Interesting study but it sounds like the satellite was captured in the early 1990s, exhibited in a museum for a decade or two, and only x-rayed in 2016. I’m not sure if the defects they found can be attributed to the space environment or wear and tear from sitting in a museum.
It didn't reenter and somehow fail to burn up. It was captured from orbit and brought back by the space shuttle.<p>Still a very interesting analysis.
That's one capability that was lost with the space shuttle. There's nothing remaining nor planned that can bring something that size back from LEO.<p>I feel like materials science could learn a lot more about radiation embrittlement and high energy micro impacts.<p>The space shuttle is often regarded as a huge mistake and in many ways (reusability especially, it was more like rebuildability :) ) it was, but it was still hell of a machine.
This kind of reads like an investigation of some unknown object. Seems like the intent is to better understand how the thing was affected during use and on re-entry and improve future reusable craft.
Guys,<p>I watched all the alien movies.<p>We should not trust those things that come from outside planet Earth ...
I would highly recommend reading the materials about <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Duration_Exposure_Facility" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Duration_Exposure_Facilit...</a>, which is dedicated for material exposure research in the space.