Voyager 1 is still alive out there, barreling into the cosmos more than 15 billion miles away. However, a computer problem has kept the mission's loyal support team in Southern California from knowing much more about the status of one of NASA's longest-lived spacecraft. The computer glitch cropped up on November 14, and it affected Voyager 1's ability to send back telemetry data, such as measurements from the craft's science instruments or basic engineering information about how the probe was doing. As a result, the team has no insight into key parameters regarding the craft's propulsion, power, or control systems. "It would be the biggest miracle if we get it back. We certainly haven't given up," said Suzanne Dodd, Voyager project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in an interview with Ars.

Video From the department of "we've got this supercomputer on the space station, what shall we do with it?" Wear and tear is a problem for astronauts venturing out of the orbiting lab, and while helmets filling with water may have garnered all the headlines, decades of grabbing for handrails and maneuvering equipment takes its toll on gloves. The gloves have five layers – a rubberized coating, followed by a cut-resistant material called Vectran then three further layers to keep the person inside at just the right temperature and pressure. Problems come when wear reaches the Vectran layer, for beyond that lies the pressure bladder and a bit further, the squishy human. Since, by their nature, the gloves get quite a bit of use, NASA insists astronauts take photos of their gloves and send them back to Earth for inspection prior to reuse. While this is all very well on the ISS, doing something similar on (or in orbit around) Mars, or when communication is constrained, is less than ideal.

They are doing critical science missions in an intense operating environment where safety is paramount. On spacewalks they repair equipment, install new instruments and upgrade the largest spacecraft ever flown. Just like workers here on Earth, their gloves can show wear and tear – even rips and cuts – presenting potential safety concerns. To prevent problems from arising, astronauts working for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must take photos of their spacesuit gloves during and after every spacewalk and transmit them down to Earth for inspection. From there, NASA analysts examine photos of the gloves, looking for any damage that could pose a hazard, and then send the results back to the astronauts on the ISS.

NASA's Perseverance rover has tried out a nifty new feature for the first time, which let it'spit out' a piece of Mars rock that had been clogging its sampling tube. The trick means that Perseverance can now continue taking samples of rock from the Red Planet to search for possible signs of ancient life. The SUV-sized vehicle has been on the Red Planet since February 2021, and is slowly trundling through the Jezero Crater taking rock samples for later retrieval. On December 29, while retrieving a sample from a rock, its sixth so far, NASA engineers found they couldn't get the rock to go into the storage area. This was due to a pebble-sized piece of debris obstructing the robotic arm, blocking the entrance to the tube docking area - nearly a month later, this has been solved. NASA used an untested'un-choking procedure', that involved pointing the drill containing a clogged test tube towards the ground and rotating it at high speed.

Digital twins replicate an object or a human organ and work in parallel with – and just like – the original. In reality, they're a combination of data, algorithms and artificial intelligence, and they exist in a virtual world, like an avatar. Today digital twins are used in just about every industry: manufacturing, healthcare, architecture, transportation, communication systems and more. "Digital twins are computer models of things that exist in the real world," says Prof. Frédéric Kaplan, the head of EPFL's Laboratory for Digital Humanities. "The term can also refer to models of more abstract processes, such as a production schedule. So you can think of digital twins as both data-generated models and computer simulations."

Software has never played a more critical role in spaceflight. It has made it safer and more efficient, allowing a spacecraft to automatically adjust to changing conditions. According to Darrel Raines, a NASA engineer leading software development for the Orion deep space capsule, autonomy is particularly key for areas of "critical response time"--like the ascent of a rocket after liftoff, when a problem might require initiating an abort sequence in just a matter of seconds. Or in instances where the crew might be incapacitated for some reason. And increased autonomy is practically essential to making some forms of spaceflight even work.

Future spaceships that humans use to explore other solar systems might be able to fold up and fit into a tiny space, since NASA engineers are exploring foldable designs that could be used on spacecraft today. Smaller and lighter equipment is easier and less costly to launch, making it a more viable option. This strategy has a root in origami, the paper-folding art that has its roots in Japan. "Origami can seem deceptively simple, hiding complex math within its creases," NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said in a statement. "Besides aesthetic beauty, it addresses a persistent problem faced by JPL engineers: How do you pack the greatest amount of spacecraft into the smallest volume possible?"

Sorry for the explicit language in the title, but examples, like MD Anderson having to bench Watson in its "eradicate cancer" moon shot, after a 3-year, $62 million dollar effort, make my head explode. Rocket science is relatively simple, compared to a space program. AI is the (relatively) easy part of the business problem they are trying to solve with AI. From almost 30 years dancing in and around AI, including implementing multi-million dollar expert systems at some of the world's largest companies, these are my three steps to help ensure your $62 million or even $6200 does not meet the same fate as the Oncology Expert Advisor. As the audit report on the project says, "results herein should not be interpreted as an opinion on the scientific basis or functional capabilities of the system in its current state."