. But future missions depend on scientists figuring out how to make this precision choreography technology work, and so Proba-3 is a test.
Oh wow, they've potentially rescued this (very cool!) mission for both probes
Scott Manley had this nice overview of the mission (~9 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfW645jhbKM
I'm glad that this site at least left ~10% of the screen on my phone to read the article, next to all banners and newsletter ads. It's not 5%, great!
There is also the original ESA post with a lot less ads and correctly implemented opt out from analytics https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Techn...
I'm genuinely curious: I'm sure you know about the existence of ad blockers. They're not exactly new technology. I'm sure you also know that everyone here knows about ad blockers. So I'm genuinely wondering: what does it do for you to complain about the ads here? Especially in a way that some will no doubt take as you never having heard of ad blockers?
How do I get an as blocker onto the iPhone default browser?
I have used 1Blocker for years and it has worked great. There are many others all using the same principle. It also allows me to have a custom rule to disable JS entirely on some sites.
not as good as most desktop ones but:
https://apps.apple.com/app/ublock-origin-lite/id6745342698
other options: https://fmhy.pages.dev/mobile#ios-adblocking
There’s lots in the App Store.
Use U-Block origin. At this point I consider it a necessity for accessibility. I find it impossible to read anything with animated or video adverts. I truly cannot focus on the text. It's user-hostile, ableist, and content producers that continue using them can go fuck themselves. I have no ethical qualms about depriving them of revenue.
Question: does it actually deprive them of revenue even if I was never going to click on an ad anyway?
The ads delivery ecosystem billing is generally structured around impressions not click through rate (which depends a lot on the nature of the ad). So yes it does.
Good.
You're getting 10% of content? I get 0% because of the impassible cloudflare wall.
I use Rethink app to block most of the ads and trackers. It works like VPN so with all apps, not just web browser.
Which means I have 100% of the screen available :)
It says the spacecraft was tumbling, but implies that due to regaining solar power it has achieved a stable position. I'm curious about the missing steps there...
I'm sure there is an engineering or physics reason, but why can't the occulter be an attached, smaller-diameter disc?
The goal of the mission was actually to test precision maneuvers -keeping spacecraft aligned to mm precision. The sun pictures are a bonus.
can someone tell me the reason how that happen? it's not clear to me from the article, i mean the chain of reacyion part
The European Space Agency, not 'Europe'. Just as annoying as calling the EU Europe, and calling both Europe despite different membership is just confusing.
Life is more enjoyable if you put your focus on understanding what’s being said rather than policing how it’s said.
It's such an interesting mission too, keeping the spacecraft synchronized enough with incredible precision so that one can cast a shadow in just the right place on the other, all while the orbital mechanics of gravity are constantly insisting otherwise
"Given the diameter of the occulter disk on the OSC and the intended corona observation regions, the CSC must be approximately 150 meters from the OSC and maintain this position with millimetric accuracy, both in range and laterally"
Is metonymy really so unreasonable in this title?
You have it exactly right. I read the title the way it was intended and I think the complaint was pedantic.
I doubt there's anyone in the small group of people that actually need to care about the distinction between EU and ESA spacecraft who doesn't already know this is an ESA mission anyway, and if such a person exists they can probably read as far as the first four words...
In theory this could be about Roscosmos since they're based in Moscow
“North America puts man on the moon”
Yes. Yes it is.
Now let's evaluate "America puts man on moon"
Its a common term for the USA that has no other meaning. The content is North America, the two continents are the Americas. No ambiguity.
Europe properly means the continent so it is far more like saying "North America puts man on moon" than saying "America puts man on moon".
Ambiguity is always bad.
Some people say its clear, but I am sure a lot of others thought an EU agency reconnected with a spacecraft.
Its interesting that people get so upset about asking for correct and unambiguous language.
“America” has no other meaning? So USA means United States of USA?
Exactly, their name is a zip bomb.
Doing recursive acronyms centuries before it was cool.
> Its a common term for the USA that has no other meaning
Except, you know, the only “other” meaning of “America” is just literally the alternative name for Americas, both continents. Here is an obscure link to the description [0]. Even if you want to refer to North America, what about Mexico and Canada?
The less you know, the less ambiguous it is.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas
Didn't think it was possible, but yes, you made it even worse.
A good title is brief and clear.
"'Miracle': European Space Agency reconnects with lost spacecraft" is long.
"'Miracle': ESA reconnects with lost spacecraft" is opaque.
The first four words of the article are, "The European Space Agency..."
ESA is one of the largest space agencies in the world. There’s nothing opaque about calling it ESA especially in a title. We wouldn’t use initialisms if everything had to be expanded all the time.
So is Roscosmos, but in such a situation, "Russia reconnects with lost spacecraft" would be the more accessible title
Personally I would prefer to call it "Roscosmos/ESA connects..." than "Russia/Europe connects". It adds information for free while keeping it short, just put it in the title. ESA is more specific than Europe or EU, so why make the title more generic and opaque than needed? It tells you it's not a random team of "Europeans", it's not an amateur hacker in the backyard, or some intelligence agency.
The expansion isn't really needed when it's a "household name" in the field. If you read a title about space industry there's no need to expand or explain NASA, ESA, Roscosmos, maybe not even for ISRO or JAXA, although I can see how some of these wouldn't be the most familiar for people in the West even when they have some interest in space news.
"America landed on the moon" vs "NASA landed on the moon".
it was a great accomplishment, all of NASA getting there and at the same time!!
Personally not a fan of this sort of pedantry.
Am I the only one who cannot access this article?
I get: 400 Bad Request
Your request has been blocked by our server's security policies. What to do: If you believe this is an error, please contact our support team.
Now its time to reconnect with their Allies. THe west is waiting for EU