I remember somebody who worked for NASA telling me it cost 750K to test the fluorescent lightbulbs for the spaceships. The crappy technology (by Earth standards) is mostly due to testing constraints, from what I understand.
Just think of age testing - they probably want the camera to last at least 5 years. If the camera you want to send up has been developed in the last year, how do you really do that? In a lab, for reliability testing of new components, typically you temperature cycle equipment, up and down every couple of hours, to simulate time passing, in order to try and compress the time frame required to test the aging rate, but we all know it doesn't really achieve what we want it to too well.
Comments
I remember somebody who worked for NASA telling me it cost 750K to test the fluorescent lightbulbs for the spaceships. The crappy technology (by Earth standards) is mostly due to testing constraints, from what I understand.
Just think of age testing - they probably want the camera to last at least 5 years. If the camera you want to send up has been developed in the last year, how do you really do that? In a lab, for reliability testing of new components, typically you temperature cycle equipment, up and down every couple of hours, to simulate time passing, in order to try and compress the time frame required to test the aging rate, but we all know it doesn't really achieve what we want it to too well.