re keeping spacecraft on after funding cuts in article apr kelvin jpl nasa gov baalke kelvin jpl nasa gov ron baalke writes in article apr zeus calpoly edu jgreen trumpet calpoly edu james thomas green writes why do spacecraft have to be shut off after funding cuts for example why couldn t magellan just be told to go into a safe mode and stay bobbing about venus in a low power use mode and if maybe in a few years if funding gets restored after the economy gets better hopefully it could be turned on again it can be but the problem is a political one not a technical one also remember that every dollar spent keeping one spacecraft in safe mode probably a spin stabilized sun pointing orientation is a dollar not spent on mission analysis for a newer spacecraft in order to turn the spacecraft back on you either need to insure that the ops guys will be available or you need to retrain a new team having said that there are some spacecraft that do what you have proposed many of the operational satellites goddard flies like the tiros noaa series require more than one satellite in orbit for an operational set extras which get replaced on orbit are powered into a standby mode for use in an emergency in that case however the same ops team is still required to fly the operational birds so the standby maintenance is relatively cheap finally pat s explanation some spacecraft require continuous maintenance to stay under control is also right on the mark i suggested a spin stabilized control mode because it would require little power or maintenance but it still might require some momentum dumping from time to time in the end it is a political decision since the difference is money but there is some technical rationale behind the decision david w gsfc
