from Hacker News

NASA's Voyager Team Focuses on Software Patch, Thrusters

by Aaronn on 10/21/23, 3:24 AM with 48 comments

• by FirmwareBurner on 10/23/23, 8:58 PM

  >NASA engineers are working on a software patch that will order the Voyagers to fire their thrusters less often but for longer periods to maintain their attitude

  Anyone got any detailed info on what CPU, software and programming language is used on the Voyager that can support something as "advanced" as OTA software patches?

  It was launched in 1977 and since aerospace uses tech older than consumer tech, it probably isn't running anything remotely as advanced as a Z80, 6800 or 6502 which came out only a few years before Voyager was launched.

  Any info I found point to a custom 18 bit CPU built out of discrete TTL 7400 series parts which would be period correct, but not much details on how the SW, programming and OTA updates work.

  I assume NASA has the full HW-SW stack, compiler, toolchain, version control, plus HW and SW simulators for it so making some of them public would be really cool considering the source code of the moon lander is already public. What do they have to loose?

• by ck2 on 10/21/23, 4:50 AM

  Pioneer 10 is technically further away, just dead as a rock without power (no comm for 20 years)

  Voyager website is awesome

  https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/timeline/

  A very different time, thank goodness for DEI now

  https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/assets/images/timeline/0003.jpg

• by qingcharles on 10/21/23, 6:56 AM

  Is it just me that really wants to FOIA the firmware code to read it?

  What is it written in? Assembler, surely?

  What is the development toolchain like in 2023 for a 70s computer? Do they have an emulator? What happened to the spare development Voyager they had lying around?

• by nycdotnet on 10/23/23, 9:33 PM

  This is a pretty cool article but calling the Voyagers “obsolete” is killer comedy. Ok yes and what non-obsolete technology has passed the heliopause and can be patched from 130/160 AU away.

• by prox on 10/21/23, 4:30 AM

  Now this is hackernews. Imagining working on spacecraft where no human made thing has gone before.

  Also is this correct?

  >NASA extended the mission so that Voyager 2 could visit Uranus and Neptune; it is still the only spacecraft ever to have encountered the >ice giants<.

  Aren’t they gas giants? I mean they are probably very cold, but usually they are called gas giants.

• by protoman3000 on 10/21/23, 1:45 PM

  I'm curious about how the upload to these spacecrafts is secured. We're talking about 1977 technology. What prevents an antisocial troll or adversial state to upload broken firmware?

• by gonzo41 on 10/21/23, 6:00 AM

  There's a great ROI on these, I don't know why we're not sending more just like it with updated packages.

• by perihelions on 10/23/23, 10:24 PM

  What non-volatile residue does hydrazine fuel create?

• by miohtama on 10/23/23, 9:22 PM

  What "binary format" Voyagers are running? How does the actual patch happening? Slow BPS transfer of a binary diff?

• by bullen on 10/21/23, 1:35 PM

  Mandatory reminder for Voyager: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H62hZJVqs2o

• by bongoman37 on 10/23/23, 9:06 PM

  Its just incalculable what the ROI on this kind of a mission is. It is amazing that US and tech was in the state it was in when the planets aligning themselves happened and we were able to send these out there. A decade here or there and the opportunity would be lost.

• by doublerabbit on 10/23/23, 8:53 PM

  pulse the thrusters to disintegrate any form of lice form.