A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Titan Rover vs. Titan Balloon



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 23rd 05, 07:31 PM
PaulCsouls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Titan Rover vs. Titan Balloon


There's talk now of sending a rover similiar to the Mars rover to
Titan. I think with Titan's thick atmosphere and the much greater
distance a balloon is a better idea. A heat source created from an
oxygen supply and the methane atmosphere could power a hot air
balloon. The probe could then do aerial photography and land to do
soil analysis. The oxygen fuel could also be used to keep the
electronics warm. I think a balloon would be much smaller and cheaper
than a rover for Titan and cover a much larger area.

Paul C.
  #2  
Old January 23rd 05, 09:30 PM
Scott M. Kozel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

PaulCsouls wrote:

There's talk now of sending a rover similiar to the Mars rover to
Titan. I think with Titan's thick atmosphere and the much greater
distance a balloon is a better idea. A heat source created from an
oxygen supply and the methane atmosphere could power a hot air
balloon. The probe could then do aerial photography and land to do
soil analysis. The oxygen fuel could also be used to keep the
electronics warm. I think a balloon would be much smaller and cheaper
than a rover for Titan and cover a much larger area.


Perhaps it could be a blimp with propellors, steerable and able set its
own course.
  #3  
Old January 23rd 05, 11:03 PM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A rover had more control over where it goes, and can go short distances in a
controlled fashion. A balloon is great for surveying large swaths of land but
is lousy for in-situ measurements where precision of positioning is concerned.
Also debatable if there's enough methane in the atmosphere to collect and burn.
Carrying oxygen is a heavy proposition even in liquid form, while you always
need some form of battery if you're going to operate equipment.

A combined rover - balloon device, in case anyone is tempted to think along
these lines, is going to be so heavy and cumbersome to design and invent that it
won't be practical. Aside from the excessive complexity of such a beast is the
fact that no one has ever tried to fly such a beast. Lots of experimentation to
find out how to do it, and NASA isn't rolling in dough the last time I checked.

One thing people don't realize is that it's a totally different thing when a
human is there to pilot something than when a robot has to do it. You can't
control the thing remotely in real time - the round trip light time is over two
hours. And robots are less flexible than human beings at handling extreme or
difficult situations, and of getting themselves out of the slightest trouble.

This is another case of an idea inadequately thought out. Reminds me of one of
the lessons learned from professional writers when someone submits a rough idea
to them and asks them to write it up. As I personally know, the idea is 1% of
the work, and the actual write-up is the other 99%, hence the guy who came up
with the idea should only get 1% of the profit, but they never realize the work
involved, nor accept the fair payment. A little thought would have ferreted the
difficulties out, but then it's so much easier to do 1% of the work than the
full 100%.
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"PaulCsouls" wrote in message
...

There's talk now of sending a rover similiar to the Mars rover to
Titan. I think with Titan's thick atmosphere and the much greater
distance a balloon is a better idea. A heat source created from an
oxygen supply and the methane atmosphere could power a hot air
balloon. The probe could then do aerial photography and land to do
soil analysis. The oxygen fuel could also be used to keep the
electronics warm. I think a balloon would be much smaller and cheaper
than a rover for Titan and cover a much larger area.

Paul C.



  #4  
Old January 24th 05, 02:38 AM
PaulCsouls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Gas is much more efficient than batteries. And as to the weight, we
are not going to see battery powered aircraft anytime soon. I think a
balloon would work even if you have to bring both components for
combustion. If we only need to heat some air to gain boyancy, the
amount a fuel necessary is minimal compared to powering a jet or a
rocket engine. Sending liquid oxygen into space is 40 years old proven
technology. A balloon is not as good as a rover, but great science is
done with weather balloons on earth all the time. A Titan balloon
which could map terrain for a few days would be a step up from
dropping a volkswagen on Titan for a couple of hours. I don't know how
long Cassini is expected to last, but Voyager is still sending data
from the heliopause and there is opportunity here to send another
mission to Titan in the next decade and use Cassini to relay the
messages. A rover is not going to happen, but something ambitious just
might.

Paul C


On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:03:05 GMT, "David Nakamoto"
wrote:

A rover had more control over where it goes, and can go short distances in a
controlled fashion. A balloon is great for surveying large swaths of land but
is lousy for in-situ measurements where precision of positioning is concerned.
Also debatable if there's enough methane in the atmosphere to collect and burn.
Carrying oxygen is a heavy proposition even in liquid form, while you always
need some form of battery if you're going to operate equipment.

A combined rover - balloon device, in case anyone is tempted to think along
these lines, is going to be so heavy and cumbersome to design and invent that it
won't be practical. Aside from the excessive complexity of such a beast is the
fact that no one has ever tried to fly such a beast. Lots of experimentation to
find out how to do it, and NASA isn't rolling in dough the last time I checked.

One thing people don't realize is that it's a totally different thing when a
human is there to pilot something than when a robot has to do it. You can't
control the thing remotely in real time - the round trip light time is over two
hours. And robots are less flexible than human beings at handling extreme or
difficult situations, and of getting themselves out of the slightest trouble.

This is another case of an idea inadequately thought out. Reminds me of one of
the lessons learned from professional writers when someone submits a rough idea
to them and asks them to write it up. As I personally know, the idea is 1% of
the work, and the actual write-up is the other 99%, hence the guy who came up
with the idea should only get 1% of the profit, but they never realize the work
involved, nor accept the fair payment. A little thought would have ferreted the
difficulties out, but then it's so much easier to do 1% of the work than the
full 100%.


  #5  
Old January 24th 05, 09:21 AM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You need batteries whether you fly or drive. Or do you think the instruments on
board don't need electrical power, let alone the computer to control the
balloon's altitude and terrain avoidance?

And you can't use solar cells. Not enough power. So you're going to use some
form of battery to power the thing, no matter what.
QED

Also, the original poster had his balloon landing now and again to do insitu
measurements. Landing a balloon over a selected spot is tricky at best and
impossible at worst. Adding this to the mission complicates things, especially
if the goal is to find an interesting site and then go there to investigate.

Of course, you could try doing both at the same time. This sounds reasonable to
me. The balloon stays aloft, depending on how much altitude variance is found
on Titan. The rover ferrets a much smaller area in detail.
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"PaulCsouls" wrote in message
...

Gas is much more efficient than batteries. And as to the weight, we
are not going to see battery powered aircraft anytime soon. I think a
balloon would work even if you have to bring both components for
combustion. If we only need to heat some air to gain boyancy, the
amount a fuel necessary is minimal compared to powering a jet or a
rocket engine. Sending liquid oxygen into space is 40 years old proven
technology. A balloon is not as good as a rover, but great science is
done with weather balloons on earth all the time. A Titan balloon
which could map terrain for a few days would be a step up from
dropping a volkswagen on Titan for a couple of hours. I don't know how
long Cassini is expected to last, but Voyager is still sending data
from the heliopause and there is opportunity here to send another
mission to Titan in the next decade and use Cassini to relay the
messages. A rover is not going to happen, but something ambitious just
might.

Paul C


On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:03:05 GMT, "David Nakamoto"
wrote:

A rover had more control over where it goes, and can go short distances in a
controlled fashion. A balloon is great for surveying large swaths of land
but
is lousy for in-situ measurements where precision of positioning is concerned.
Also debatable if there's enough methane in the atmosphere to collect and
burn.
Carrying oxygen is a heavy proposition even in liquid form, while you always
need some form of battery if you're going to operate equipment.

A combined rover - balloon device, in case anyone is tempted to think along
these lines, is going to be so heavy and cumbersome to design and invent that
it
won't be practical. Aside from the excessive complexity of such a beast is
the
fact that no one has ever tried to fly such a beast. Lots of experimentation
to
find out how to do it, and NASA isn't rolling in dough the last time I
checked.

One thing people don't realize is that it's a totally different thing when a
human is there to pilot something than when a robot has to do it. You can't
control the thing remotely in real time - the round trip light time is over
two
hours. And robots are less flexible than human beings at handling extreme or
difficult situations, and of getting themselves out of the slightest trouble.

This is another case of an idea inadequately thought out. Reminds me of one
of
the lessons learned from professional writers when someone submits a rough
idea
to them and asks them to write it up. As I personally know, the idea is 1% of
the work, and the actual write-up is the other 99%, hence the guy who came up
with the idea should only get 1% of the profit, but they never realize the
work
involved, nor accept the fair payment. A little thought would have ferreted
the
difficulties out, but then it's so much easier to do 1% of the work than the
full 100%.




  #6  
Old January 24th 05, 08:43 PM
Alexander Avtanski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

PaulCsouls wrote:
There's talk now of sending a rover similiar to the Mars rover to
Titan. I think with Titan's thick atmosphere and the much greater
distance a balloon is a better idea. A heat source created from an
oxygen supply and the methane atmosphere could power a hot air
balloon. The probe could then do aerial photography and land to do
soil analysis. The oxygen fuel could also be used to keep the
electronics warm. I think a balloon would be much smaller and cheaper
than a rover for Titan and cover a much larger area.

Paul C.


The only problem would be that this would require a supporting orbiter
to be put around Titan, the way it is with the Mars rovers. Currently,
the useful time for operation of any such balloon would be limited to a
couple of hours - not better than the Huygens.

Some day, if the communication problem and the autonomous control of
this whole thing are worked out - it may would work...

- Alex
  #7  
Old January 24th 05, 09:41 PM
PaulCsouls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Here is the article that inpired my comment.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/0...eut/index.html

And here are articles about about a hot air balloon on Mars.
http://www.howstuffworks.com/news-item202.htm
http://www.spacechannel.org/pumpkin.html

Yes you will need batteries, but as an electronics engineer I know the
electronics need alot less power than motors. You will need to power
the transmitters and an orbital repeater is not difficult technology
if we don't pack alot of science into the orbiter. Also with the low
temperatures I feel lubricating moving parts will be a big challenge.
Okay maybe landing is more difficult than I thought but I believe I
saw originally some Mars balloons designed to fly during the day
heated by solar power and land at night. I don't think a Titan rover
will happen anytime soon. I think a balloon is a more reasonable goal.

Paul C.

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:21:34 GMT, "David Nakamoto"
wrote:

You need batteries whether you fly or drive. Or do you think the instruments on
board don't need electrical power, let alone the computer to control the
balloon's altitude and terrain avoidance?

And you can't use solar cells. Not enough power. So you're going to use some
form of battery to power the thing, no matter what.
QED

Also, the original poster had his balloon landing now and again to do insitu
measurements. Landing a balloon over a selected spot is tricky at best and
impossible at worst. Adding this to the mission complicates things, especially
if the goal is to find an interesting site and then go there to investigate.

Of course, you could try doing both at the same time. This sounds reasonable to
me. The balloon stays aloft, depending on how much altitude variance is found
on Titan. The rover ferrets a much smaller area in detail.


  #8  
Old January 24th 05, 09:47 PM
PaulCsouls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes an orbital repeater would be necessary, but if we don't pack alot
of science on to the orbiter and just use it to relay to Cassini it
should not be that bad. Anyway my original point was a balloon was a
more reasonable goal than a rover. I think launching a balloon probe
to Titan in the next decade is doable. I think a Titan rover would
need more development just for the moving parts.

http://www.spacechannel.org/pumpkin.html

Paul C

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:43:15 -0800, Alexander Avtanski
wrote:

PaulCsouls wrote:
There's talk now of sending a rover similiar to the Mars rover to
Titan. I think with Titan's thick atmosphere and the much greater
distance a balloon is a better idea. A heat source created from an
oxygen supply and the methane atmosphere could power a hot air
balloon. The probe could then do aerial photography and land to do
soil analysis. The oxygen fuel could also be used to keep the
electronics warm. I think a balloon would be much smaller and cheaper
than a rover for Titan and cover a much larger area.

Paul C.


The only problem would be that this would require a supporting orbiter
to be put around Titan, the way it is with the Mars rovers. Currently,
the useful time for operation of any such balloon would be limited to a
couple of hours - not better than the Huygens.

Some day, if the communication problem and the autonomous control of
this whole thing are worked out - it may would work...

- Alex


  #9  
Old January 24th 05, 10:25 PM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Comparing Mars to Titan is like comparing Bermuda during the summer with
Antarctica during its winter. It might be possible to design a balloon to use
solar heating to inflate and deflate itself on Mars, but Titan it a lot farther
away, the atmosphere is thicker and therefore acts like a thermal blanket, and
the temperatures a lot colder. As an electronics and systems engineer, I don't
see the problems of a balloon to be any less in number, or any less daunting,
than a rover. We simply don't know, and cannot really test for, the properties
of a balloon in a Titan environment. I also see the same problems with a rover,
but at least with a rover you can see, stop, and consider your next move at a
leisurely pace, where a balloon is going to keep going right into that hillside.

So at this time, I don't see that a balloon is any better from an engineering
development standpoint and uncertainties as to whether it will work standpoint
over a rover. But at least the rover won't be moving uncontrollably as you try
and figure out how to avoid that hill in front of you.
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"PaulCsouls" wrote in message
...

Here is the article that inpired my comment.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/0...eut/index.html

And here are articles about about a hot air balloon on Mars.
http://www.howstuffworks.com/news-item202.htm
http://www.spacechannel.org/pumpkin.html

Yes you will need batteries, but as an electronics engineer I know the
electronics need alot less power than motors. You will need to power
the transmitters and an orbital repeater is not difficult technology
if we don't pack alot of science into the orbiter. Also with the low
temperatures I feel lubricating moving parts will be a big challenge.
Okay maybe landing is more difficult than I thought but I believe I
saw originally some Mars balloons designed to fly during the day
heated by solar power and land at night. I don't think a Titan rover
will happen anytime soon. I think a balloon is a more reasonable goal.

Paul C.

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:21:34 GMT, "David Nakamoto"
wrote:

You need batteries whether you fly or drive. Or do you think the instruments
on
board don't need electrical power, let alone the computer to control the
balloon's altitude and terrain avoidance?

And you can't use solar cells. Not enough power. So you're going to use some
form of battery to power the thing, no matter what.
QED

Also, the original poster had his balloon landing now and again to do insitu
measurements. Landing a balloon over a selected spot is tricky at best and
impossible at worst. Adding this to the mission complicates things,
especially
if the goal is to find an interesting site and then go there to investigate.

Of course, you could try doing both at the same time. This sounds reasonable
to
me. The balloon stays aloft, depending on how much altitude variance is found
on Titan. The rover ferrets a much smaller area in detail.




  #10  
Old January 25th 05, 04:34 AM
PaulCsouls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Rover, balloon or whatever, they should do it quick. The real key to
any Titan mission is a plutonium powered schoolbus in the neighborhood
to relay the data home. Once Cassini is gone, the project increases a
whole order of magnitude. And with a seven year travel time, they
don't have a whole lot of time to decide.

Paul C.

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:25:03 GMT, "David Nakamoto"
wrote:

Comparing Mars to Titan is like comparing Bermuda during the summer with
Antarctica during its winter. It might be possible to design a balloon to use
solar heating to inflate and deflate itself on Mars, but Titan it a lot farther
away, the atmosphere is thicker and therefore acts like a thermal blanket, and
the temperatures a lot colder. As an electronics and systems engineer, I don't
see the problems of a balloon to be any less in number, or any less daunting,
than a rover. We simply don't know, and cannot really test for, the properties
of a balloon in a Titan environment. I also see the same problems with a rover,
but at least with a rover you can see, stop, and consider your next move at a
leisurely pace, where a balloon is going to keep going right into that hillside.

So at this time, I don't see that a balloon is any better from an engineering
development standpoint and uncertainties as to whether it will work standpoint
over a rover. But at least the rover won't be moving uncontrollably as you try
and figure out how to avoid that hill in front of you.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Seeing, touching and smelling the extraordinarily Earth-like worldof Titan (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 4 January 25th 05 12:00 AM
UA's Cassini Scientists Ready for First Close Titan Flyby er Amateur Astronomy 0 October 26th 04 07:14 AM
UA's Cassini Scientists Ready for First Close Titan Flyby Ron Astronomy Misc 0 October 25th 04 08:35 PM
New Detailed Images of Titan Ron Astronomy Misc 0 April 1st 04 08:05 PM
Slip Sliding Away (Mars Rovers) Ron Astronomy Misc 16 March 14th 04 06:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.