You must log in or register to comment.

mccannr1 t1_j5k0rla wrote

This headline makes it sound like it's a disaster. The array is 98% deployed and working well within mission parameters. It's good to go.


danielravennest t1_j5k41gz wrote

The worry is since that array isn't latched, it may cause problems when they use the rocket engines.


shotsallover t1_j5l3wrs wrote

Or, maybe they use the engines to shake it loose so they can finish deploying it?


vanearthquake t1_j5l7vaf wrote

You’ve been watching lots of movies haven’t you


dboyr t1_j5le8vo wrote

It honestly sounds like a very reasonable attempt at a fix


alvinofdiaspar t1_j5llavl wrote

I don't know if they should even bother at this point - provided that the unlatched solar panel doesn't create any problems going forward. At some point trying to fix it might be more risky than leaving it alone.


Inariameme t1_j5mfgbo wrote

using the engines (i assume) is an inevitablity

deployment might be a closed process

without the capacity to reinitialize


GarunixReborn t1_j5mn9bv wrote

they could just retract it while the engines are operating, wouldn't that work?


alvinofdiaspar t1_j5mpeh0 wrote

Don't quote me on this because I don't know the details of the mechanism - but I don't think it is designed to be retracted; it's supposed to be one of these do once and done kind of design.


featherwolf t1_j5mldad wrote

It sounds like exactly the kind of maneuver JPL would pull.


alvinofdiaspar t1_j5ll0oo wrote

Believe it or not that's a thing - they tried that (among many, many other things) to try and deploy the high gain antenna on the Galileo probe. It all failed.


Chicken_Teeth t1_j5mxul9 wrote

We can send a tiny rocket loaded with WD-40 up there. Should need less force to launch less mass. Then just let off a little pressurized WD-40 from time to time to build speed in the vacuum. Or set up a planetary slingshot.


edstirling t1_j5kay40 wrote

"Nasa abandons hope of further deployment."


TecumsehSherman t1_j5l3bwa wrote

"Space program shuts down! 'We just couldn't deploy the dammed solar panels' says former Chief Space Person"


BLooDCRoW t1_j5l4pkb wrote

"NASA to declare bankruptcy after catastrophic deployment failure."


hobbitdude13 t1_j5l7ra7 wrote

"We just ployed them so hard we couldn't deploy them." - NASA spokesperson


amitym t1_j5lgpfa wrote

"What started as a monosaster has doubled into a disaster."


myusernameblabla t1_j5njyzo wrote

"NASA Slammed into Bankruptcy by Capitalist Critics as Efforts to Fully Deploy Lucy Solar Array Come to a Halt, Global Economic Meltdown Imminent and Housing Prices rise yet AGAIN!”


reckoner23 t1_j5qa1l7 wrote

I think its time to put a filter block on


mynameismy111 t1_j5jf67d wrote

the array appears stable and can generate sufficient power to carry out its mission. Credit: NASA/GSFC


PandaEven3982 t1_j5k0wfg wrote

And for the moment, that's all that matters. I'm sure the failure mode will be studied to a fare thee well, but the mission advances. Go Lucy!


therikan5 t1_j5oe8w6 wrote

Lots of fake scientists in these comments 🤣 most of them obviously didn’t pay attention in school


Greedy-Creme-995 t1_j5ijret wrote

More setbacks. This mission will never get done.


mouse_puppy t1_j5iloaq wrote

Did you even read the article? I mean, I know this I'd Reddit but come on. It's 98% deployed, is not mission affecting, handled its earth flyby without issue, and is considered an acceptable level of risk.


SpartanJack17 t1_j5iqufj wrote

Are you confusing it with Psyche, a mission that's been delayed a couple of times? Lucy has already launched, one of the solar panels stopped deploying at 98%, and NASA decided that they don't need to go the rest of the way. It's not a setback.


mynameismy111 t1_j5jf6vc wrote

the array appears stable and can generate sufficient power to carry out its mission.

To be fair how often do we read the link instead of the headline