|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ... It's really a shame that a new Jupiter descent probe is unlikely to fly in the near future. Nuttin' that a big enough check can't solve. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Everyone wrote:
Some are speculating a splashdown in a methane ocean. Surprisingly, it actually sounds like Huygens would survive this! That's by design -- the specs included the ability to float in any plausible Titan ocean. There is a small surface-experiments package which includes one or two things to examine liquid properties in that case. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote: ...Which begs the question: Does Huygens have a camera on board... There is a camera. It's primarily an atmosphere instrument -- Huygens is primarily an atmosphere probe, not a lander -- but it should get some surface pictures during descent, and maybe even some from the surface. The landing is iffy, but if nothing goes too badly wrong, Huygens should survive it and operate on the surface briefly. One thing to cross your fingers about, by the way, is that Cassini will lose Huygens's signal if Huygens ends up sitting at too much of a tilt. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Henry Spencer wrote: That's by design -- the specs included the ability to float in any plausible Titan ocean. Oh yeah? How about one where it's immediately swallowed by a Titanic Titanian Methane Muskie? There is a small surface-experiments package which includes one or two things to examine liquid properties in that case. "Stomach acid?!" Pat |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 08:03:45 +0100, Jonathan Silverlight wrote: It's too bad (no, it's inexcusable) that the ESA Mercury lander has been cancelled. Magnificent seven sounds good! ...Again, leave it to the Old World to prove it no longer has the balls or the brains to be adventureous anymore. The cancellation of that particular mission totally annihilated any amount of respect I have for ESA and it's purseholders... D'ah, man, c'mon. "Old World", like "Old Europe". Man, that's weak. "Old Europe" has been taking a bunch of chances on some seriously capable interplanetary probes while ISS has been going around in circles and giving a big science fair. Hell, I never thought I'd see the day when I was more excited about robotic missions than manned. I mean, I'll _always_ be excited about manned spaceflight, but they've got to get up and _go_somewhere_, already. Idiots... Hey, c'mon. What do you want? They're putting a lander on Titan RSN. The Mars Express Orbiter's not only returning pictures that make me drool all over my keyboard, but they got Beagle2 where it had to be, ****-poor planning, etc. by the Beagle folks notwithstanding (don't bust ESA's nuts for _that_). Still, a Mercury lander. ****, that would've been nice. Talk about your "magnificent desolation". No ambient sunlight problem _there_, I'd bet. So, any theoretical bets on whether or not a Mercury lander would survive any longer than a Venera? Seems that'd be a place where forcible conversion of the spacecraft into semi-molten slag would become a _really_ serious issue. .. "All over, people changing their votes, along with their overcoats; if Adolf Hitler flew in today, they'd send a limousine anyway!" --the clash. __________________________________________________ _____________ Mike Flugennock, the Sinkers, flugennock at sinkers dot org Mike Flugennock's Mikey'zine, dubya dubya dubya dot sinkers dot org |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy... _facility.org says... On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 01:54:49 GMT, Everyone wrote: Unfortunately, Huygens can't deliver this, even if it were possible. Battery powered only, and it's signal is relayed from orbiter passing overhead very quickly. We'll be lucky if it survives impact at all, and if it does we'll only get an hour or two of life. ...Which begs the question: Does Huygens have a camera on board, or did they simply not bother in this case? Two cameras, IIRC -- one that points straight down and one that points toward the horizon. It even has a spotlight that will shine down onto the surface as Huygens approaches, so that we will get some amount of an image even if the weak Saturnian sunlight doesn't penetrate the clouds very well. The side-facing camera is designed to be able to continue to relay images after landing -- assuming Huygens survives landing. But from what I've read, its designers believe that it will survive either a landing on ice or rock OR a splashdown into a methane ocean. Doug |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Flugennock wrote:
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . .. On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 08:03:45 +0100, Jonathan Silverlight wrote: ...Again, leave it to the Old World to prove it no longer has the balls or the brains to be adventureous anymore. The cancellation of that particular mission totally annihilated any amount of respect I have for ESA and it's purseholders... D'ah, man, c'mon. "Old World", like "Old Europe". Man, that's weak. "Old Europe" has been taking a bunch of chances on some seriously capable interplanetary probes while ISS has been going around in circles and giving a big science fair. Hell, I never thought I'd see the day when I was more excited about robotic missions than manned. I mean, I'll _always_ be excited about manned spaceflight, but they've got to get up and _go_somewhere_, already. Apples and oranges. ESA is part of ISS too. If you want to compare manned to manned or robotic to robotic, be my guest. But the fact that the ESA has managed precisely two successful interplanetary missions in its entire lifetime (Giotto and Mars Express) and has only recently started upping the pace, whereas NASA has managed five successfull missions for Mars alone within only the last decade (including three successful rover missions) does not speak highly of the ESA's capabilities or its member countries' dedications to space exploration. Especially considering that the ESA member countries have a combined GDP roughly on par with that of the US. And "chances", not many that I've seen. A few, perhaps, but not enough with a reasonable amount of support to merit much credit. Idiots... Hey, c'mon. What do you want? They're putting a lander on Titan RSN. The Mars Express Orbiter's not only returning pictures that make me drool all over my keyboard, but they got Beagle2 where it had to be, ****-poor planning, etc. by the Beagle folks notwithstanding (don't bust ESA's nuts for _that_). I don't, but you KNOW that the ESA would have grabbed some of the credit if Beagle-2 would have succeeded, even though it was not their mission. Still, a Mercury lander. ****, that would've been nice. Talk about your "magnificent desolation". No ambient sunlight problem _there_, I'd bet. So, any theoretical bets on whether or not a Mercury lander would survive any longer than a Venera? Seems that'd be a place where forcible conversion of the spacecraft into semi-molten slag would become a _really_ serious issue. You gotta consider the thermal dynamics. Venus is a really hard problem because there's just so much heat to deal with, 60 bars of superheated atmosphere is a heck of a lot of heat energy to reckon with, and it touches your spacecraft *everywhere*. And then there's the wind and whatnot keeping the air that same temperature no matter what kind of cooling you bring along. But Mercury you just have to deal with the Sun (same problem as with an orbiter, solvable) and contact with the ground, which can be handled pretty easily with a couple insulated legs, if that, since regolith isn't that great a heat conductor. The trick is making everything small enough and light enough to bring the spacecraft in on the budgets. All that aside, you can always just put it in the shade or semi-shade, since Mercury has a slow rotation rate. But that might make seeing things a bit difficult. If you brought along an RTG and a spot-light then you'd be set though. Just for fun I'll toss out this: what about a Mercury rover? Now that I'd really like to see. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Hedrick wrote:
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ... It's really a shame that a new Jupiter descent probe is unlikely to fly in the near future. Nuttin' that a big enough check can't solve. Small check. It could easily fit within a Discovery class budget. Hell, if they can cram a two asteroid multi-rendezvous mission into a Discovery budget they can send a balloon to Jupiter. Personally, I would have liked to see more Discovery slots put in the budget rather than this new double budget "New Frontiers" dealie they've thought up. Not that I'm complaining, yet. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Flugennock" wrote in message m... So, any theoretical bets on whether or not a Mercury lander would survive any longer than a Venera? Seems that'd be a place where forcible conversion of the spacecraft into semi-molten slag would become a _really_ serious issue. Well that's interesting. Could we use aluminium or would we need to splash out on titanium or something else, for instance? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - August 27, 2004 | OzPirate | Policy | 0 | August 27th 04 10:11 PM |
Cassini-Huygens Mission Status Report - May 28, 2004 | Ron | Misc | 7 | June 1st 04 09:57 PM |
Space Calendar - May 28, 2004 | Ron | History | 0 | May 28th 04 04:03 PM |
Space Calendar - April 30, 2004 | Ron | History | 0 | April 30th 04 03:55 PM |