|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |