Talk:Ulysses (spacecraft)

Europe: ESA Mid‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by ESA task force (assessed as High-importance).

Spaceflight Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy: Solar System High‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as High-importance).

Goodbye

ESA/NASA's Ulysses Mission Operations Blog:

UTC Timestamp: 30-Jun-2009 20:15

Ground station can not find the carrier. Transmitter is off on the spacecraft. Goodbye Ulysses.

Bon voyage! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.50.16.4 (talk) 20:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How fast?

It says this probe is the fastest artificallly accellerated object, but does not say how fast.

"On leaving Earth, the spacecraft became the fastest ever artificially-accelerated object" Is this fact outdated by the recent launch of New Horizons? (see the New Horizons article)

picture

is it the real ulysses craft or a model? Nasa website says model....

Request for Image

Can someone add an image that shows the satellite's orbit and the gravity assisted maneuvers described in this article? Perhaps an animation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.170.239.44 (talk) 19:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about an image of the Sun's north or south poile?

Something that is a glaring omission from this article are any actual images from Ulysses. Did it not take photographs of the North and South poles? There is actually no reference to Ulysses carrying a camera. This is sigificant as it makes it one of the only NASA probes to be "blind" if this is the case. 68.146.41.232 (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, Ulysses was supposed to be a two-probe mission, one mostly ESA the other mostly NASA. They were supposed to go on opposite sides of the ecliptic and instruments were distributed among the two probes. However due to budget cuts, NASA decided to cut its half of the mission - that would be bad enough, but here comes the worst: at NASA "they forgot" to tell their European counterpart (so that the setup of the remaining probe could be altered, and the most significant experiments get onboard) until it was much too late to make any changes. This is why Ulysses carries no camera. This "little glitch" by the way jeopardized even Cassini (since ESA did not precisely consider NASA any longer a reliable partner at the time) and it took much work on both sides of the pond to convince ESA that Cassini-Huygens would work out. NASA provided, according to the original agreements, the launch and the DSS coverage for the Ulysses mission. Ulysses has changed our understanding of the solar system, and even at present is sending much relevant data - so please write to ESA and insist on extended funding, and write to NASA and ask them to keep providing DSS time, preferably at high altitude passes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.149.132.137 (talk) 20:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Typo?

"In 1994-95 it explored both the northern solar polar regions."

Can you have two northern polar regions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.91.142 (talk) 20:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another possible typo: "Dual tape recorders, each of approximately 45 megabit capacity..." 45 megabit is rather small, that is only 5.625 megabytes. In any case the article should be change to use megabytes as they are a unit of storage and megabits are a measure of bandwith. (reminder: 8 megabits is one megabyte, see bits to byte)

45 megabits is right. Please reference this link: Ulysses Spacecraft. "The Data Storage Units consist of two redundant tape recorders for storage of data during those perids when the spacecraft is not in communication with the gorund (nontracking periods) for subsequent playback and transmission during the next tracking period. The 45 Mbit capacity of each tape recorder is sufficient to provide continuous storage at 512 bit/s for 22 h or 256 bit/s for 44 h." --Marsbound2024 (talk) 18:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mission End Date Incorrect?

I have just read an article from ESA: [1] which seems to suggest that on the date of writing the craft is still active, beyond the date stated in this wiki entry of July 1st. Should this be changed or at least re-worded? --193.203.245.211 (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am under the opinion that Ulysses should still be considered an active mission as long as it continues to return data and mission controllers are working with it. Thus, why don't we return this mission to "active" status by re-bolding and italicizing it to denote it as a current spacecraft mission. We can always remove it when the mission is officially ended. --Marsbound2024 (talk) 18:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The official end date of the mission was 1 July 2008, but NASA / ESA are continuing the mission as long as the hydrazine fuel in the spacecraft does not freeze. Listen to the interview with Mission Operations Manager Nigel Angold for more information. Jespdj (talk) 06:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did launch delay mean that RTG output was already reduced

Any info on when the RTG fuel was made or what the power at launch was ? - Rod57 (talk) 05:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delay mentioned (with source) on GPHS-RTG. Delay did reduce power available, otherwise it might have operated for another 4 years. - Rod57 (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No original photos unique of Ulysses...

I was looking for photos of planets that were unique to Ulysses,but none on this page. Can we get some photos that will better show Ulysses' contribution to this event? Dinkytown talk 23:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ulysses and Shuttle Centaur

In the launch section, I would add a mention that Ulysses was originally planned to be launched from the Shuttle using the Shuttle Centaur. The cancellation of the Shuttle Centaur in the wake of the Challenger disaster caused much of the delay in the mission. [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piece.of.eight (talk • contribs) 22:00, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ulysses (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Ulysses (spacecraft). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jupiter flyby section

This section is dubious at best. The reference is a link to an unclear YouTube video which does not contain the information claimed in the paragraph. Also the claim that it will be the 8th interstellar probe after Interstellar Express seems to be WP:SYNTH at best. I would suggest the whole section is worth deleting unless anybody knows of a better source. It's not my specialty, so I'm posting this rather then immediately removing it. Regards Davidelit (Talk) 14:55, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree, but I think we should try to find more info on it than removal. Perhaps a simulation? IowaBird (talk) 23:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fate subsection removed

I've removed the "Fate" section since the spacecraft was decommissioned and deactivated on 30 June 2009. AreThree (talk) 05:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]