Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Unmanned Spaceflight.com _ New Horizons _ New Horizons: Pre-launch, launch and main cruise

Posted by: cIclops Feb 8 2005, 02:09 PM

Yes it's happening after all these years, the mission to the last planet!

And maybe to celebrate the confirmation of budget, NASA approval preparations and the fueling of the RTG (radioisotope thermoelectric generator), there is an updated web site at http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/

Launch will be January 2006 with arrival at the Pluto Charon system July 2015 (mark your calender!) and then on through the Kuiper belt during 2016-2020 and beyond.

20.8-centimeter telescope for 100m resolution at closest approach
IR/UV spectrometers
2 x 8GB data recorders
data rate: 768 bps (sic) to 70m DSN
465kg including fuel
$650m

336 days to launch

Posted by: djellison Feb 8 2005, 04:17 PM

768 bps isnt too bad actually

given say an 8 hr DSN pass - that's 21.6 Mbits

One a day, for a week = 151 Mbits

Heck - 8 Gigabits.

ohmy.gif

tongue.gif

Doug

Posted by: gpurcell Feb 10 2005, 11:19 PM

Yeah, but in 2015 we'll be posting on a BBS where some 20-year old cracker will wonder why the thing wasn't launched with a 30 MB camera and 1GB/sec data transfer capabilities...after all, you can get it at any Best Buy!

Posted by: remcook Feb 11 2005, 04:10 PM

...but will it survive a decade in space?
hey, most don't even work a decade on earth!

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Feb 14 2005, 10:32 AM

It is still touch and go whether NH will be launched in 2006 -- a final decision will be made on this in April. If it is delayed until 2007, the flight, without a Jupiter gravity assist, will take three years longer -- but as a compensation, NH will be more likely to have its supply of plutonium fuel (whose processing has been very seriously delayed by the Los Alamos security scandal) topped up enough to allow it to fly by one or more KBOs after Pluto. It is very much open to doubt whether it could operate long enough to reach another KBO after Pluto if it's launched in 2006, despite its shorter flight time.

Posted by: cIclops Feb 15 2005, 05:41 PM

Audio interview with Hew Horizons (NH) Principle Investigator, Alan Stern available here:

http://www.planetary.org/audio/pr20050214.html

Project update based on audio interview:

NH in final assembly stage: 5 out of 6 science instruments mounted on spacecraft
launch vehicle under contract
application for launch approval pending

launch window is two weeks long starting January 2006, launching in early part of the window means arrival in July 2015.

329 days till launch window opens

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 19 2005, 04:25 PM

Attached is a picture of New Horizons in build from last month. Enjoy!

 

Posted by: lyford Feb 19 2005, 06:39 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 19 2005, 08:25 AM)
Attached is a picture of New Horizons in build from last month. Enjoy!

WOW - they're gonna need longer cables than that if they want to reach to Pluto! biggrin.gif

Nice pic, thank you! - Where is the spacecraft being assembled?

Posted by: dot.dk Feb 19 2005, 06:48 PM

Remember to send your name to Pluto cool.gif

http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ecard/sendName_ecard_content.html

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 19 2005, 06:53 PM

New Horizons is being assembled at Johns Hopkins, Applied Physics Lab. If you are not familiar with APL, it is where NEAR, CONTOUR, and MESSENGER were built, along with approx. 30 earth orbital missions, like TIMED, Transit, and MSX. By mid-summer the spacecraft is planned to be at Goddard for environmental testing.

Posted by: remcook Feb 19 2005, 07:53 PM

Great news! thanks for the input Alan...didn't know PI's post on message boards cool.gif

so, is everything going on schedule?

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 19 2005, 08:02 PM

Well, PIs are just people as far as I can tell.

New Horizons has its challenges, like many missions, but the big picture is very promising. We just passed a major review at NASA HQ, and we have over 80% of the flight avionics on the spacecraft. Mission sims begin next month.

At the same time we are building NH, we are pressing for a backup mission, New Horizons 2 for launch in 2008-2009.

Posted by: DEChengst Feb 19 2005, 09:05 PM

Alan, can you give an update on the RTG status ?

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 19 2005, 09:09 PM

The RTG and the necessary fuel are both in good shape. Previous problems resolved.
All needed fuel is now ready. We expect 190 W or a tad more at Pluto in mid-2015.
The s/c requires ~165W, so there is a healthy margin. The launch approval process
has begun, and will take the remainder of the year to complete.

Posted by: DEChengst Feb 19 2005, 09:15 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 19 2005, 09:09 PM)
The RTG and the necessary fuel are both in good shape. Previous problems resolved. All needed fuel is now ready. We expect 190 W or a tad more at Pluto in mid-2015. The s/c requires ~165W, so there is a healthy margin.

Why does bad news always make big headlines and the good news somehow just doesn't get mentioned ? They scare the hell out off you by telling telling New Horizons may fly late or not at all due to lack of plutonium, but once the problems are solved the press somehow keeps silent. Thanks for the update and making me sleep a little bit better tonight wink.gif

Posted by: djellison Feb 19 2005, 10:54 PM

'Good' News isnt sexy. If the US media is anything like the UK media - then they love talking a story up ( NH getting funding to go ahead ) then smashing it to pieces. They do it with sports stars, governmental projects, anything

And they'll never set the record straight when things pan out properly.

Doug

Posted by: cIclops Feb 20 2005, 08:00 AM

QUOTE (DEChengst @ Feb 19 2005, 09:15 PM)
Why does bad news always make big headlines and the good news somehow just doesn't get mentioned ?

Recall the old adage "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story" :>

Posted by: cIclops Feb 20 2005, 08:16 AM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 19 2005, 09:09 PM)
The RTG and the necessary fuel are both in good shape.  Previous problems resolved.
All needed fuel is now ready. We expect 190 W or a tad more at Pluto in mid-2015.
The s/c requires ~165W, so there is a healthy margin. The launch approval process
has begun, and will take the remainder of the year to complete.

Welcome to our humble forum Alan, pull up a keyboard and make yourself comfortable smile.gif

What great news, NH is all gassed up and raring to go! I've got so many questions I hardly know where to start.

Okay how about with these two:

Given the 190+tad Watts at Pluto, how far out will that take NH?

Does NH have a really minimal power mode that will allow very low data rates (seconds per bit perhaps) for super extended missions?

Certificate No. 1125

324 days to launch window

Posted by: Sunspot Feb 20 2005, 12:35 PM

Short article on New Horizons at the Planetary Society website:

http://www.planetary.org/pluto_75/pluto_newhorizons_190205.html

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 20 2005, 03:10 PM

Given the 190+tad Watts at Pluto, how far out will that take NH?

This depends on when we launch in the 2006 window or the backup 2007
window because the exit velocity varies with launch date. The basic answer
is that predicts show that we have sufficient power to run out to 2025, which
corresponds to ~50-60 AU if all goes well.

Does NH have a really minimal power mode that will allow very low data rates (seconds per bit perhaps) for super extended missions?

We have data rate capabilities down to 10 bps, but using them doesn't extend
the lifetime or range estimates above. That said, there may be some heroic
things one could do if all's well to extend further. We have't looked at that.
Our job is to keep our eye on the Pluto ball, and there's more than enough
to keep us busy with that.

Posted by: DEChengst Feb 20 2005, 04:15 PM

About the 768 bit/sec datarate at Pluto: Is this what can be achieved with the current DSN or with planned upgrades to the DSN ? Because if it can be guaranteed with the current DSN, it's not unlikely that DSN will get better recievers in the coming 10 years that would allow for higher datarates cool.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 20 2005, 09:40 PM

Yes, the 768 bps is for the current system-- 70 m antennas at a range of 33 AU.
If their are improvements in DSN that are compatable with our telecom design, we could take advantage of them. .. That aside, you might be interested to know that it looks like our actual as-tested telecom performance is 1.5-2x better than the 768 bps spec performance, which is of course good news-- for those of us interested in faster downlinks.

-Alan

Posted by: cIclops Feb 21 2005, 08:56 AM

Thank you for such fast and succinct replies Alan. It must be my turn now to ask the next question smile.gif

I'm curious about NH's software and its level of autonomy but I've been unable to find any description of it other than it runs on Mongoose V R3000 processors. The ten year flight gives plenty of time to design powerful new heuristics to optimize data collection during encounters.

To what extent does the NH software process follow the Cassini code while you fly model?

Posted by: alan Feb 21 2005, 09:22 AM

QUOTE (DEChengst @ Feb 19 2005, 09:15 PM)
QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 19 2005, 09:09 PM)
The RTG and the necessary fuel are both in good shape.  Previous problems resolved. All needed fuel is now ready. We expect 190 W or a tad more at Pluto in mid-2015. The s/c requires ~165W, so there is a healthy margin.

Why does bad news always make big headlines and the good news somehow just doesn't get mentioned ? They scare the hell out off you by telling telling New Horizons may fly late or not at all due to lack of plutonium, but once the problems are solved the press somehow keeps silent. Thanks for the update and making me sleep a little bit better tonight wink.gif

The shortage of plutonium was caused by an alleged security problem at one of the labs. A couple of CDs with classified information on them went missing and everything stopped while they reviewed security protocols etc. I read recently that the CDs that were susposedly missing never existed and all the fuss was over an inventory problem. mad.gif

Posted by: cIclops Feb 21 2005, 09:50 AM

QUOTE (alan @ Feb 21 2005, 09:22 AM)
The shortage of plutonium was caused by an alleged security problem at one of the labs. A couple of CDs with classified information on them went missing and everything stopped while they reviewed security protocols etc.  I read recently that the CDs that were susposedly missing never existed and all the fuss was over an inventory problem.

It's unlikely that whatever is made public about highly classified labs is true and should be taken with a very small pinch of Uranium salt smile.gif


323 days to opening of primary launch window

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Feb 21 2005, 10:09 AM

The Feb. 17 "Nature" has a news item on the revelation that the missing disks never existed -- and if it's a cover story, it's an oddly counterproductive one. According to the magazine, most of Los Alamos' scientists are in an absolute fury over all this, and some of them are quitting.

Posted by: DEChengst Feb 21 2005, 05:27 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 20 2005, 09:40 PM)
You might be interested to know that it looks like our actual as-tested telecom performance is 1.5-2x better than the 768 bps spec performance, which is of course good news-- for those of us interested in faster downlinks.

Aren't we all interested in faster downlinks ? When we got our first modem 1200 bps was considered fast. A lot of BBSes would only support 300 bps. Some were running on older hardware and would do 300/75 bps max. It took quite a while to download even one floppy to your 8088 box. Today my ADSL line got upgraded to 8192/1024 Kbps. Downloaded a 50 MB Mars panorama in about a minute. Imagine how long that would have taken to download on one of those 300 bps BSSes. Having memories of using 300 bps the logical conclusion is that I'm getting old wink.gif

Posted by: Guest Feb 22 2005, 12:36 AM

The autonomy software is a rule-based system being put in place pre-flight. We do not expect to upgrtade it unless bugs occur that are not revealed in the (extensive) ground testing.

IThe system is based on the autonomy engine APL did for MESSENGER, with some improvements.

Posted by: cIclops Feb 22 2005, 06:48 AM

QUOTE (Guest @ Feb 22 2005, 12:36 AM)
The autonomy software is a rule-based system being put in place pre-flight. We do not expect to upgrtade it unless bugs occur that are not revealed in  the (extensive) ground testing.

IThe system is based on the autonomy engine APL did for MESSENGER, with some improvements.

Thanks for the details.

Here is a description of the APL rule based autonomy system: http://www.lunabots.com/icml2003/docs/Gomez_icml_wkshp_2003.pdf

Ten years is a very long time in the software universe, there may be other better approaches such as neural networks available by 2015. To make the most intelligent use of spacecraft resources during encounter is it possible to significantly enhance the software?

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 22 2005, 01:09 PM

QUOTE (cIclops @ Feb 22 2005, 06:48 AM)
Ten years is a very long time in the software universe, there may be other better approaches such as neural networks available by 2015. To make the most intelligent use of spacecraft resources during encounter is it possible to significantly enhance the software?


It's not about doing what is best in terms of systems efficiency, it's about minimizing risk. The saying we use is that "better is the enemy of good enough." There is also that pesky detail of having limited budgets, so aerospace geeks and PIs love to say,
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Enough said.

Posted by: cIclops Feb 22 2005, 02:02 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 22 2005, 01:09 PM)
It's not about doing what is best in terms of systems efficiency, it's about minimizing risk. The saying we use is that "better is the enemy of good enough."  There is also that pesky detail of having limited budgets, so aerospace geeks and PIs love to say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Enough said.

"Better is the enemy of good enough" yes I've heard that one before. Apparently it was the motto hung on the wall of Admiral Sergei Gorshkov, father and architect of the modern Soviet Navy, to remind him of the relative quality of the US and Soviet fleets.

Clearly in a project like NH success is the only real measure and that means the
unfailing execution of the baseline mission. Yet as technology advances there is a pattern of significantly reducing risk either by adding more complexity or by using new approaches. The test test test method is limited by the time and resources available and constrained by the design.

"He who knows that enough is enough will always have enough" - Lao Tsu

Posted by: chris Feb 22 2005, 03:12 PM

QUOTE
Ten years is a very long time in the software universe, there may be other better approaches such as neural networks available by 2015. To make the most intelligent use of spacecraft resources during encounter is it possible to significantly enhance the software?


In my experience of writing software, the main things that makes for robustness are good design, good developers, and testing, testing, and more testing. The increasing use of techniques like unit and functional testing in the commercial environments I work in is testament to this. And remember that robustness for a spacecraft is orders of magnitude harder than for anything on Earth. You can't push a reset button if it all goes wrong. (The fact that JPL got Spirit back after the flash filesystem cock-up is one of the things that has impressed me the most about the technology on the MERs).

I'm not an expert in neural networks, but a good friend of mine did his PhD on them, and from what he tells me they would be a very bad choice for spacecraft. They are impossible to debug, and often are not doing what you think they are.

This (http://neil.fraser.name/writing/tank/) is a famous neural network story. It may be apocryphal, but I'm told it gives a flavour of the kind of problems you can end up with.

Chris

Posted by: djellison Feb 23 2005, 12:10 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Feb 19 2005, 04:25 PM)
Attached is a picture of New Horizons in build from last month. Enjoy!

For those trying to get their bearings - we're looking at the side onto which the RTG will be mounted. the SWAP instrument is sticking out on the right by the bunnysuited engineers. ALICE and RALPH are sort of hidden round the corner on the left - and above SWAP on the right just under the HGA is PEPSSI

I hereby award NH with the Acronyms-of-the-Year award smile.gif

Doug

Posted by: Borek Feb 23 2005, 01:07 PM

What spacecraft stabilization will be used during cruise phase? Will it be spin-stabilized? If yes, is there any chance of gathering data relevant to the Pioneer Anomaly investigation?

Borek

Posted by: djellison Feb 23 2005, 01:38 PM

Well - attitude is all done with thrusters (no reac. wheels) , so I guess it'll be spin stab for much of the cruise - despinning for observations as and when appropriate - Alan will fill us in I'm sure

Doug

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 23 2005, 02:20 PM

Yes, we spin most of cruise, stopping only rarely. It costs fuel that we want to hoard for encounters and KBO DeltaV. And yes, our radio science team hopes to look for
the Pioneer anaomaly. Contact Len Tyler or Ivan Linscott at Stanford.

-Alan

Posted by: cIclops Feb 25 2005, 07:10 PM

For those interested in how such things are done now http://spacescience.nasa.gov/admin/pubs/plutoeis/index.htm to an index of the draft environmental impact statement for NH.

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 27 2005, 05:18 PM

For those interested, various interesting information aboiut New Horizons can be found at www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb

And here is another nice image some may wish to download.

 

Posted by: MiniTES Feb 27 2005, 09:18 PM

Dr. Stern, what, if any, flyby science are you planning to do at Jupiter, assuming that there is a Jupiter flyby?

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 28 2005, 01:02 AM

Extensive Jupiter system science is planned-- a great deal focus on meteoroligical
inviestigations of Jupiter using IR imaging spectroscopy. There is also a good bit of
satellite imaging and spectroscopy, stellar occulations of Jupiter's atmosphere, dust studies in the Jovian system, and a magnetospheric tail explortation that is wholly unique becaue NH will fly down the tail hundreds of AU as it exists toward Pluto-Charon.
One dirty little secret of NH: We'll return far more bits from Jupiter than Pluto,
largely becasue we can, given the closer range.

We also plan to use Jupiter as a cal target and as ops practice on the way to Pluto.
(and we just found a Centaur to study-- albeit from long range, in 2010-- 2002 GO).

-Alan Stern

Posted by: tedstryk Feb 28 2005, 01:37 AM

I have read that closest approach won't be too far outside the orbit of Callisto. Will Callisto actually be nearby. Also, with its telescopic capability, what kind of resolution will New Horizons be able to get on the Galileans?

Posted by: MiniTES Feb 28 2005, 01:43 AM

QUOTE (tedstryk @ Feb 28 2005, 01:37 AM)
I have read that closest approach won't be too far outside the orbit of Callisto. Will Callisto actually be nearby. Also, with its telescopic capability, what kind of resolution will New Horizons be able to get on the Galileans?

To add to that, how will that compare with Galileo and Voyager images? Have the parts of Callisto or the other Galileans that could be imaged at a high resolution already been imaged at such a resolution by Galileo or will they be new areas?

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 28 2005, 03:12 AM

All this depends on which day in Jan 2006 we launch, which in turn ocrresponds to which day in 2007 we arrive at Jupiter. Callisto and other moons way be close, or may be far--- depending on when we arrive. What we can say for sure-- now in 2005-- is this:
the cloest approach of NH to Jupiter will be almost 4 times closer than Cassini, i.e., at about 38 Rj.

-Alan Stern

Posted by: tedstryk Feb 28 2005, 03:25 AM

Assuming there are no delays from Jan 2006, what kind of resolution could LORRI get for Io? (I figure it won't vary nearly as much as Callisto no matter where it is, unless it is behind Jupiter at closest approach)

Thanks,

Ted

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Feb 28 2005, 06:25 AM

I attended the 2003 DPS meeting -- and, specifically, the special session on science goals for NH's Jupiter flyby. The impression I got is that the most interesting aspect of that flyby will be, not its imaging of the moons, but its near-IR spectra of them -- which will be much better than those from either Galileo or Cassini (better instrument than the former; much closer than the latter), and may well provide us with very interesting new data on their surface compositions.

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Feb 28 2005, 06:28 AM

By "much better spectra", of course I mean in spectral resolution -- obviously they'll be pretty much whole-disk spectra, unlike Galileo's; but their spectral resolution will be so much better that they have a good chnce of revealing new surface constituents.

Posted by: Alan Stern Feb 28 2005, 07:36 AM

The LORRI imager's resolution on Io, depending on where it is in its orbit will be between roughly 12 and 15 km per pixel at closest approach.

Posted by: tedstryk Feb 28 2005, 02:36 PM

That should be good to look for changes at smaller scales than can be seen from earth since I32

Posted by: DEChengst Feb 28 2005, 05:11 PM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Feb 28 2005, 06:25 AM)
I attended the 2003 DPS meeting -- and, specifically, the special session on science goals for NH's Jupiter flyby. The impression I got is that the most interesting aspect of that flyby will be, not its imaging of the moons, but its near-IR spectra of them -- which will be much better than those from either Galileo or Cassini (better instrument than the former; much closer than the latter), and may well provide us with very interesting new data on their surface compositions.

How about the resolution it will get on Jupiter ? Will it beat this splendid mosaic made by Cassini:

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA04866.jpg

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Mar 1 2005, 06:22 AM

Oh, yes -- although, since NH's bit rate will be far lower than Cassini's, it won't make nearly as MANY mosaics of Jupiter.

Posted by: cIclops Mar 1 2005, 07:39 AM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Mar 1 2005, 06:22 AM)
Oh, yes -- although, since NH's bit rate will be far lower than Cassini's, it won't make nearly as MANY mosaics of Jupiter.

What will be the maximum data transmission rate at Jupiter?

315 days to first launch opportunity

Posted by: tedstryk Mar 1 2005, 10:49 AM

New Horizons does have much more storage capacity than Cassini. So it could perhaps store a lot of stuff onboard for more boring parts of the cruise.

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 1 2005, 12:11 PM

New Horizons will be able to transmit at 37 Kbps from Jupter, and a little over 1 Kbps from Pluto. The s/c has redundent 64 Gbit solid state recorders.

As to Jupiter imaging resolution, color images made near closest approach (C/A) will be
of a resolution comparable to the Cassini image posted above. Panchromatic images will be about 3X better. However in both cases the imagers are very senstivie, having
been designed for optimal perfomance at 32 AU. As such, there is likely to be
overexposure in regions away from the terminator near C/A.

Posted by: tedstryk Mar 1 2005, 12:45 PM

You mentioned a distant Centaur flyby. Assuming the launch date doesn't change, what do you mean by distant? 1 million km? 50 million km?

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 1 2005, 12:52 PM

Ted,

2002 GO will be 2.7 AU awa-- good OpNav practice and a chance to get a solid phase
curve. We will search along the path for better (closer) candidates after launch, but
Monte Carlo sims tell us not to expect anything close enough to generate real maps
unless we get incredibly lucky.

Posted by: MiniTES Mar 1 2005, 03:20 PM

Has any thought been given to what Kupier Belt objects might be encountered after launch? How close might those flybys be? Or does that also depend on the launch date?

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 1 2005, 10:07 PM

A lot of work has gone into KBO flyby planning. NH1 can probably only get
to 1 or maybe 2 KBOs, and those will be small, i.e., Eros-sized or a bit
smaller. This is because after we leave Pluto-Charon, we can only
maneuver 100 m/s or so off this course, which means turning only ~0.1 deg.

(NH2 can hit a large KBO because we can target it from Jupiter or Uranus
as the "substitute" first target for Pluto.)

We will not choose the first NH1 target KBO until about 2012, because
we will have much better knowledge of KBOs by then in general, and
the possible targets along our trajectory in particular.

-Alan

Posted by: djellison Mar 1 2005, 11:29 PM

Now leave the man alone so he can go and finish it before Jan '06 tongue.gif

Doug

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 1 2005, 11:44 PM

Doug- Thanks, I do have a day job-- in fact, three of them by last count. Maybe I should assign someone to do Q&A with this site. The questions are good ones.

-Alan

Posted by: tedstryk Mar 2 2005, 12:52 AM

I think I speak for everyone here in saying that we greatly appreciate your taking the time to answer our questions.

Posted by: MiniTES Mar 2 2005, 02:07 AM

QUOTE (tedstryk @ Mar 2 2005, 12:52 AM)
I think I speak for everyone here in saying that we greatly appreciate your taking the time to answer our questions.

I second that.

Posted by: lyford Mar 2 2005, 04:03 AM

QUOTE (MiniTES @ Mar 1 2005, 06:07 PM)
QUOTE (tedstryk @ Mar 2 2005, 12:52 AM)
I think I speak for everyone here in saying that we greatly appreciate your taking the time to answer our questions.

I second that.

Let me also chime in that your presence on this board is most awesome!

I think Pluto holds a special place in the public consciousness, being the "last" planet out there and the only one not directly visited by a mission yet. I have been waiting for a Pluto mission since I was a kid - and finally watching it happen, hearing the details in real time by no one less than the PI is wonderful. Tomorrow I am taking my 5th grade class to http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ecard/sendName_ecard_content.html and having them sign up... Let the Inner - Outer Solar System rivalry begin! laugh.gif

Posted by: djellison Mar 2 2005, 08:47 AM

Perhaps we should start a thread and just submit questions to it - then if you can find someone appropriate Alan - I can string them together into a coherent set of questions that 'tell the story' fire them off in an email and then report back here?

Doug

Posted by: DEChengst Mar 2 2005, 05:13 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Mar 1 2005, 11:44 PM)
Maybe I should assign someone to do Q&A with this site. The questions are good ones.

I think it's great to have you onboard Alan. It's so cool to be able to ask questions to the people actually working on the mission and get a response within a day. Compared to these days, Voyager happened in the dark ages. You had to wait a month for a magazine to see the first results, and ofcourse that wouldn't anwser all the question you had. Internet is a great tool to make people enthousiastic about a mission and give them something back for the tax money they pay to fund the missions. I really like the MER and Cassini rawimages website as you can use them to create your own mosaics. I hope New Horizons will do the same. If you do so I think it would be great to include some target pointing and distance information in the filename as this would really help us amateurs to find matching images to create mosaics from. MER includes a lot of info in the filename which is great, Cassini does not which makes them harder to use.

A lot of visitors on this forum also hang out on IRC in #space at irc.freenode.net. Perhaps you would like to join some time for an interactive question and anwser session ?

Posted by: Roby72 Mar 2 2005, 10:45 PM

Alan,

I also most appreciate your interest in our forum. Its fantastic to see the progress in building NH as a real spacecraft, after this long series of troubles.

Therefore I have my own special question - sometimes in the late 80s there was a mission called TAU on the drawboards of NASA I believe. It would have a ion engine to reach 1000 A.U. and this far away point should enabled the TAU-craft to obtain extremely precise astrometric measurements (parallaxes out to the Magellanic clouds!). Could NH accomplish some astrometric measures out to 50 A.U. ? Is the original TAU-craft still a secret project at NASA ?

Sometimes in about 10 years from now, ESA would fly the GAIA mission, also a precise astrometric mission, but near Earth.

regards
Robert

Posted by: cIclops Mar 3 2005, 10:53 AM

QUOTE (Roby72 @ Mar 2 2005, 10:45 PM)
...  sometimes in the late 80s there was a mission called TAU on the drawboards of NASA I believe.

yes, it now seems to be the 400 AU Interstellar Probe concept ... lots of details http://interstellar.jpl.nasa.gov/interstellar/probe/introduction/intro.html

Posted by: cIclops Mar 4 2005, 07:25 AM

Alan has written a new piece updating the status of NH and his feelings towards the project http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/overview/piPerspective_03_2005.html

I hope we'll see more photos before the thermal blankets cover the innards.

312 days left before launch window opens

Posted by: john_s Mar 9 2005, 12:10 AM

Hi- this is John Spencer, frequent lurker (and occasional contributor) on this forum. I'm also a New Horizons science team member, and rashly volunteered to help Alan Stern get back to running the mission by helping him answer New Horizons questions here. So fire away...

We just had a meeting of the science team here in Boulder, and we are all starting to get psyched about the fast-approaching launch. Along with several other current team members I've been working on some version of this mission since the early 1990s, and we are so used to it being a distant and hypothetical idea that it's a shock as well as a thrill to have everything becoming so real so quickly.

Posted by: cIclops Mar 9 2005, 10:14 AM

QUOTE (john_s @ Mar 9 2005, 12:10 AM)
Hi- this is John Spencer, frequent lurker (and occasional contributor) on this forum.  I'm also a New Horizons science team member, and rashly volunteered to help Alan Stern get back to running the mission by helping him answer New Horizons questions here.  So fire away...

Welcome john_s !

I must say it is refreshing to have real project people willing to subject themselves to this type of free for all discussion. It's not only an opportunity for those of us on the outside to interact and learn but also a way for us to feel a part of the adventure. Stand by for the first shot ....

smile.gif

NET 307 days to launch

Posted by: lyford Mar 9 2005, 11:12 PM

Welcome John - let the interrogation begin! biggrin.gif

Posted by: clemmentine Mar 10 2005, 06:11 AM

Thank you, john_s, for taking the time to answer our questions.

According to the New Horizons website, NH will be 11,095 km from Pluto at closest approach. Isn't that inside the orbit of Charon since the pair is 19,600 km apart (according to http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Plu_Charon)?
I seem to remember that at one time, it was thought that Pluto's atmosphere may envelop Charon. Is that no longer considered likely or is the Pluto CA distance preliminary and can be changed via TCMs?

Posted by: john_s Mar 10 2005, 07:32 AM

QUOTE (clemmentine @ Mar 10 2005, 06:11 AM)
According to the New Horizons website, NH will be 11,095 km from Pluto at closest approach.  Isn't that inside the orbit of Charon ...
I seem to remember that at one time, it was thought that Pluto's atmosphere may envelop Charon.  Is that no longer considered likely or is the Pluto CA distance preliminary and can be changed via TCMs?

That's funny, we were just talking in the hallway yesterday about how we might get close enough to Pluto to detect some deceleration of the spacecraft due to Pluto's atmosphere- not sure yet if that's possible though I suspect the effect will be negligible. The atmosphere is indeed pretty extended, due to the low gravity, and one of the spacecraft's tasks is to estimate its escape rate via Pluto's perturbation to the solar wind. At 11,000 km altitude the atmosphere will pose no risk to the spacecraft.

You're right that we can easily change the flyby altitude, and the current value is just a working number. Coming closer gives better measurements of Pluto's gravity and solar wind perturbations, but makes imaging more difficult due increased smear rates and slew times.

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 13 2005, 05:32 PM

Sports fans-- Updated NH mission and payload Powerpoints presentations have been posted at www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb

Enjoy.

Onward to 2006,
-Alan

Posted by: cIclops Mar 13 2005, 06:44 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Mar 13 2005, 05:32 PM)
Updated NH mission and payload Powerpoints presentations have been posted at www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb

Yummy, thanks!

According to the http://www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb/Mission_Overview_Mar05.ppt the observatory phase begins C/A - 4 weeks and the post encounter studies last 2 weeks, why are these periods so different?

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 13 2005, 06:55 PM

Outbound is less interesting. as Pluto is a crescent, and already explored at high-resolution on approach. About 2 weeks post-encounter we do the KBO targeting maneuver, and then begin the less hectic, final observation phase for pluto-Charon.

Posted by: cIclops Mar 13 2005, 06:57 PM

Thanks for the fast reply, too fast for this edit smile.gif

Also there is no capability for the "search for magnetic fields" in the science tracability matrix of the http://www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb/downloads/Payload_Overview.ppt yet there is a solar wind particle detector, won't this instrument be able to indirectly detect the plasma sheet of Pluto's field if it exists?

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 13 2005, 07:09 PM

Yes, very perceptive. Back in 2001, we carefully considerd but rejected flying a MAG on NH because it greatly complicates the s/c (booms, magnetic cleanliness, etc.).
However, SWAP (our solar wind particle detector) can potentially infer a mag field at
Pluto-Charon based on the particle flux trace through the system and the kinds of
solar wind disturbances/magnetospheric boundaries the instrument discovers.

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 18 2005, 09:39 AM

There are several new NH downloads including an EPO poster at
www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb for those interested.

Posted by: MiniTES Mar 20 2005, 01:57 AM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Mar 18 2005, 09:39 AM)
There are several new NH downloads including an EPO poster at
www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb for those interested.

Thanks, Alan.

Posted by: lyford Mar 20 2005, 06:28 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Mar 18 2005, 01:39 AM)
There are several new NH downloads including an EPO poster at
www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb for those interested.

Time to buy more printer cartridges! tongue.gif Thanks, Alan.

Posted by: imran Mar 22 2005, 06:46 PM

http://www.space.com/astronotes/astronotes.html

QUOTE
"The spacecraft and instruments are undergoing a very rigorous test program over the next few months," said New Horizons Principal Investigator Alan Stern of the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado. "This begins with systems testing, and then proceeds to shake tests and space environment thermal vacuum testing," he told SPACE.com.

QUOTE
After reviews are completed under the National Environmental Policy Act, if NASA decides to proceed with the mission, the spacecraft would await presidential approval to launch next January.


Good luck, Alan.

Posted by: Alan Stern Mar 23 2005, 04:12 PM

Thanks for the best wishes, enjoy the download candy.

Onward to 2006!
-Alan

Posted by: djellison Mar 23 2005, 04:28 PM

Ahh - good 'ol Shake and Bake.

I saw the flight structure for a comm sat undergo a launch simulation shake about 7 years ago. Astonishing noise - the sort of noise that you can feel in oyur stomach. How such precise delicate machines can be designed to withstand extremes of acceleration, heat and pressue is one of the miracles of modern science.

Doug

Posted by: imran Mar 24 2005, 10:02 PM

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/news/releases/2005/27-05.html

QUOTE
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for NASA's planned New Horizons mission to Pluto has been released for a 45-day public comment period that ends April 11. A press briefing will be held at 10 a.m. EST on March 29 at NASA's Kennedy Space Center (KSC) News Center to acquaint the media with the mission to Pluto and its moon, Charon, and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement associated with the launch.

Posted by: MiniTES Mar 26 2005, 11:08 PM

QUOTE (imran @ Mar 24 2005, 10:02 PM)
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/news/releases/2005/27-05.html

QUOTE
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for NASA's planned New Horizons mission to Pluto has been released for a 45-day public comment period that ends April 11. A press briefing will be held at 10 a.m. EST on March 29 at NASA's Kennedy Space Center (KSC) News Center to acquaint the media with the mission to Pluto and its moon, Charon, and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement associated with the launch.

*



These things always baffle me. Is it as if the launch will destroy the environment or something like that?

Posted by: dvandorn Mar 26 2005, 11:29 PM

QUOTE (MiniTES @ Mar 26 2005, 05:08 PM)
These things always baffle me. Is it as if the launch will destroy the environment or something like that?
*


Not if the launch goes as planned, no. But any time you launch a spacecraft with plutonium on board, a launch failure has the potential (however remote) of introducing said plutonium to the environment. The E.I.S. is just a safeguard to make sure NASA has taken reasonable precautions against any negative environmental impact from plutonium handling before, during and after the launch.

I'm not one of the anti-nuke whackos, believe me -- I believe NASA does, indeed, take all reasonable precautions. But I also think it's a good idea to hold *anyone* using or handling such dangerously toxic materials as plutonium to a very high safety standard.

-the other Doug

Posted by: djellison Mar 26 2005, 11:42 PM

I wonder what would happen if the public knew of all the military payloads that carry such things that never make the news in any way what soever

Doug

Posted by: dvandorn Mar 26 2005, 11:57 PM

QUOTE (djellison @ Mar 26 2005, 05:42 PM)
I wonder what would happen if the public knew of all the military payloads that carry such things that never make the news in any way what soever

Doug
*


Honestly, I think a majority of Americans wouldn't care all that much. It's only a relatively small lunatic fringe here that is swayed by the anti-nuke Chicken Littles.

I may be a little overly optimistic, here, but I think a large majority of the general public understands that the risks of disaster are relatively tiny.

-the other Doug

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Mar 27 2005, 12:22 AM

Personally -- and speaking as someone who (to my continuing amazement) apparently did play a major role in getting NASA to reverse its original rejection of this probe, through my series of SpaceDaily articles (details on request) -- I remain very uneasy about launching something as toxic as Pu-238 unless it's absolutely necessary, and I would hope they can hold it to an absolute minimum in future missions. For instance, not a single one of the four proposed highest-priority New Frontiers concepts after New Horizons -- including the Jupiter polar orbiter -- requires it. I'm not wildly happy about their putting it on MSL; I think there might very well be ways to make a solar power system work effectively(including dust-cleaning mechanisms and concentrator mirrors).

Actually, I'm a lot less uneasy about orbiting nuclear reactors, since those use U-235 -- which is normally extremely non-radioactive -- as their fuel, and so don't start producing dangerous radioisotopes until they've actually been turned on and allowed to run a while. Put them into a high Earth orbit before you do that and they are no danger whatsoever.

Posted by: MiniTES Mar 29 2005, 07:29 PM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Mar 27 2005, 12:22 AM)
Personally -- and speaking as someone who (to my continuing amazement) apparently did play a major role in getting NASA to reverse its original rejection of this probe, through my series of SpaceDaily articles (details on request) -- I remain very uneasy about launching something as toxic as Pu-238 unless it's absolutely necessary, and I would hope they can hold it to an absolute minimum in future missions.  For instance, not a single one of the four proposed highest-priority New Frontiers concepts after New Horizons -- including the Jupiter polar orbiter -- requires it.  I'm not wildly happy about their putting it on MSL; I think there might very well be ways to make a solar power system work effectively(including dust-cleaning mechanisms and concentrator mirrors).

Actually, I'm a lot less uneasy about orbiting nuclear reactors, since those use U-235 -- which is normally extremely non-radioactive -- as their fuel, and so don't start producing dangerous radioisotopes until they've actually been turned on and allowed to run a while.  Put them into a high Earth orbit before you do that and they are no danger whatsoever.
*


Can you say "RORSAT"? wink.gif

Posted by: cIclops Mar 29 2005, 08:54 PM

Redux an earlier post. While browsing through the summaries of the recent Lunar and Planetary Science XXXVI (2005) Conference http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2005/pdf/1445.pdf about maximizing mission science return caught my attention. It outlines a successful flight experiment onboard the EO-1 spacecraft called the Autonomous Sciencecraft Experiment (ASE).

This type of software based intelligence demonstrated the capability to make decisions on instrument targeting and to optimize the data stored and transmitted. For the critical close encounter phases of the mission this may be extremely valuable.

no less than 287 days before launch

Posted by: Decepticon Mar 29 2005, 10:32 PM

During the jupiter flyby will we be doing Moon science?

I would love to see any surface changes on Europa since the Galileo Mission.

Posted by: john_s Mar 30 2005, 12:40 AM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Mar 29 2005, 10:32 PM)
During the jupiter flyby will we be doing Moon science?

I would love to see any surface changes on Europa since the Galileo Mission.
*


Yes, we'll be doing plenty of Jupiter moon science, though there are a few constraints that will limit what we can do. Primary constraint at the moment is limited onboard storage capacity, and the fact that we want to keep data management as simple as possible- we won't be able to do multiple write/download/erase/rewrite cycles on our solid-state-recorders, for instance. There's also the unusual problem that when your cameras are optimized to work at 30 AU, everything at 5 AU looks very bright, and we'll be saturating at minimum exposure on many of our targets. Our best views of Io are likely to be taken in Jupiter-shine rather than sunshine, for instance.

Despite these constraints, we'll be taking images and near-infrared spectra of all the satellites. Surface changes on Europa won't be a high priority, because the lack of changes between Voyager and Galileo epochs, in images at much higher resolution than we'll be able to get with New Horizons, make changes between Galileo and New Horizons unlikely. But we'll be cataloging surface changes, plumes, and hotspots on Io, and making near-infrared spectral composition maps of the satellites at higher spectral resolution than Galileo. We'll also be watching Jupiter eclipses of the satellites to study their atmospheres.

We can't make final plans till after launch, when we'll know the precise trajectory, the Jupiter flyby date, and the satellite viewing geometrys. Then we'll have a few months of hard work to come up with a detailed plan that makes the most of this unique opportunity.

Posted by: Decepticon Mar 30 2005, 02:33 PM

Thanks for the quick answer!


As long as global imaging of Europa will be done, I'll be VERY happy!



I'm so excited about this mission. biggrin.gif

Posted by: john_s Mar 30 2005, 05:01 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Mar 30 2005, 02:33 PM)
As long as global imaging of Europa will be done, I'll be VERY happy!


Sorry, but it's unlikely that we'll get complete global imaging of Europa, because due to the overexposure problem we will only have a narrow strip of unsaturated terrain near the terminator in each image, so it would take too many images to build up complete coverage. Even on Io, where global imaging is higher priority, we probably won't achieve that goal. But we'll do our best...

Glad you're excited about the mission- so are we!

Posted by: Sunspot Mar 30 2005, 05:23 PM

I want to see Io...... biggrin.gif

....I miss Galileo sad.gif

Posted by: tedstryk Mar 30 2005, 07:54 PM

I do too. I would like to see a Galileo-2 type mission. It could probably be developed more quickly than a Europa orbiter. With a high data rate and a very large data recorder, it could really send back some incredible shots. My bias against the Europa orbiter is basically my hands down rejection of the case that Europa is more interesting than the other moons. I think it is one member of a four part set that all need to be understood (in addition to the planet and inner moons) in order to understand the Jovian system (and outer moons, if they are not all captured asteroids).

Posted by: Decepticon Mar 31 2005, 02:45 AM

I'm curious if there is a trajectory map is available threw the Jupiter system?


Also will any close encounters with asteroid's on the way out?



Sorry for all the questions, the main horizon page does not cover these questions in detail. sad.gif

Posted by: djellison Mar 31 2005, 07:53 AM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Mar 31 2005, 02:45 AM)
I'm curious if there is a trajectory map is available threw the Jupiter system?

*


As John said - not until after launch. The exact launch date will define where the jovian moons will be at the flyby - and launch windows and elv's being what they are - the only time you can guarentee when you're going to leave the ground is when you've done it :0

Doug

Posted by: cIclops Apr 3 2005, 09:09 PM

With its 20cm scope NH will be able to perform a population survey of the Kuiper belt by direct imaging and by measuring dust debris, what search strategy will be used?

282 more days and nights before launch

Posted by: john_s Apr 4 2005, 03:08 AM

QUOTE (cIclops @ Apr 3 2005, 09:09 PM)
With its 20cm scope NH will be able to perform a population survey of the Kuiper belt by direct imaging and by measuring dust debris, what search strategy will be used?

282 more days and nights before launch
*


We don't plan to use New Horizons for Kuiper belt population studies by searching for individual KBOs. Even though it will be much closer to its little piece of the Kuiper Belt than ground-based telescopes, that won't make up for its lack of aperture compared to the 10-meter class telescopes back on Earth, and the narrow data pipeline back to Earth will also limit the area that we could cover. We'll be directly sampling the dust in the Kuiper Belt with the Student Dust Counter, which has no particular strategy- it simply records the dust particles as we run into them. It's also possible that we'll be able to image the sunlight scattered by Kuiper Belt dust, as you suggest, though I don't think we've studied this possibility in detail yet- the likely faintness of the "zodiacal light" at such large distances from the sun will be a challenge. The dust is particularly interesting because it can be directly compared to the dust we see in the "Kuiper Belts" around other stars, where we have no hope of seeing individual asteroid-sized bodies.

New Horizon's biggest contribution to our understanding of the Kuiper Belt will of course come from its close-up studies of Pluto, Charon, and the other one or two KBOs that we fly past- an area where ground-based facilities can't hope to compete.

Posted by: hendric Apr 4 2005, 05:30 AM

John,
I never saw an answer to a previous question about using NH's position to take astrometry. Would it be a worthwhile thing to do?

Posted by: cIclops Apr 4 2005, 08:41 AM

QUOTE (john_s @ Apr 4 2005, 03:08 AM)
We don't plan to use New Horizons for Kuiper belt population studies by searching for individual KBOs.  Even though it will be much closer to its little piece of the Kuiper Belt than ground-based telescopes, that won't make up for its lack of aperture compared to the 10-meter class telescopes back on Earth, and the narrow data pipeline back to Earth will also limit the area that we could cover.  We'll be directly sampling the dust in the Kuiper Belt with the Student Dust Counter, which has no particular strategy- it simply records the dust particles as we run into them.  It's also possible that we'll be able to image the sunlight scattered by Kuiper Belt dust, as you suggest, though I don't think we've studied this possibility in detail yet- the likely faintness of the "zodiacal light" at such large distances from the sun will be a challenge.  The dust is particularly interesting because it can be directly compared to the dust we see in the "Kuiper Belts" around other stars, where we have no hope of seeing individual asteroid-sized bodies.


Yes NH has only 20/1000 of the resolving power of Keck but Keck has to peer through the atmosphere and NH will be right inside the Kuiper belt. What is the smallest KBO resolvable by Keck at 60AU - 100 kms? NH will have better resolving power than Keck for at least an AU in all directions *continuously* for several years. An automated onboard survey would greatly reduce the load on that narrow data pipe. Imaging the Kuiper dust should yield information about the object density assuming that it is generated by collision processes.

A survey of smaller KBOs should be possible with NH that is beyond Keck's capability to compete. In any case NH needs something to keep it busy once it has finished its KBO flyby smile.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Apr 4 2005, 11:23 AM

The major contribution NH will make to understanding the size distribution of KBOs
will be documenting the crater size-frequency distributions on Pluto and Charon (and
KBOs--if we get that far--as we hope we will).

Our 1 km-resolution maps will allow us to count craters due to impactors
as small as 100 m-- something one can't detect from Earth, even at 40 AU.
The hi-res LORRI images near C/A will get craters as small as perhaps
50 m, thus due to impactors of scale 5 m size!

Most interestingly to me, Pluto's rapid atmospheric escape should have generated
one to several km in surface loss over 4 Gyr. This is thought to have, "wiped
the slate clean" over time, so that Pluto's surface should show only craters
from the "present-day" KB. Charon, with no atmospheric loss, should however show
the time-integrated history of impacts stretching back almost to its formation, when
the KB is thought to have been much more massive. Comparison of the two should
be fascinating.

-Alan

Posted by: john_s Apr 4 2005, 02:25 PM

QUOTE (hendric @ Apr 4 2005, 05:30 AM)
John,
  I never saw an answer to a previous question about using NH's position to take astrometry.  Would it be a worthwhile thing to do?
*


You mean astrometry of stars for parallax determination? It's possible we could do something useful in that area. Our highest-resolution imager, LORRI, has pixels about 1 arcsecond in size, and we can measure star positions to an accuracy of a few tenths of a pixel. This is pretty good, though we can't compete for precision with specialized satellites like Hipparcos in Earth orbit, which though it only had a 2 AU baseline to work with, compared to the 30 or 40 AU we'll get from New Horizons, could measure star positions to 0.001 arcsec or better. We do have one advantage over Hipparcos, though- we can look at much fainter stars, magnitude 16 or fainter compared to Hipparcos' limit of about magnitude 12. So maybe we could get some useful parallax measurements of a few high-priority targets that were too faint for other techniques (if technology at 1 AU hasn't caught up with us by 2015!). But we couldn't do a wide survey- it would take too much bandwidth and maneuvering fuel that we need for our prime mission.

Good questions- keep 'em coming!

Posted by: hendric Apr 7 2005, 06:42 AM

QUOTE (cIclops @ Apr 4 2005, 08:41 AM)
Yes NH has only 20/1000 of the resolving power of Keck but Keck has to peer through the atmosphere and NH will be right inside the Kuiper belt. What is the smallest KBO resolvable by Keck at 60AU - 100 kms? NH will have better resolving power than Keck for at least an AU in all directions *continuously* for several years.  An automated onboard survey would greatly reduce the load on that narrow data pipe.  Imaging the Kuiper dust should yield information about the object density assuming that it is generated by collision processes.

A survey of smaller KBOs should be possible with NH that is beyond Keck's capability to compete. In any case NH needs something to keep it busy once it has finished its KBO flyby smile.gif
*


I did some thinking and here's what I came up with:

1. smile.gif Being closer to the KB makes the KBOs brighter by a factor of (40/1)^2.
2. mad.gif NH light collecting area is only (20/1000)^2 of Keck

So overall, for KBs at 1AU from NH and 40 AU from Keck, you get a .64 factor.

3. mad.gif Differences in size/technology of CCDs at Keck and on NH. I have to give this one to Keck since they can continuously update their tech, and go with enormous CCD arrays.
4. mad.gif Cosmic ray hits would go way up that far away, I assume.
5. smile.gif Time sharing. Keck isn't 100% searching for KBOs. NH could be, though. This would help mitigate 2 and 4.
6. mad.gif Velocity while searching. The high speed needed to get to the KB would tend to smear any pointlike KBO into something resembling a cosmic ray. My best guess is that at 13km/s your typical KBO at 1AU is going to be a streak about 15 arc seconds long on your CCD in a 5 minute shot. This is bad because you split up the KBOs light across several pixels, and that streak now resembles a cosmic ray hit.
7. smile.gif You'll have lots of power (cpu and RTG) with nothing to do, so you could take lots of pictures, offset them by what you would expect for a KBO streak at various distances and directions, and see what pops out when you add them up. I remember reading about a paper where they did a KBO search like this, by creating an "orbit space" and moving around a series of pictures and summing them to see what popped out of the noise. You could do this with a fairly large number of images. As amateur astronomers know, you get a sqrt(#of images) improvement to the picture.
8. mad.gif The area near the spacecraft is probably going to be well-searched from the ground by the time it gets to the KB. By that time, 30m telescopes should be operational, I think.

But if you're going to spend the time to look for dust anyways... rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Jeff7 Apr 7 2005, 05:29 PM

Kind of OT here, but I'd love to see them strap some solar sails onto the NH probe. Either that, or else do another probe for it. A solar sail craft might be going fairly fast by the time it'd make a pass by Pluto. Or maybe not, I don't know much about their actual acceleration rates, and max speeds. If there were enough light for it, deploy the sails after the Pluto flyby, and race out of the solar system in style.

Posted by: Chmee Apr 7 2005, 07:20 PM

QUOTE (tedstryk @ Mar 30 2005, 03:54 PM)
I do too.  I would like to see a Galileo-2 type mission.  It could probably be developed more quickly than a Europa orbiter.  With a high data rate and a very large data recorder, it could really send back some incredible shots
*



Just make sure though that the High Gain Antenna on a Galileo-2 works... rolleyes.gif

Posted by: tedstryk Apr 8 2005, 04:30 AM

That is definitely true. When one looks at the coverage of the moon Galileo obtained during its Earth flyby, one can only dream of what it could have returned from Jupiter with a working antenna. What would be really cool is to send a Cassini class mission a la Voyager - with two cloned spacecraft, and a much larger data recorder than Cassini has. The two orbiters would flyby the four galileans (and perhaps encouter Amalthea and or Thebe during Jupiter orbit insertion) for four to six years. Then one of the spacecraft would use gravity assists to insert itself into Europa orbit. The other would conduct repeat Io flybies until the damage became so severe from the radiation that it would be crashed into Io.

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Apr 8 2005, 02:48 PM

Well, then, you'll be pleased to know that the second-decade set of candidates for New Frontiers-class missions includes an "Io Observer" and a "Ganymede Observer", each of which would observe those moons during multiple close flybys in Jupiter orbit. The latter could easily be expanded to include Callisto. Indeed, it might be possible to design a mission that made repeated flyby observations of all 3 moons -- except that, to greatly reduce its radiation exposure and maximize the number of working Io flybys, you want the Io orbiter to be in a polar Jupiter orbit, which makes flybys of Ganymede and Callisto far harder to achieve with the same spacecraft. (Since it proved impossible to design a New Frontiers-cost mission that would include both a Jupiter polar orbiter and multiple entry probes, a Jupiter flyby with 3 entry probes is another candidate for a second-decade NF mission.)

Posted by: tedstryk Apr 8 2005, 04:30 PM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Apr 8 2005, 02:48 PM)
Well, then, you'll be pleased to know that the second-decade set of candidates for New Frontiers-class missions includes an "Io Observer" and a "Ganymede Observer", each of which would observe those moons during multiple close flybys in Jupiter orbit.  The latter could easily be expanded to include Callisto.  Indeed, it might be possible to design a mission that made repeated flyby observations of all 3 moons -- except that, to greatly reduce its radiation exposure and maximize the number of working Io flybys, you want the Io orbiter to be in a polar Jupiter orbit, which makes flybys of Ganymede and Callisto far harder to achieve with the same spacecraft.  (Since it proved impossible to design a New Frontiers-cost mission that would include both a Jupiter polar orbiter and multiple entry probes, a Jupiter flyby with 3 entry probes is another candidate for a second-decade NF mission.)
*



That is great to hear. Another possibility is to include proper instruments to study Io from afar on the Ganymede and Callisto mission. Then, a la Galileo, if it lasts a long time, bring it in to Io for as many flybys as it can stomach.

Posted by: Sunspot Apr 8 2005, 05:11 PM

.....second decade? sad.gif sad.gif lol

My vote goes to the Io observor. biggrin.gif

Posted by: cIclops Apr 8 2005, 05:12 PM

As usual good news travels slower than the speed of bad news but it's finally arrived in http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/overview/piPerspective_current.html from Alan Stern, PI for NH.

115 Days to launch (in Hex)

Posted by: odave Apr 8 2005, 06:37 PM

QUOTE (cIclops @ Apr 8 2005, 01:12 PM)
115 Days to launch (in Hex)


...and after that, 72 months to Pluto-Charon encounter (in Hex) smile.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Apr 17 2005, 09:46 PM

Just for fun, see attached.

 

Posted by: DEChengst Apr 18 2005, 01:07 AM

I noticed that both New Horizons and Rosetta will carry an UV imaging spectrometer called Alice. The New Horizon websites says that the version used on Rosetta is a less sophisticated version than the one used on NH. I'm wondering what enhanchements were made to Alice fitted on New Horizons.

Posted by: hendric Apr 18 2005, 03:03 AM

Alan,
Has your team determined plans for availability of raw images on the web? I know the first encounter is still quite a ways away, but I'm hoping you continue the trend of MER and Cassini. pancam.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Apr 18 2005, 03:50 AM

New Horizons Alice has more redundancy. It also has a different passband (465-1880 A
for Pluto, vis 700-2050 A) and better optics. Most importantly, Pluto-Alice has a Solar Occultation Channel to probe the atmosphere with the powerful UV beam from the Sun.

Posted by: djellison Apr 18 2005, 08:42 AM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Apr 17 2005, 09:46 PM)
Just  for fun, see attached.
*


OK - who's is the Frankenstein poster smile.gif

I remember seing an inflatable alien during MPL ATLO, but this is something else biggrin.gif

Doug

Posted by: Alan Stern Apr 18 2005, 11:05 AM

QUOTE (djellison @ Apr 18 2005, 08:42 AM)
QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Apr 17 2005, 09:46 PM)
Just  for fun, see attached.
*


OK - who's is the Frankenstein poster smile.gif

I remember seing an inflatable alien during MPL ATLO, but this is something else biggrin.gif

Doug
*




That's a safety poster; I don't know who put it up-- probably QA.

Posted by: djellison Apr 18 2005, 12:06 PM

'Always destatic yourself before touching the spacecraft or Health and Safety will put a bolt thru your neck'

wink.gif

Doug

Posted by: Jim Apr 20 2005, 02:09 AM

QUOTE (djellison @ Apr 18 2005, 06:06 AM)
'Always destatic yourself before touching the spacecraft or Health and Safety will put a bolt thru your neck'

;)

Doug
*



Correct. It is a Quality Assurance poster warning of the danger of static to parts and systems. There are many copies on the walls at APL where the spacecraft is being assembled.

Posted by: paxdan Apr 21 2005, 07:58 AM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Apr 18 2005, 12:05 PM)
QUOTE (djellison @ Apr 18 2005, 08:42 AM)
QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Apr 17 2005, 09:46 PM)
Just  for fun, see attached.
*


OK - who's is the Frankenstein poster smile.gif

I remember seing an inflatable alien during MPL ATLO, but this is something else biggrin.gif

Doug
*




That's a safety poster; I don't know who put it up-- probably QA.
*



Frakenstein poster? ahh that's a 'remember to keep the bolts tight or we'll have your head poster'.
d'oh

double d'oh

Posted by: Alan Stern May 5 2005, 01:50 PM

From alan@boulder.swri.edu Thu May 5 07:42:31 2005
Date: Wed, 5 May 2005 11:53:53 -0600 (MDT)
From: Alan Stern-- SwRI/Boulder <alan@boulder.swri.edu>

Subject: New Horizons News for Science Team at T-250 days

04 May 2005



CoIs, Collaborators,

Tomorrow will mark an interesting milestone: New Horizons will be 250 days
from launch window opening. Considering we started in late December 2000,
over 1830 days from the 11 Jan 2006 launch window opening, some 85% of the
total time to launch has now elapsed. Of the 251 days to go, some 31 are
currently uncommitted (reserve) days, which is promising.

The New Horizons spacecraft is now put together, with its full structure,
all of the instruments, the propulsion system, and all of its flight
avionics on the bird. All that is missing are a few heaters and
temperature sensors, some balance weights, and the MLI blankets. (Truth be
told, LORRI is off undergoing an LVDS repair, but will be on again by
Friday.) The remaining closeout panels on the spacecraft will be installed
next week in prep for environmental testing.

The spacecraft had a very successful, 5-day long dry run of its standard,
Comprehensive Performance Test (CPT) last week. There are about
80 separate tests that comprise the CPT procedure. Although many small
glitches occurred in the dry run CPT, the overall performance was very,
very good. Most issues were just "cockpit" errors in the ground system or
checklist procedures. The APL team is proceeding toward a "for score" CPT
that will begin in just a few days; a strong passing score is required on
this test to move to environmental testing. Between the dry run CPT and
the for score CPT, mission ops conducted the first long mission sim
(MSIM-1), which also went very well. There is very good confidence at APL
that the for score CPT will be another success.

Upcoming events for the spacecraft this month include heater and MLI
blanket installation, the Pre-Environmental Review (18-19 May), and then
the entry into environmental testing beginning with shake testing on or
about May 20th.

Meanwhile, our own Atlas V (AV-010) is taking shape in Denver and the
third stage is taking shape in Decatur.

Consider where we are and then consider this: Since we started our
proposal effort, 4.5 years have elapsed. In that time span we have
negotiated the funding battles, designed and built a spacecraft and
instrument payload, we have an RTG that is almost ready to fuel, and we
have a launch vehicle that is deep in production (and on schedule).
And all of this has been done without a slip to 2007 or any descoping
of the scientific payload. Now consider this: our predecessor, PKE, spent
almost this long in study phase alone, and never reached PDR. New
Horizons is setting a good example for how to make NASA's Pluto-Kuiper
Belt mission happen.

That said, we are not out of the woods, of course. As our I&T lead
Mike Colby has said, "We've made a lot of progress, but that doesn't
mean we're ahead." Like most missions at this stage, we still have a lot
of work left to go at many places around the nation. And we still have to
be ever vigilant that we don't make mistakes around the hardware.

With the spacecraft complete and moving toward environmental testing. NASA
HQ will hold a major Go/NoGo decision meeting on 25 May for the 2006
launch window. The preparations for that meeting are beginning this week.

With the spacecraft and RTG doing so well, the primary schedule concern at
this point has to be Launch Approval for the RTG. The launch approval
schedule currently has negative slack (it shows an earliest launch about
15 days into the launch window), but NASA and DOE are working to compress
the LA schedule without sacrificing safety. I am optimistic that this will
work itself out, but a lot has to still be done.

And the meeting on 25 May is key. We do not want to fuel the RTG for a
2006 launch if we can't make 2006, since that would compromise the power
situation for 2007 (once the RTG is capped off, it can't be reopened to
add new fuel if a slip to 2007 were to occur). We also do not want to slip
to 2007 if it can be avoided. I am optimistic in this regard as well, but
the meeting on May 25th is not pro forma, and its outcome depends in
part on whether the events of the next three weeks go as well as
things went the past few weeks.

The entire project team under Glen Fountain, Tim Herder, and their
lieutenants continues an amazing performance. Not many people gave New
Horizons a good shot at 2006 in 2001, or in 2002, or 2003 or 2004, or even
as recently as this past February, but here we are: 250 days to launch
window opening with an excellent chance of getting launched for a 2015
arrival.

We all owe Glen, his predecessor Tom Coughlin, and the *entire* APL Space
Department team a great debt of thanks. We also owe the instrument
teams under Bill Gibson's guidance our thanks. And we owe all of the folks
working at DOE, Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, KinetX, and DSN our sincere
thanks for the job they are doing to see the exploration of Pluto and the
Kuiper Belt initiated. And that goes for the folks at NASA MSFC and HQ too.

As I have said before: "The road to Pluto isn't paved with bricks; it's paved with
long hours;" and one thing is for sure: the people working on New Horizons have
been putting a lot of long hours of late.

Onward, to 2006! Go New Horizons!

-Alan

Posted by: gpurcell May 5 2005, 05:02 PM

Alan, are you getting any sense that Kaiko and the rest of the crowd that protested Cassini have an interest in protesting this mission?

Posted by: Alan Stern May 5 2005, 10:40 PM

QUOTE (gpurcell @ May 5 2005, 05:02 PM)
Alan, are you getting any sense that Kaiko and the rest of the crowd that protested Cassini have an interest in protesting this mission?
*



Yes, they have said they will try to stop New Horizons.

Posted by: deglr6328 May 6 2005, 03:24 AM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ May 5 2005, 10:40 PM)
QUOTE (gpurcell @ May 5 2005, 05:02 PM)
Alan, are you getting any sense that Kaiko and the rest of the crowd that protested Cassini have an interest in protesting this mission?
*



Yes, they have said they will try to stop New Horizons.
*




What is Kaku's deal anyway? rolleyes.gif I mean he's a physicist! He should know better! I remember once listening to the (ever horrible, for way too many reasons to list here!) Art Bell show years ago when he was on and he was just going right along with all of Art's wacky alien/time travel/ghosts crap. I specifically remember being very surprised at his lack of appropriate skepticism. He's obviously an extremely brilliant guy...I don't know....tough one to figure out.....maybe he's just a bit of a media whore? (can I say that?) blink.gif

Posted by: tedstryk May 6 2005, 03:42 AM

QUOTE (deglr6328 @ May 6 2005, 03:24 AM)
QUOTE (Alan Stern @ May 5 2005, 10:40 PM)
QUOTE (gpurcell @ May 5 2005, 05:02 PM)
Alan, are you getting any sense that Kaiko and the rest of the crowd that protested Cassini have an interest in protesting this mission?
*



Yes, they have said they will try to stop New Horizons.
*




What is Kaku's deal anyway? rolleyes.gif I mean he's a physicist! He should know better! I remember once listening to the (ever horrible, for way too many reasons to list here!) Art Bell show years ago when he was on and he was just going right along with all of Art's wacky alien/time travel/ghosts crap. I specifically remember being very surprised at his lack of appropriate skepticism. He's obviously an extremely brilliant guy...I don't know....tough one to figure out.....maybe he's just a bit of a media whore? (can I say that?) blink.gif
*



Alternatively, one can always be talented and yet insane...that might describe him best!

Posted by: chuckyvt May 8 2005, 09:00 PM

Congradulations Alan on making New Horizons a reality. I"m keeping my fingers crossed for a 2006 launch. I haven't heard much regarding the RTGs in a while. Do you expect to get the originally planned power output? Or do you think you'll have to launch with something lower? Oh, and for everyone else, if you haven't read already, you should read Alan's comments posted on the New Horizons website. Very interesting!
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/overview/piPerspective_current.html

Posted by: Alan Stern May 9 2005, 11:31 AM

QUOTE (chuckyvt @ May 8 2005, 09:00 PM)
Congradulations Alan on making New Horizons a reality.  I"m keeping my fingers crossed for a 2006 launch.  I haven't heard much regarding the RTGs in a while.    Do you expect to get the originally planned power output?  Or do you think you'll have to launch with something lower?  Oh, and for everyone else, if you haven't read already, you should read Alan's comments posted on the New Horizons website.  Very interesting!   
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/overview/piPerspective_current.html
*


The problem was solved. We're going to have 190-192 W at Pluto for a 2015 arrival.
This is roughly 85% of our best case expectation, and certainly sufficient to confidently
power the s/c through the encounter and playback.

Posted by: Bob Shaw May 9 2005, 03:34 PM

Alan:

Glad to hear you guys got the fuel!

What's the notional post-Pluto lifespan of the vehicle with 85% RTG fill? Are we loloking at a (possible) longevity to rival Pioneer/Voyager, and, if so, what distant science might be achieved?

(Answers on a postcard, please!)

Posted by: Alan Stern May 10 2005, 02:41 AM

QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ May 9 2005, 03:34 PM)
Alan:

Glad to hear you guys got the fuel!

What's the notional post-Pluto lifespan of the vehicle with 85% RTG fill? Are we loloking at a (possible) longevity to rival Pioneer/Voyager, and, if so, what distant science might be achieved?

(Answers on a postcard, please!)
*


It depends on when we launch and how fast we travel. The best case is a Jan 2006
launch with a JGA; we should make 50 AU w/o heroics. Of course, this assumes the s/c performs as planned. Ask me again in two years.

-Alan

Posted by: Alan Stern May 21 2005, 03:05 PM

Subject: New Horizons Update

20 May 2005


Science Team,

New Horizons continues to make big strides forward.

The spacecraft is fully assembled now. NH successfully completed its baseline CPT
(Comprehensive Performance Test) on 11 May.

The first mission sim (MSIM-1, lasting 5 days, as planned) was so successful that some of the objectives of MSIM-2 were also accomplished. The remainder of MSIM-2 will be conducted in early and mid-June.

On May 18-19 the New Horizons team sat before the Pre-Environmental Review (PER) board, consisting of reviewers from APL, JPL, SwRI, GSFC, and consultants. The PER review was successful, and new Horizons will enter environmental testing next week.

Shake testing is first. The spacecraft will move to NASA/Goddard in two weeks for
acoustics, spin balance, and thermal vacuum testing. This will continue all summer.

Progress on the flight RTG, third stage, and launcher are also proceeding well.

The Go-NoGo decision meeting at NASA-HQ is set for this coming Wednesday. Both the project and the Program office are recommending a Go. The final decision is up to NASA HQ.

I'll keep you informed of further news as events warrant.

Onward, to 2006!
-Alan

Posted by: lyford May 21 2005, 06:29 PM

Alan -

Thanks for the update - this is exciting news...
Good luck on Wednesday and Bon Yoyage New Horizons!

Excelsior! laugh.gif

Posted by: Analyst May 24 2005, 03:19 PM

Alan,

thanks for this update.

I'm sure you do everthing you can to calibrate LORRI. With it's long focal lenth it is probably very sensitive to thermal changes and contamination. I have the recent problems with Deep Impact and the high resolution channel on ESA's Mars Express in my mind. Hopefully you can learn from these mistakes.

But who am I, telling you your business. smile.gif I simply don't want blurred pictures. wink.gif

Analyst

Posted by: Chmee May 24 2005, 03:32 PM

Yes, please no blurred images or star navigation. We wouldn't want to go off path and do a "litho"-braking on Pluto, making it a Kuipler-belt version of Deep Impact smile.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Jul 8 2005, 08:10 PM

An updated NH mission background and current status presentation, replete with
some nice eye candy, can be found as the topmost link at www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb

Posted by: djellison Jul 8 2005, 10:40 PM

Lovely pic of the near-complete spacecraft on slide 3, and great shot of the spin test on 41. Sound like everything is on schedule, much better and you'd be shooing MRO out the way to make room at the Atlas LC smile.gif

You look at the cutaway drawing of the launch vehcile and I honestly cant remember the payload being a smaller percentage of the LV - it really highlights just how much energy is required.

Doug

Posted by: Alan Stern Jul 9 2005, 01:19 AM

Doug,

As small as spacecraft as you can get away with and as large a launcher as
an Atlas V plus the STAR-48, and the combination is SPEED! We cross the orbit
of the Moon in 9 hours-- about 10x faster than Apollo trips (3 days). We're
at Jupiter in 13 months-- the previous record is 17 months.

Of course, we still have a great deal to do before we can fly...

-Alan

Posted by: edstrick Jul 9 2005, 07:54 AM

I THINK the Pioneer Jupiter missions crossed the Moon's orbit in 10 or 11 hours. Light spacecraft, on an Atlas Centaur with a solid fuel kick stage. "Bat out of Hell" trajectory.

Posted by: SFJCody Jul 9 2005, 11:58 AM

When will New Horizons exceed Voyager 1's distance from the Sun?

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Jul 10 2005, 08:10 AM

QUOTE (edstrick @ Jul 9 2005, 07:54 AM)
I THINK the Pioneer Jupiter missions crossed the Moon's orbit in 10 or 11 hours.  Light spacecraft, on an Atlas Centaur with a solid fuel kick stage.  "Bat out of Hell" trajectory.
*


They did indeed -- 10 hours in the case of Pioneer 10, I distinctly remember -- and so did the Voyagers and Ulysses. New Horizons, however, will be moving out faster than any of them. (Ulysses currently holds the record for short travel time to Jupiter -- 16 months, not 17 as Alan Stern said -- and Voyager 1 is second at 18 months.)

Posted by: MiniTES Jul 14 2005, 02:28 PM

Alan: Do you and the science team plan to (or have you not thought about it yet) share the raw NH images with the public as soon as they're downlinked, as the Cassini and MER teams do?

Posted by: djellison Jul 14 2005, 02:51 PM

QUOTE (MiniTES @ Jul 14 2005, 02:28 PM)
Alan: Do you and the science team plan to (or have you not thought about it yet) share the raw NH images with the public as soon as they're downlinked, as the Cassini and MER teams do?
*


And if you do - could you consult people here w.r.t. whatever the 'stretching' algorythm might be for them smile.gif

As we so often find with MER / Cassini imagery - a badly stretched image is not worth much more than no image at all sad.gif

doug

Posted by: Alan Stern Jul 14 2005, 05:59 PM

QUOTE (MiniTES @ Jul 14 2005, 02:28 PM)
Alan: Do you and the science team plan to (or have you not thought about it yet) share the raw NH images with the public as soon as they're downlinked, as the Cassini and MER teams do?
*



Yes, that is the plan. But as to how we will mechanize it, ask in 2012 or so. It's a wee
bit early to be worrying that detail.

-Alan

Posted by: DEChengst Jul 14 2005, 06:51 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Jul 14 2005, 07:59 PM)
Yes, that is the plan. But as to how we will mechanize it, ask in 2012 or so. It's a wee bit early to be worrying that detail.
*


But the Jupiter fly-by will be much earlier than that. Feb 2007 is close enough for me to start worrying wink.gif

Posted by: MiniTES Jul 14 2005, 07:01 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Jul 8 2005, 08:10 PM)
An updated NH mission background and current status presentation, replete with
some nice eye candy, can be found as the topmost link at www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb
*


Good slideshow -
I note that there's an image of the spacecraft being spun around in environmental testing. You wouldn't happen to have a video of that test by any chance? cool.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Jul 15 2005, 06:13 AM

QUOTE (MiniTES @ Jul 14 2005, 07:01 PM)
Good slideshow -
I note that there's an image of the spacecraft being spun around in environmental testing. You wouldn't happen to have a video of that test by any chance?  cool.gif
*


I don't. Maybe I can turn one up when I get back from my Maine
vacation in 10 days.

Posted by: Comga Jul 16 2005, 04:54 PM

Another great image is in the July 11 issue of Aviation Week on page 17. It points out Ralph and Alice. Although small, if you look closely and use the SwRI slideshow as a guide, you can see the other external instruments, SWAP and PEPSSI, on the far side. (The LORRI door is closed.) Such a handsome craft.

After talking about the great progress being made, the short article also discusses the power situation, saying that the electrical power available at encounter will be 120W, vs an original plan of 190W. Is this an accurate current projection?

Posted by: Alan Stern Jul 17 2005, 12:25 PM

The numbers in the AvWeek article are not correct.

Our original expectation was 225 W at 2015.5 (the best case Pluto encounter date).
The problems at LANL prevented this from obtaining.

At one point it looked as bad as 150 W at 2015.5. The spacecraft requires about
165 W to run the encounter, counting an allocation for the payload. As a result
of some very good work at DOE, we now have an expectation of 192+/-2W at
2015.5, which is perfectly adequate.

Posted by: Decepticon Jul 17 2005, 12:43 PM

Does the gravity assist at jupiter cross within the 4 major moons?

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Jul 17 2005, 12:51 PM

No -- it's a short distance outside Callisto's orbit. Had it been launched in the previous window in Dec. 2004, it could have made a close flyby of Europa; had it been launched in the one before that in Nov. 2003, it could have made a close flyby of Io. Yet more lost as a result of Dan Goldin's idiocy.

Posted by: tedstryk Jul 17 2005, 01:00 PM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Jul 17 2005, 12:51 PM)
No -- it's a short distance outside Callisto's orbit.  Had it been launched in the previous window in Dec. 2004, it could have made a close flyby of Europa; had it been launched in the one before that in Nov. 2003, it could have made a close flyby of Io.  Yet more lost as a result of Dan Goldin's idiocy.
*

I hope that Callisto is in that part of its orbit at the time.

Posted by: lyford Jul 17 2005, 04:31 PM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Jul 17 2005, 04:51 AM)
Yet more lost as a result of Dan Goldin's idiocy.
*

Well, you can't deny the man did leave his mark upon space exploration! (Though not with the legacy he was hoping for I would imagine... tongue.gif )

Missing targeting opportunities like this are an almost unforgivable sin, especially on these "once per professional lifetime" type missions. Losing these fly bys means less science for the buck, an irony so glaring as to be obvious even to The Dan.

His Let's Give Murphy's Law A Head Start Program, also known as Better, Faster, Cheaper was directly at odds with choosing hi-profile PR one off missions. Decreased funding meant decreased testing and missed design flaws; leading to such innovative solutions as the Genesis probe's lithobraking and advances in deconvolving algorithms for imagery.

Perhaps I will start a Better Faster Cheaper rant topic elsewhere, I apologize for topic hijack.

And thanks again to Alan for visiting us and relating all the good news as it happens!

Posted by: GBTO Jul 17 2005, 04:38 PM

I have been following this forum (as well as ISSDG/Jupiter List and volcanopele's blog) for awhile now (great work by all!) and it's my first post.

The question I have is, re: NH - according to the paper on RH telecom design (DeBoy, C. C. et al. (2005). The New Horizons mission to Pluto: Advances in telecommunication system design. Acta Astronautica), the theoretical possiblity exists for NH to use both TWTA for downlink, resulting in a 44% reduction of downlinking time. Are there any concrete plans for such a capability to be used, esp. immediately after the encounter so that a larger browse dataset can be downlinked back?

Also, re: RALPH, has all the problems with the instrument been more or less dealt with (to a large extent)? I recall reading about LEISA having serious SNR/electronics problems during the optical tests, which when translated to the encouter, could have lead to fatal problems. Thanks!

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Jul 17 2005, 09:26 PM

Well, I have no objection to the "smaller and more frequent" part of "Better, Faster, Cheaper" -- since it means that you lose less from an individual failure due to a design flaw. (Mars Observer cost more than the next 4 US Mars missions combined.) Unfortunately, while this was a very good idea on Goldin's part, it seems to have been his ONLY good idea. (And its advent was probably inevitable at some point after the Challenger disaster had ruined NASA's earlier plans to require ALL US spacecraft to be launched on Shuttles, by the simple technique of making them too big to be launched on anything else.)

As for the Pluto probe: I learned at the 2000 meeting of the Solar System Exploration Subcommittee that he didn't want to fly it at all. All his repeated demands to go back and make the spacecraft even smaller than the last design team had made it were just his way of clandestinely killing it -- "Nobody gives a damn about Pluto", he told one aide. He was totally obsessed with astrobiology instead -- and while it remains my main reason (and that of a lot of other folks) for being interested in space exploration, he ran it into the ground.

Posted by: lyford Jul 17 2005, 10:31 PM

hi Bruce, I think I had heard that story about Goldin and Pluto... amazing, really. I would be interested in hearing more about your take on some other bits if I can talk Doug into starting an exploration strategies topic... smile.gif

I am just glad that he didn't succeed in stopping this mission, if that was his preference!

EDIT: (I started a http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=1158 topic over in EVA if anyone cares to join me... smile.gif )

Posted by: Bob Shaw Jul 23 2005, 11:29 PM

New Scientist has an interesting article this week about the possibility of a number of reasonably large unfound planets (total mass: sub-Mars) in the region between Pluto and the Oort Cloud. It describes a plausible explanation (the 'Oligarch' theory) for some of the more extreme orbital strangenesses out there, and gives some examples of search strategies etc.

My questions relate to this, and probably I'm hoping that Alan, or perhaps Bruce, can answer:

If an object is identified then what are the constraints on imaging it from New Horizons? At what point in the extended mission will images become impossible (I presume that we'll end up with some very low temperatures and a broken camera). By imaging, I mean anything up from a star-like dot - I'm not expecting pretty pictures!

I presume that if an object was identified before the Pluto encounter then the spacecraft might be retargetted, and that there would be a fair 'spread' of space which might be reached. However, if any sort of slingshot wasn't carried out (perhaps due to any putative body not being discovered in time, or a desire to maximise Pluto/Charon science, or (gasp!) no money) then what sort of maneuvering capability would New Horizons be likely to have by then? I expect that it'd be very slight, and hardly likely to allow much retargetting, but would just like to know for sure!

Posted by: garybeau Jul 24 2005, 01:15 PM

Bob,
Some good information at the NSSDC here... http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=NHORIZONS

"After passing by Pluto, New Horizons will be headed out to the Kuiper Belt where multiple Kuiper Belt Objects on the order of 50-100 km in diameter are expected to be targeted for encounter and similar measurements to those made at Pluto. This phase of the mission will last from 5 to 10 years. "

If they have the capability to image 50-100 kilometer objects, sub-Mars size objects should be a piece of cake. When they refer to "targeted", surely they must be talking visually only. By the time they reach Pluto, there won't be enough hydrazine left to do much of a course correction and flying 9600 kilometers at closest approach to Pluto won't allow for much of a gravity assist.
But it is big open space out there, and the sooner they spot something the more options they have.

Gary

Posted by: john_s Jul 24 2005, 01:49 PM

QUOTE (garybeau @ Jul 24 2005, 01:15 PM)
Bob,
Some good information at the NSSDC here... http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=NHORIZONS

"After passing by Pluto, New Horizons will be headed out to the Kuiper Belt where multiple Kuiper Belt Objects on the order of 50-100 km in diameter are expected to be targeted for encounter and similar measurements to those made at Pluto. This phase of the mission will last from 5 to 10 years. "

If they have the capability to image 50-100 kilometer objects, sub-Mars size objects should be a piece of cake. When they refer to "targeted", surely they must be talking visually only. By the time they reach Pluto, there won't be enough hydrazine left to do much of a course correction and flying 9600 kilometers at closest approach to Pluto won't allow for much of a gravity assist.
But it is big open space out there, and the sooner they spot something the more options they have.

Gary
*


We are hoping for a close encounter with at least one Kuiper Belt Object- we hope to have enough hydrazine after Pluto to target at least one small one. Small ones are easier to target simply because there are more of them so less of a course correction is likely to be needed to get to the closest one. We are currently conducting a search for suitable KBOs along our probable trajectory with the Subaru telescope on Mauna Kea. The KBO encounter is however dependent on having enough hydrazine, and we won't know till after launch whether we'll have the fuel to do it.

But the key is being able to get close with a targeted encounter, within ten thousand kilometers or so. We probably won't be able to do anything useful with large KBOs, except perhaps measuring their brightness at high phase angles, simply because they are few and far between and at our likely closest approach to any of them we still won't be able to compete with ground-based telescopes. Our telescope aperture of a few inches at a range of a few AU can't compete with a 10-meter terrestrial telescope 40 AU away.

Posted by: garybeau Jul 25 2005, 11:41 PM

QUOTE (john_s @ Jul 24 2005, 08:49 AM)
We are hoping for a close encounter with at least one Kuiper Belt Object- we hope to have enough hydrazine after Pluto to target at least one small one.


Even if you still have half the hydrazine left after the encounter with Pluto, that would give you less than one degree of course correction. (If I did my math right)
And since the spacecraft at that point will be 2-1/2 degrees out of the plane of the solar system, wouldn't that make an encounter with a kbo fairly unlikely?

Gary

Posted by: john_s Jul 25 2005, 11:49 PM

QUOTE (garybeau @ Jul 25 2005, 11:41 PM)
Even if you still have half the hydrazine left after the encounter with Pluto, that would give you less than one degree of course correction. (If I did my math right)
And since the spacecraft at that point will be 2-1/2 degrees out of the plane of the solar system, wouldn't that make an encounter with a kbo fairly unlikely?

Gary
*


We've done the numbers and we have a decent chance of finding a KBO even within that narrow cone, and accounting for the latitude of the spacecraft. We simply have to chose one of the smaller, more abundant, objects.

Posted by: alan Aug 4 2005, 04:43 AM

Hurry up and launch it before someone decides Pluto isn't a planet any longer.

Posted by: tfisher Aug 30 2005, 03:26 AM

Question: is the final trajectory for the new horizons probe elliptical or hyperbolic? I would have thought that it would be going fast enough to escape (11km/s past pluto is faster than the 6.7km/s escape velocity I get for out there, at least if you're going mostly away from the sun at the time) but a slashdot article today is suggesting it will return to 1au in 50,000 years or so. So what's right?

Posted by: antoniseb Aug 30 2005, 07:44 PM

QUOTE (tfisher @ Aug 29 2005, 10:26 PM)
a slashdot article today is suggesting it  will return to 1au in 50,000 years or so. 


Hmmm. I'm guessing SlashDot is wrong here. The SlashDot article has one sentence saying it will return, but I've never before heard that it isn't on an escape trajectory. The NH website doesn't even say what the flyby velocity of Pluto is, so there's no way to tell from that site. I've seen other places saying 11 km/sec for the flyby, but I don't know if this takes into account that Pluto is already travelling a few km/sec outbound as this mission is arriving well past preihelion for Pluto. The outbound velocity might be 13-16 km/sec.

I would imagine that NH would not end up returning to 1AU, since after the encounter with Jupiter, it will have a perihelion closer to five AU.

If the galaxy were not filled with gravitational knots (other stars), you might expect the Voyagers and Pioneers to return in 225 million years.

Posted by: Alan Stern Aug 31 2005, 10:35 AM

New Horizons is on a one-way trip, outward bound.

The planned trajectory is hyperbolic from the solar system. The flyby
speed at Pluto depends on the arrival year. For a 2006 Jan launch and a 2015 July arrival, it is about 13 km/sec.

-Alan

Posted by: Bob Shaw Aug 31 2005, 10:50 AM

QUOTE (antoniseb @ Aug 30 2005, 08:44 PM)
If the galaxy were not filled with gravitational knots (other stars), you might expect the Voyagers and Pioneers to return in 225 million years.
*


Are you saying that the Voyagers are *not* on hyperpolic trajectories?

Until these posts, I've always been under the impression that all four of the distant human spacecraft were travelling at above Solar escape velocity...

Posted by: djellison Aug 31 2005, 10:51 AM

That 225 million years involves an orbit...around the galaxy smile.gif

Doug

Posted by: Bob Shaw Aug 31 2005, 11:00 AM

QUOTE (djellison @ Aug 31 2005, 11:51 AM)
That 225 million years involves an orbit...around the galaxy smile.gif

Doug
*



Doug:

That, I can accept!

And obviously, it'll be perturbed to hell and back by then, so Adios, Amigo!

Bob Shaw

Posted by: Marcel Aug 31 2005, 11:01 AM

Something different; I'm curious about how much fuel NH would have to take to be able to do a POI-burn. Probably a lot considering it's velocity.

Posted by: djellison Aug 31 2005, 11:32 AM

Well, a low circular orbit of say, 100km around pluto would require...
umm

a=v^2/R f=MA f=gM1M2/R^2...

UMM

ahh

right

boil all that down and basically the orbital velocity of any spacecraft is....

Sqrt of G M1 / r

where G is newtons tiny number, M1 is the mass of the body ( pluto ) and r = radius from the centre of the body

I get 865 m/sec for an orbital velocity - so you'd have to have a delta V of 12.1km/sec - Consider MRO, which is 50% fuel by mass - and can manage a Delta V of about 1km/sec ohmy.gif

Of course - if you broke into a very eliptical orbit - it would be less delta V than that - but that maths is beyond me smile.gif

Doug

Posted by: Marcel Aug 31 2005, 12:00 PM

SO:

At roughly 400 kg's of (dry) mass, that would mean it has to descellerate roughly 20 % of MRO's mass....which will consume a fifth of 1100 kg's of fuel, being 220 kg's for each delta V of 1 km/s for NH.

Times 12,1 (or do i forget an exponent here ?) means 2660 kg's of hydrazine, which would make NH 3 tons in total.

I'll forget about it.

Posted by: djellison Aug 31 2005, 12:22 PM

But then - at the beginning of that burn, you're having to decellerate 3 tons as well wink.gif

It's called the rocket equation I believe, cant remember the specifics of it - but it's the equation that tells us that at launch, not only is a rocket launching it's payload, but it's launching all it's fuel as well - which gets consumed en route.
Put it this way - 12km/s is 60% MORE than the speed required to orbit the earth - and you have some very mighty rockets to start doing that smile.gif

Doug

Posted by: Marcel Aug 31 2005, 12:48 PM

QUOTE (djellison @ Aug 31 2005, 12:22 PM)
But then - at the beginning of that burn, you're having to decellerate 3 tons as well wink.gif

It's called the rocket equation I believe, cant remember the specifics of it - but it's the equation that tells us that at launch, not only is a rocket launching it's payload, but it's launching all it's fuel as well - which gets consumed en route.
Put it this way - 12km/s is 60% MORE than the speed required to orbit the earth - and you have some very mighty rockets to start doing that smile.gif

Doug
*

I knew i forgot about that while i was writing (you have to bring the fuel you need later on, which costs energy as well). But roughly we could say, that it would have to be an inverted delta II or something like that.

Why not brake gentle after jupiters assist with an ion thruster or something and ooze in orbit by just the right speed and angle ? Why do these OI burns always have to be so brute and violent just before passing the target ?

Posted by: Ames Aug 31 2005, 01:02 PM

QUOTE (Marcel @ Aug 31 2005, 01:48 PM)
I knew i forgot about that while i was writing (you have to bring the fuel you need later on, which costs energy as well). But roughly we could say, that it would have to be an inverted delta II or something like that.

Why not brake gentle after jupiters assist with an ion thruster or something and ooze in orbit by just the right speed and angle ? Why do these OI burns always have to be so brute and violent just before passing the target ?
*


If you used an ion thruster it would add years to the mission. It has taken Hayabusa months to approach its target gently.

Nick

Posted by: djellison Aug 31 2005, 01:17 PM

give a deceleration of 1 mN on 400kg - you've got an acceleration of 0.0000025 m/s^2

So the 12km/sec would take about 152 years ohmy.gif

Doug

Posted by: Marcel Aug 31 2005, 01:49 PM

QUOTE (djellison @ Aug 31 2005, 01:17 PM)
give a deceleration of 1 mN on 400kg - you've got an acceleration of 0.0000025 m/s^2

So the 12km/sec would take about 152 years ohmy.gif

Doug
*

huh.gif

I wonder then how they'll manage to get the probe as described in the "far out" thread to 100 km/s with ion thrusters within a scientists lifetime. Stack em up probably !

Let's forget about orbitting Pluto. It's too expensive and way out of proportion. A flyby within my lifetime would be perfect for me: i am wondering about what it looks like there since i could read.

Posted by: antoniseb Aug 31 2005, 04:37 PM

QUOTE (Marcel @ Aug 31 2005, 06:01 AM)
how much fuel NH would have to take to be able to do a POI-burn.

Keep in mind that for this scenario to work, NH would need to be on an elliptical orbit with a aphelion at Pluto's expected location. That would be a very slow journey.

Posted by: Jeff7 Aug 31 2005, 10:01 PM

What about a space-based launch? This'd assume a stable space station, like the ISS's descendant, and preferably one a bit higher than the ISS. Maybe a few launches of main modules, assemble in space, and send it on its way.
Even so, it'd need to be big (like, probably larger than Cassini), but at least the problem of a launch vehicle wouldn't be an issue.


That aside, I'd still love to strap an ion engine onto New Horizons and switch it on once the Pluto flyby is done. Fling the thing outta here fast.

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Aug 31 2005, 10:19 PM

The main problem with low-thrust orbiters for the really distant outer Solar System is that, after you thrust for a long time to get to the planet fast, you then have to thrust just as long to slow down the flyby speed enough to be able to brake into orbit around the planet when you get there. Unless, that is, you have a planet with a substantial atmosphere -- such as Uranus or Neptune -- in which case you can have the best of both worlds: use an ion drive to ram the probe into the outer Solar System rapidly, and then eject the ion-drive module just before arrival and use aerocapture to brake into orbit around the planet. Which, in fact, is exactly what JPL plans to do in its current Neptune Orbiter design.

You might, perhaps, be able to do that at Pluto, using a ballute, if you get there before the extremely thin atmosphere freezes out. (JPL is seriously considering adding a modest-sized Triton soft-lander to the Neptune Orbiter, having discovered that most of the lander's preliminary braking can be done by skimming through Triton's extremely thin air with a ballute that would be quite low-mass.) But in Pluto's case, there's a real chance that the air WILL have frozen out by the time you get there. In any case, the important thing to do with KBOs -- including Pluto -- is to examine as large an assortment of them as possible, rather than spending large amounts of money focusing on just one (even one as relatively distinctive as Pluto).

Posted by: tedstryk Sep 1 2005, 12:38 AM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Aug 31 2005, 10:19 PM)
But in Pluto's case, there's a real chance that the air WILL have frozen out by the time you get there.  In any case, the important thing to do with KBOs -- including Pluto -- is to examine as large an assortment of them as possible, rather than spending large amounts of money focusing on just one (even one as relatively distinctive as Pluto).
*


In fact, Pluto, unlike the other large KBOs we know, may suffer from the same problem Triton does, if to a lesser degree. Namely, it is a binary, and as such, tidal heating may have melted it enough that it is no longer truely representative of a primitive KBO.

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Sep 1 2005, 03:13 AM

It is considered unlikely that even the impact that broke off Charon (let alone the tidal effects afterwards) heated Pluto as much as Triton was heated. (It was probably a much slower-speed collision than the one that created our Moon.) But there may indeed be differences between Pluto and KBOs undamaged by collisions, albeit much smaller than the differences produced by the tidal heating that totally melted Triton -- and so, once again, a broad sample of KBOs is indeed important.

(Note that the 2002 Decadal Survey actually listed a survey of multiple KBOs as a MORE important scientific goal for New Horizons than studying Pluto specifically.)

Posted by: JRehling Sep 1 2005, 04:28 AM

QUOTE (djellison @ Aug 31 2005, 04:32 AM)
Well, a low circular orbit of say, 100km around pluto would require...
umm
[...]
I get 865 m/sec for an orbital velocity - so you'd have to have a delta V of 12.1km/sec  - Consider MRO, which is 50% fuel by mass - and can manage a Delta V of about 1km/sec ohmy.gif

Of course - if you broke into a very eliptical orbit - it would be less delta V than that - but that maths is beyond me smile.gif

Doug
*


The most extreme elliptical orbit with a perihades (?) of 100 km would be the orbital velocity you derive times sqrt(2) (minus a tiny pinch so it doesn't quite escape). That would thus save about 300 m/sec off the 12.1 km/sec figure -- not a huge savings (2.5%). It's pretty obvious this isn't going to work unless the NH payload were the size of a pea.

Posted by: Rob Pinnegar Sep 1 2005, 05:37 AM

QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Aug 31 2005, 09:13 PM)
... (It was probably a much slower-speed collision than the one that created our Moon.)

It'd pretty much have to have been, eh? Breaking a chunk off Pluto is a whole lot easier than breaking a chunk off Earth. A major impact with the relative velocity of the "selenogenic" Earth impact probably would've blown Pluto apart.

Posted by: hendric Sep 1 2005, 06:30 AM

Such a large percentage of KBOs are binaries, what does that mean for the singletons that are left, since I assume most collisions would not form binaries, but create a bunch of smaller planetoids. IE, are there *any* "primitive" KBOs? What does "primitive" mean, anyway, if they all had to accrete by impacts?

Posted by: Cugel Sep 1 2005, 12:08 PM

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050901_pluto_update.html

Mission update.
It will take the probe 2 months to reach Jupiter!!!! Warp 4 or 5 I think....

Posted by: Marcel Sep 1 2005, 12:23 PM

huh.gif

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: ljk4-1 Sep 1 2005, 01:06 PM

QUOTE (Cugel @ Sep 1 2005, 07:08 AM)
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050901_pluto_update.html

Mission update.
It will take the probe 2 months to reach Jupiter!!!! Warp 4 or 5 I think....
*


On Star Trek: Enterprise, they went from Earth to Neptune in 6 seconds, so 2 whole months is kinda slow.

Posted by: maycm Sep 1 2005, 01:23 PM

QUOTE
...the Pluto Energetic Particle Spectrometer Investigation (PEPSSI), will search for neutral atoms that escape Pluto's atmosphere and subsequently become charged by their interaction with the solar wind.


I think they should have called it DIET COKE
Device for Investigating Energetic Traces of Charged Objects Kneeding (sorry) Explanation

A sponsorship opportunity missed I think. laugh.gif

Posted by: Mongo Sep 1 2005, 04:11 PM

QUOTE (Cugel @ Sep 1 2005, 12:08 PM)
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050901_pluto_update.html

Mission update.
It will take the probe 2 months to reach Jupiter!!!! Warp 4 or 5 I think....
*

According to the link now, it will take 13 months after launch to reach Jupiter. This is in line with estimates earlier on this thread.

Bill

Posted by: tedstryk Sep 1 2005, 08:33 PM

I don't know of another large KBO that is a binary (and by binary I mean has a moon that is a considerable percentage of its own size - I know lots of them have moons).
There are a lot of unknowns. And it has been suggested that tidal heating is a possiblity for Pluto/Charon as well.

Posted by: Bob Shaw Sep 1 2005, 09:11 PM

QUOTE (ljk4-1 @ Sep 1 2005, 02:06 PM)
On Star Trek: Enterprise, they went from Earth to Neptune in 6 seconds, so 2 whole months is kinda slow.
*


Yes, but New Horizons will be travelling onwards for decades, and Star Trk: Enterprise never made it into the next season...

...I'll bet on the tortoise!

Hehe.

Posted by: Bob Shaw Sep 1 2005, 09:12 PM

QUOTE (ljk4-1 @ Sep 1 2005, 02:06 PM)
On Star Trek: Enterprise, they went from Earth to Neptune in 6 seconds, so 2 whole months is kinda slow.
*


Yes, but New Horizons will be travelling onwards for decades, and Star Trek: Enterprise never made it into the next season...

...I'll bet on the tortoise!

Hehe.

Posted by: Rob Pinnegar Sep 2 2005, 02:19 PM

QUOTE (tedstryk @ Sep 1 2005, 02:33 PM)
There are a lot of unknowns.  And it has been suggested that tidal heating is a possiblity for Pluto/Charon as well.
*


I had been under the impression that tidal heating tends to dampen the eccentricity of a satellite's orbit, which implies that it can only last for a limited time before the orbit becomes nearly circular which removes the energy source. In Io's case (and Enceladus' too?) of course, this hasn't happened because the orbital resonances of those moons with other, larger moons force the orbital eccentricity.

So how could Pluto/Charon maintain tidal heating without a third large body in the system? Does this hypothesis assume that tidal heating only lasted for a short period after Charon's formation? Or are solar perturbations enough to keep Charon's orbit slightly elliptical?

Posted by: antoniseb Sep 2 2005, 03:22 PM

QUOTE (Rob Pinnegar @ Sep 2 2005, 09:19 AM)
So how could Pluto/Charon maintain tidal heating without a third large body in the system?
*


As far as third bodies go, does the Sun count? That seems to be working for the Earth-Moon system.

Posted by: RNeuhaus Sep 2 2005, 08:06 PM

Primary launch window for New Horizons is January 11 - February 14, 2006. If the spacecraft roars skyward within the first 18 days of that window, scooting by Jupiter for a gravity assist, it will reach Pluto in 2015.

"It’ll be the fastest spacecraft ever to Jupiter…13 months after launch," Stern said. "We pass the Moon in just nine hours."

Wow, just 9 hours to Moon blink.gif How fast travel the spaceship 400,000 km/9 hours = 44,444 k/h = 12.34 km/sec. The previous astronaut must bear more than 3 days to reach moon.

The nuclear powered spaceship with 20 years of operation is really cheap against a widelly published a relatively cheap Phoenix Scout with $386 million for only no more than 5 months. The cost of New Horizons, including the launch vehicle and operations through the Pluto-Charon encounter, will be roughly $650 million.

More information http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050901_pluto_update.html

If you want to send your name to Pluto!!! Visit and register at http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ecard/scripts/addSignaturesForm.php

Rodolfo

Posted by: ljk4-1 Sep 2 2005, 08:07 PM

QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Sep 2 2005, 03:06 PM)
Primary launch window for New Horizons is January 11 - February 14, 2006. If the spacecraft roars skyward within the first 18 days of that window, scooting by Jupiter for a gravity assist, it will reach Pluto in 2015.

"It’ll be the fastest spacecraft ever to Jupiter…13 months after launch," Stern said. "We pass the Moon in just nine hours."

Wow, just 9 hours to Moon  blink.gif  How fast travel the spaceship 400,000 km/9 hours = 44,444 k/h = 12.34 km/sec. The previous astronaut must bear more than 3 days to reach moon.

The nuclear powered spaceship with 20 years of operation is really cheap against a widelly published a relatively cheap Phoenix Scout with $386 million for only no more than 5 months.  The cost of New Horizons, including the launch vehicle and operations through the Pluto-Charon encounter, will be roughly $650 million.

More information http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050901_pluto_update.html

Rodolfo
*


Pioneer 10 took eleven whole hours to pass Luna's orbit in 1972.

Posted by: dvandorn Sep 2 2005, 08:10 PM

QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Sep 2 2005, 03:06 PM)
Wow, just 9 hours to Moon  blink.gif  How fast travel the spaceship 400,000 km/9 hours = 44,444 k/h = 12.34 km/sec. The previous astronaut must bear more than 3 days to reach moon.
*

As I recall, the fastest an Apollo ever traversed the distance between Earth and Moon was about 56 hours -- and that was Apollo 8's homeward journey. (With no LM, they had more fuel remaining when it came to TEI, and they burned a little longer to get home a little sooner.) However, due to vagaries of trajectories, the Apollo 10 crew were the fastest, reaching a slightly higher velocity just prior to entry interface than any other Apollo crew ever managed.

-the other Doug

Posted by: remcook Sep 3 2005, 10:24 AM

QUOTE
Wow, just 9 hours to Moon    How fast travel the spaceship 400,000 km/9 hours = 44,444 k/h = 12.34 km/sec. The previous astronaut must bear more than 3 days to reach moon.


The astronaut had the disadvantage that it tried to orbit or even land on the moon.

Posted by: RNeuhaus Sep 3 2005, 06:16 PM

As I am new with the space and am starting to understand about the space limitations.

Our actual problem is that with the present technology, the space must carry kilograms of combustion to space in order to break there (Hoffman Delta-V). It is understandable that it is very expensive to send extra kilograms to space for the breaking process. The solution must be that the space is able to generate braking force without having to carry the extra kilograms. Now, we have ion electric engine but it is not enough to break for a high speed of above than many kilometers/sec. Now I know at the present time there are many man working to overcome this.

Rodolfo

Posted by: remcook Sep 3 2005, 07:53 PM

QUOTE
Now, we have ion electric engine but it is not enough to break for a high speed of above than many kilometers/sec



Electric propulsion systems are exclusively low-thrust systems, meaning that you can never give an instant delta-V like with chemical propulsion systems.

If you want to orbit another body using low-thrust systems, you need to start breaking very early, or just arrive very gradually. See for instance the SMART-1 mission. It was captured by the moon after continuously increasing the size of the earth orbit.

The advantage of electric propulsion lies with its fuel-efficiency, i.e. you need far less fuel and can therefore reach much higher accelarations with the same fuel mass.

But I think we are drifting off-topic here. maybe good for another thread?

Posted by: antoniseb Sep 3 2005, 11:13 PM

QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Sep 2 2005, 03:06 PM)
Wow, just 9 hours to Moon  ... The previous astronaut must bear more than 3 days to reach moon.
*


Don't compare it to Apollo, which wanted to stop at the moon, compare it to Voyager 1, which was on a similar flight plan to New Horizons.

Posted by: RNeuhaus Sep 5 2005, 08:12 PM

Thanks to ljk4-1, dvandorn, remcook and antoniseb for the interesting replies. I agree that these replies are not of 100% focused on the above topic and somewhat related. At the beginning of this topic there were a very good comments between Doug and Marcel about the Delta-V for News Horizon to be captured by Pluto. The only solution what I have in the mind is that the spaceship can travel as fast as possible and be able to insert into the orbit is by sending two parts. The first part with enough combustible cargo to brake the News Horizon spacecraft before inserting to Pluto must be launched with anticipated time and with lower speed so that the spacecraft New Horizons which is launched later at with higher speed be able to catch it and dock it at the calculated distance previous reaching to Pluto for speed, mass and Delta-V in order to insert into the Pluto Orbit.

However, now I see, according to Bruce's note', is that the objective of the mission is not to only visit to Pluto but also to visit others "asteroides" or "planets" of Kipus Belt Oordt. Hence, the New Horizons spacecraft will flyby Pluto and the moon Charon in the interval of 2 hours. So short time to capture all needed information ? to take pictures on all surfaces, take spectometer and magnetometer for all surface too? with just only 2 hours??? at the closest distance.

The other thing that I am uncomfortable is that none has told which "asteroide" or "planet" is New Horizons spacecraft is planning to visit...after Pluto. I guess it will scan for any to discover on its way like Voyager in reaching to heliosphere...

Rodolfo

Posted by: Bob Shaw Sep 5 2005, 08:54 PM

Rodolfo:

To get out there in a reasonable timescale does require a fast flyby of the target, although it *would* be possible to design a spacecraft with an engine aboard which would allow it's velocity to be cut before making a flyby (as was indeed the plan with the Advanced Mariner studies, in order to give more time in contact with the (short-lived) Mariner Mars Lander, and you could even say that the current Japanese comet probe is adopting something like that approach). Maybe such a scheme would be possible in the future, but for now we must be glad for what we're going to get - New Horizons is lucky to fly at all.

As regards post-Pluto targets, there was an earlier discussion on here where either Alan Stern or one of his colleagues commented on the expected levels of hydrazine at EOM and the potential 'cone' of encounters. My understanding is that despite the fact that there will be some Delta-V capability left, it's down to brute chance in large part, and (hopefully) some hard work before encounter, as the Pluto encounter geometry itself offers the greatest single opportunity to change the trajectory. Obviously, there'll be a tradeoff between Pluto science and potential KBO science which will be addressed closer to the time, just as with Voyager.

Bob Shaw

Posted by: anthony Sep 20 2005, 11:03 AM

I couldn't help noticing in a recent magazine article that 2003 UB313 is 'kind of in the same direction' (stop me if I'm getting too technical) as Pluto. I know the orbital inclinations are very different, but is 2003 UB313 completely out of the question as a target for New Horizons? Judging by its distance it might take another fifteen or twenty years to reach after the Pluto encounter, so I'd imagine there might be problem with RTG power after that length of time.

Anthony

Posted by: Marcel Sep 20 2005, 12:28 PM

QUOTE (anthony @ Sep 20 2005, 11:03 AM)
I couldn't help noticing in a recent magazine article that 2003 UB313 is 'kind of in the same direction' (stop me if I'm getting too technical) as Pluto. I know the orbital inclinations are very different, but is 2003 UB313 completely out of the question as a target for New Horizons? Judging by its distance it might take another fifteen or twenty years to reach after the Pluto encounter, so I'd imagine there might be problem with RTG power after that length of time.

Anthony
*

RTG is not the problem. Voyager still goes strong after decades. The question is; will there be any KBO within the reachable "cone" NH can be directed towards after the Pluto encounter. I guess the geometry of the flyby (and the change in direction of the spacecraft due to the flyby) is of great influence on how much flexibility there is in the path afterwards. My feeling (i'm not a rocket scientist) says, that a target KBO has to be chosen by 2014, then the way Pluto is encountered has to be chosen such, that it flies more or less towards the KBO afterwards without intervention of the left over delta V capability. The latter being used only for two or three short burns to fine-tune it towards the KBO.

It would be great if it would be 2003 UB313, i have no clue however whether it's in the same direction as Pluto is.

Anyone else knows if it will be in more or less the same direction as Pluto by that time ?

Posted by: abalone Sep 20 2005, 01:00 PM

QUOTE (Marcel @ Sep 20 2005, 11:28 PM)
less towards the KBO afterwards without intervention of the left over delta V capability. The latter being used only for two or three short burns to fine-tune it towards the KBO.

It would be great if it would be 2003 UB313, i have no clue however whether it's in the same direction as Pluto is.

Anyone else knows if it will be in more or less the same direction as Pluto by that time ?
*

My recollection is that the delta V capability is in the order of about 100-150 m/s in addition to any change in direction induced by the encounter. That equates to a very small cone of accessabilty at 17.8? km/s, so tanQ=.15/17.8. It would have to be more rather than less in line with Pluto. It would be a coincidence of very low probability

Quote from
http://www.roe.ac.uk/~jkd/kbo_proc/antospencerfigs.doc
Conclusions
Finding one or more KBO targets for the New Horizons mission is a large but tractable endeavor. We will need to search down to magnitude 27 to be sure of finding at least one target if we are unlucky in the amount of maneuvering fuel available on the spacecraft for KBO targeting, though with plausible fuel budgets, surveys magnitude to 26 may be sufficient. The amount of telescope time required for the survey depends on the severity of the effects of confusion by Milky Way background stars, but it is likely that a comprehensive survey early in the next decade can be done in reasonable time using large-format detectors on 8-meter class telescopes. New Horizons team plans its own searches for mission KBOs but will welcome other U.S. or international teams who wish to become involved in exchange for mission participation at the KBO.

Posted by: Marcel Sep 20 2005, 01:24 PM

QUOTE (abalone @ Sep 20 2005, 01:00 PM)
That equates to a very small cone of accessabilty at 17.8? km/s, so tanQ=.15/17.8. It would have to be more rather than less in line with Pluto. It would be a coincidence of very low probability
*

That means it can redirect ONE degree after the Pluto flyby on it's own propulsion. That's not much.
I guess the assist from Pluto has to do the thing.

Posted by: abalone Sep 20 2005, 01:35 PM

Correction
I think it is only 11.8km/s so the angle is a bit larger but not much

Posted by: Marcel Sep 20 2005, 01:51 PM

QUOTE (abalone @ Sep 20 2005, 01:35 PM)
Correction
I think it is only 11.8km/s so the angle is a bit larger but not much
*

There's one remaining (quite important) question left for me: How much angular change is to be expected due to the flyby ? And is there any flexibility in it (by changing altitude of the flyby for example) ?

And eh, one more: is it already determined how the flyby geometry will be (which altitude, what side, what projected path on the surface, longitude, latitude....etc.) or can it be detailed further during the months or weeks before closest approach while the first details of the planet come in ?

Posted by: Marcel Sep 20 2005, 01:51 PM

QUOTE (abalone @ Sep 20 2005, 01:35 PM)
Correction
I think it is only 11.8km/s so the angle is a bit larger but not much
*

There's one remaining (quite important) question left for me: How much angular change is to be expected due to the flyby ? And is there any flexibility in it (by changing altitude of the flyby for example) ?

And eh, one more: is it already determined how the flyby geometry will be (which altitude, what side, what projected path on the surface, longitude, latitude....etc.) or can it be detailed further during the months or weeks before closest approach while the first details of the planet come in ?

Posted by: john_s Sep 20 2005, 04:57 PM

QUOTE (Marcel @ Sep 20 2005, 01:51 PM)
There's one remaining (quite important) question left for me: How much angular change is to be expected due to the flyby ? And is there any flexibility in it (by changing altitude of the flyby for example) ?

And eh, one more: is it already determined how the flyby geometry will be (which altitude, what side, what projected path on the surface, longitude, latitude....etc.) or can it be detailed further during the months or weeks before closest approach while the first details of the planet come in ?
*


We are not using Pluto's gravity to help with our KBO targeting- Pluto is too small to help us much (it will change our trajectory by less than 0.1 degrees). We will have some flexibility in our flyby geometry (and some, but less, flexibility in our arrival time), but the geometry decision will be made to maximize Pluto science, not to target the KBO. We'll probably make that decision long before we have useful Pluto data from the spacecraft, though.

We will find a KBO in our narrow "cone of accessibility" simply by chosing sufficiently faint, and therefore more abundant, targets. As abalone pointed out, we think we have a good chance of reaching a KBO in the ~30 km diameter class, and a fighting chance of something bigger. We can find objects this faint using large telescopes such as Subaru in Hawaii. Wish us luck!

Posted by: abalone Sep 22 2005, 02:14 AM

QUOTE (john_s @ Sep 21 2005, 03:57 AM)
we think we have a good chance of reaching a KBO in the ~30 km diameter class, and a fighting chance of something  bigger.  We can find objects this faint using large telescopes such as Subaru in Hawaii.  Wish us luck!
*

I note in your paper that searches could start as early as 2004, has this happened and are there any results yet

Posted by: Marcel Sep 22 2005, 08:11 AM

QUOTE (john_s @ Sep 20 2005, 04:57 PM)
Wish us luck!
*

Good luck !!! wink.gif
I am REALLY looking forward to the mission and i am happy to finally see Pluto up close in the next decade. Fingers crossed for launch....good luck on that one first i'd say unsure.gif

Posted by: Alan Stern Oct 4 2005, 10:03 PM

All--

Yesterday the launch clock stood at T-100 days. As of today, we're
in to double digits.

In project news, the past week has seen a great deal of instrument
and autonomy testing down at the Cape, and the completion of all SWAP
activities in San Antonio-- SWAP is now returning to the spacecraft for
flight. Yesterday we had yet another successful launch approval meeting
at NASA HQ, this time with Administrator Griffin and his Program Management
Council.

SWAP and the second IEM are to be re-installed on the spacecraft later this
week. There is also a PEPSSI activity to install some Kapton tape under
the instrument in order to put in place the kind of thermal interface
that the PEPSSI engineering team wants at their mount. At that point, the
spacecraft is back to flight config (!) with all boxes aboard, for the first
time since early September.

Next week is the Mission Operations Status Review, a 5-day spacecraft
comprehensive performance test, more DSN testing, and the Boeing third stage
Design Acceptance Qual Review. The following week we do another multi-day
mission sim, and the monthly Mission Ops Readiness and quarterly SOC
reviews.

-Alan

Posted by: jamescanvin Oct 4 2005, 11:29 PM

Thanks Alan, and good luck over these last 100 days. Hope everything runs smoothly and nothing like MER's pyro problems happen!

Cheers, James

Posted by: Toma B Oct 24 2005, 03:26 PM

Hurricane Wilma is heding for Cape Canaveral...
I'm woried about what can it do to Atlas 5 rocket...
It is siting on the pad???
Is it SAFE??? sad.gif sad.gif sad.gif

Posted by: RNeuhaus Oct 24 2005, 03:44 PM

I don't think so. Cape Canaveral will have tropical depression.
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2005/hurricanes/interactive/fullpage.hurricanes/wilma.html

Rodolfo

Posted by: Toma B Oct 24 2005, 04:10 PM

I was refering to this...
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2005/oct/HQ_M05175_KSC_Closed.html

Posted by: mcaplinger Oct 24 2005, 06:31 PM

QUOTE (Toma B @ Oct 24 2005, 07:26 AM)
Hurricane Wilma is heding for Cape Canaveral...
I'm woried about what can it do to Atlas 5 rocket...
It is siting on the pad???
Is it SAFE??? sad.gif  sad.gif  sad.gif
*


An Atlas V stays inside the Vertical Integration Facility (essentially a big building) until about 12 hours before launch, when it's rolled out to the pad.

They're pretty used to this sort of weather at KSC.

Posted by: mchan Oct 25 2005, 03:30 AM

QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Oct 24 2005, 11:31 AM)
An Atlas V stays inside the Vertical Integration Facility (essentially a big building) until about 12 hours before launch, when it's rolled out to the pad.

They're pretty used to this sort of weather at KSC.
*


I don't recall incidents of damage to launcher from hurricanes, but there have been a couple of cases where improper sealing allowed water into the payload integration room at the top of the building. In one case I recall the payload had to be removed and inspected.

Posted by: Comga Oct 25 2005, 04:46 AM

QUOTE (mchan @ Oct 24 2005, 09:30 PM)
I don't recall incidents of damage to launcher from hurricanes, but there have been a couple of cases where improper sealing allowed water into the payload integration room at the top of the building.  In one case I recall the payload had to be removed and inspected.
*



The New Horizons spacecraft has been put back in its shipping container to protect against something like a rain leak or wind getting in. This lesson has been learned. (The webcam link in post #63 by hal_9000 in "New Horizons Arrives At Ksc" is down so it can't be seen. Presumably things are shut off and locked down.)

Posted by: ljk4-1 Oct 31 2005, 05:36 PM

A post on the FPSPACE list says there is going to be a significant Pluto discovery announcement today.

Well??

unsure.gif

A new moon? Another KBO bigger than Pluto? A giant carving on its surface?

Posted by: john_s Oct 31 2005, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (ljk4-1 @ Oct 31 2005, 05:36 PM)
A post on the FPSPACE list says there is going to be a significant Pluto discovery announcement today.

Well??

unsure.gif

A new moon?  Another KBO bigger than Pluto?  A giant carving on its surface?
*


Well now it can be told- not one, but two, new moons of Pluto- probably in fairly circular orbits not too far outside the orbit of Charon- a regular little satellite system. We found them this summer with the Hubble Space Telescope. See this http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051031_pluto_moons.html. Very cool!

Posted by: BPCooper Nov 1 2005, 09:47 PM

QUOTE (antoniseb @ Aug 30 2005, 03:44 PM)
Hmmm. I'm guessing SlashDot is wrong here. The SlashDot article has one sentence saying it will return, but I've never before heard that it isn't on an escape trajectory. The NH website doesn't even say what the flyby velocity of Pluto is, so there's no way to tell from that site. I've seen other places saying 11 km/sec for the flyby, but I don't know if this takes into account that Pluto is already travelling a few km/sec outbound as this mission is arriving well past preihelion for Pluto. The outbound velocity might be 13-16 km/sec.

I would imagine that NH would not end up returning to 1AU, since after the encounter with Jupiter, it will have a perihelion closer to five AU.

If the galaxy were not filled with gravitational knots (other stars), you might expect the Voyagers and Pioneers to return in 225 million years.
*


(Thought this was answered already): a member of the NH team told me recently that they were aware of the Slashdot article, and that they do not know where they obtained that info because it is incorrect. NH is on a hyperbolic escape trajectory just like Voyager 1-2/Pioneer 10-11 (as Alan mentioned).

Wonder where SD got that.

What I am interested in finding out now is what year NH will surpass Voyager 1. One reply said they are planning to figure it out, but haven't yet.

I would guess that it would be this century but in the latter half.

Posted by: helvick Nov 1 2005, 10:13 PM

QUOTE (BPCooper @ Nov 1 2005, 10:47 PM)
Wonder where SD got that.
*


Err, pure unfounded speculation. Or if we're being kind some slightly misinformed guesswork. This is Slashdot we're talking about after all.

Posted by: mike Nov 1 2005, 10:24 PM

Indeed, Slashdot is just a geekier version of Fark with longer descriptions for the articles.. I wouldn't trust 'the Slashdot part' of Slashdot (comments and article descriptions) to be accurate about anything, personally.

Posted by: Jeff7 Nov 5 2005, 07:29 PM

Article of the Day at http://www.tfd.com/ is about New Horizons.

Posted by: Decepticon Nov 6 2005, 12:51 PM

Has the Jupiter flyby Closest approach numbers been released?

I still had my fingers crossed for a Galilean Moon Photo-shoot.
Knowing the distance could give us a idea of what kind of resolution we would get of the moons.

Posted by: ugordan Nov 6 2005, 01:06 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 6 2005, 02:51 PM)
Has the Jupiter flyby Closest approach numbers been released?

I still had my fingers crossed for a Galilean Moon Photo-shoot.
Knowing the distance could give us a idea of what kind of resolution we would get of the moons.
*


Hew Horizons website has this to say:
"Jupiter Encounter: Closest approach scheduled to occur between Feb. 25- March 2, 2007. Moving about 47,000 miles per hour (about 21 kilometers per second), New Horizons would fly 3 to 4 times closer to Jupiter than the Cassini spacecraft, coming within 31.7-32.4 Jupiter radii of the large planet."

Note that the while the RALPH camera has a red and blue filter, it has no green filter so don't hold your breath for "true" color Jupiter images. huh.gif
RALPH also appears to have a poorer resolution, somewhere along the lines of 3 times the Cassini wide angle camera resolution. That would be enough to image Jupiter at a fairly good resolution, but the moons would turn up being pretty much specks of light.
LORRI on the other hand has a resolution somewhat better than Cassini narrow angle and combined with the 3-4 times closer flyby distance would actually provide some decent long distance shots of the moons. The imager, however, is panchromatic so no color here, guys...

I guess it's up to Juno for some decent true color imagery of Jupiter and some of the moons unsure.gif

Posted by: tedstryk Nov 6 2005, 01:38 PM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 6 2005, 01:06 PM)
Hew Horizons website has this to say:
"Jupiter Encounter: Closest approach scheduled to occur between Feb. 25- March 2, 2007. Moving about 47,000 miles per hour (about 21 kilometers per second), New Horizons would fly 3 to 4 times closer to Jupiter than the Cassini spacecraft, coming within 31.7-32.4 Jupiter radii of the large planet."

Note that the while the RALPH camera has a red and blue filter, it has no green filter so don't hold your breath for "true" color Jupiter images.  huh.gif
RALPH also appears to have a poorer resolution, somewhere along the lines of 3 times the Cassini wide angle camera resolution. That would be enough to image Jupiter at a fairly good resolution, but the moons would turn up being pretty much specks of light.
LORRI on the other hand has a resolution somewhat better than Cassini narrow angle and combined with the 3-4 times closer flyby distance would actually provide some decent long distance shots of the moons. The imager, however, is panchromatic so no color here, guys...

I guess it's up to Juno for some decent true color imagery of Jupiter and some of the moons  unsure.gif
*

I don't think that in the case of Jupiter this is a really big deal. Looking at Pioneer imagery, Red-Blue does pretty well here. Also, we have a great inventory of true color data from the ground, in addition to Galileo and Cassini, that can be used for adjustments. At any rate, for places I will never see close-up, I wouldn't mind just color-shifting and using IR-R-B color.

Posted by: Decepticon Nov 6 2005, 02:56 PM

QUOTE
New Horizons would fly 3 to 4 times closer to Jupiter than the Cassini spacecraft, coming within 31.7-32.4 Jupiter radii of the large planet."


That puts it just outside Callisto orbit?
Did I figure that out right?

Posted by: ugordan Nov 6 2005, 03:24 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 6 2005, 04:56 PM)
That puts it just outside Callisto orbit?
Did I figure that out right?
*


Yep, Callisto orbits at a distance of about 26 Jupiter radii. The sooner the spacecraft launches in the launch window, the closer it will get to Jupiter and proportionally faster to Pluto.

Posted by: Rob Pinnegar Nov 6 2005, 06:06 PM

I wonder if New Horizons will happen to pass close to any of the outer-eccentric moons of Jupiter, as Cassini did with Himalia? There are something like fifty of those things known now.

Of course, those fifty objects are spread out over a region extending out to something like twenty-five million kilometres from Jupiter, which kind of negates the advantage of there being many of them. Still, it wouldn't be surprising if NH gets within a couple million kilometres of at least one of them. Even if it's a "one-pixel" flyby, something useful might come of it.

I guess we'll find out after launch, when the flight path is finalized.

Posted by: Decepticon Nov 6 2005, 07:24 PM

That's why I'm in for as much bonus untargeted flybys as possible.

Galileo & Near did not disappoint.

Posted by: JRehling Nov 7 2005, 01:46 AM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 6 2005, 08:24 AM)
Yep, Callisto orbits at a distance of about 26 Jupiter radii. The sooner the spacecraft launches in the launch window, the closer it will get to Jupiter and proportionally faster to  Pluto.
*


Of course, this means that NH may fly within 6 or so Jr of Callisto, if the timing is right -- I hope it is! Ganymede could also be favorable positioned. For Io and Europa, the margin of difference is less.

I doubt if an opportunistic Callisto flyby is worth tweaking any mission constraints over, although with such a long lag between Jupiter and Pluto flybys, I would guess that it would be possible in principle to time the Jupiter encounter as desired, then tweak Pluto arrival quite easily in the years to come. But that propellant budget could buy us a KBO or not post-Pluto, and it would end up being a poor tradeoff if a KBO were missed so that a so-so Callisto image sequence could be obtained!

Posted by: ugordan Nov 7 2005, 11:22 AM

QUOTE (JRehling @ Nov 7 2005, 03:46 AM)
I doubt if an opportunistic Callisto flyby is worth tweaking any mission constraints over, although with such a long lag between Jupiter and Pluto flybys, I would guess that it would be possible in principle to time the Jupiter encounter as desired, then tweak Pluto arrival quite easily in the years to come. But that propellant budget could buy us a KBO or not post-Pluto, and it would end up being a poor tradeoff if a KBO were missed so that a so-so Callisto image sequence could be obtained!
*


I don't think timing a Callisto nontargeted flyby would be much of an issue at all. Callisto's orbital period is 16 days and the arrangement between Jupiter and Pluto varies slowly on a timescale of +/- 8 days (which is enough to optimize for a closest approach to Callisto for the worst case scenario). The only difference would be in the actual Jupiter C/A, that would only be changed by I guess a few tens of thousands of km yet in return it would bring Callisto at an optimal point in its orbit to cut down C/A distance from millions to a few hundred thousand km.

Posted by: BruceMoomaw Nov 7 2005, 12:46 PM

At the special meeting on Jupiter science from New Horizons at the 2003 DPS conference, it was made pretty clear that the most interesting new science from NH at Jupiter will probably involve, not photos of the Galilean moons, but the best near-IR spectra yet of their surface composition -- good enough in Europa's case to perhaps allow definitive identification of just what its major non-ice components are. (The RALPH near-IR spectrometer has much higher spectral resolution than Galileo's, and it will come far closer to the moons than Cassini did.)

Posted by: djellison Nov 7 2005, 02:57 PM

Lots of images from the press day
http://www.launchphotography.com/NewHorizonsProcessing.html

Doug

Posted by: RNeuhaus Nov 7 2005, 03:32 PM

QUOTE (djellison @ Nov 7 2005, 09:57 AM)
Lots of images from the press day
http://www.launchphotography.com/NewHorizonsProcessing.html

Doug
*

Very nice pictures. The inquietud I have is that the probe is totally covered by a gold sheed except to the nuclear stick which looks somewhat worn with lots of scars.

Rodolfo

Posted by: djellison Nov 7 2005, 03:36 PM

As I understand it - the RTG is a mass model - i.e. it's not the real thing, it's just there to act the same - and it might well be a few years old, perhaps borrowed from the spares-cupboard of a past mission?

Doug

Posted by: odave Nov 7 2005, 04:32 PM

Let's hope they remember to put the real one on before launch laugh.gif

Now THAT would be a "D'OH" moment!

Posted by: ugordan Nov 7 2005, 05:21 PM

QUOTE (odave @ Nov 7 2005, 06:32 PM)
Let's hope they remember to put the real one on before launch laugh.gif

Now THAT would be a "D'OH" moment!
*

Forgetting to take off one of the instrument covers that just scream "Remove before flight" would come in as a close second tongue.gif

Posted by: john_s Nov 7 2005, 05:40 PM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 7 2005, 11:22 AM)
I don't think timing a Callisto nontargeted flyby would be much of an issue at all. Callisto's orbital period is 16 days and the arrangement between Jupiter and Pluto varies slowly on a timescale of +/- 8 days (which is enough to optimize for a closest approach to Callisto for the worst case scenario). The only difference would be in the actual Jupiter C/A, that would only be changed by I guess a few tens of thousands of km yet in return it would bring Callisto at an optimal point in its orbit to cut down C/A distance from millions to a few hundred thousand km.
*


Sorry, but we won't be able to adjust the Jupiter flyby timing to optimize the view of the moons- we'll take what we can get. We can't afford the fuel it would take to slow down or speed up to catch Callisto, for example. As soon as we launch we will know our Jupiter flyby date and thus the flyby geometry for the moons, and as I remember no launch date gives us a really close look at Callisto.

However, despite the geometry limitations, we'll be doing our utmost to maximize the science return from Jupiter and its moons. Our other major constraints will be our limited data storage capacity (which is designed for a quick flyby of little Pluto, not an extended flyby of giant Jupiter), and the fact that our cameras are designed to work at Pluto's dim illumination levels and thus will tend to give overexposed images at Jupiter- our best images of Io, for instance, will probably be taken in Jupiter shine, not sunshine!

To answer Rob Pinnegar's question, we've been checking for close flybys of any of the outer moons, and we might get a couple of pixels on the largest ones. Nothing too spectacular though.

Posted by: ugordan Nov 7 2005, 06:54 PM

QUOTE (john_s @ Nov 7 2005, 07:40 PM)
Sorry, but we won't be able to adjust the Jupiter flyby timing to optimize the view of the moons- we'll take what we can get.  We can't afford the fuel it would take to slow down or speed up to catch Callisto, for example.  As soon as we launch we will know our Jupiter flyby date and thus the flyby geometry for the moons, and as I remember no launch date gives us a really close look at Callisto.

That's a shame, but I guess any science at Jupiter is just a bonus.

QUOTE
Our other major constraints will be our limited data storage capacity (which is designed for a quick flyby of little Pluto, not an extended flyby of giant Jupiter), and the fact that our cameras are designed to work at Pluto's dim illumination levels and thus will tend to give overexposed images at Jupiter- our best images of Io, for instance, will probably be taken in Jupiter shine, not sunshine!

I understand that the S/C has massive storage space compared to recent missions. Just what telemetry rate do you expect at Jupiter, something on the order of 115 kbps?
I had a hunch illumination at Jupiter could be an issue, I didn't believe it would be a major one. Also, how do you plan to image Io in Jupiter-shine, while the Sun overexposes the daylight side? Those would have to be outbound, high phase observations?

Posted by: john_s Nov 7 2005, 08:40 PM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 7 2005, 06:54 PM)
I understand that the S/C has massive storage space compared to recent missions. Just what telemetry rate do you expect at Jupiter, something on the order of 115 kbps?
I had a hunch illumination at Jupiter could be an issue, I didn't believe it would be a major one. Also, how do you plan to image Io in Jupiter-shine, while the Sun overexposes the daylight side? Those would have to be outbound, high phase observations?
*


That's right, we'll look at Io in Jupiter shine at high phase and put up with an overexposed sunlit crescent. The data rate from Jupiter isn't our limiting factor on data storage, it's more to do with the complexity of managing our memory which means that we can only fill up one 32 Gbit section of the solid-state recorder once during the flyby. Plus we won't be able to crop our images before storing them, so to image a 100-pixel-wide Galilean satellite with our color camera we will need to store the full 4000-pixel width of our CCD array.

Posted by: imran Nov 7 2005, 11:33 PM

A pretty in-depth article in the John Hopkins Magazine on New Horizons and how the mission concept turned into reality.

http://www.jhu.edu/~jhumag/1105web/pluto.html

Posted by: Comga Nov 8 2005, 04:20 AM

QUOTE (john_s @ Nov 7 2005, 02:40 PM)
That's right, we'll look at Io in Jupiter shine at high phase and put up with an overexposed sunlit crescent.  The data rate from Jupiter isn't our limiting factor on data storage, it's more to do with the complexity of managing our memory which means that we can only fill up one 32 Gbit section of the solid-state recorder once during the flyby.  Plus we won't be able to crop our images before storing them, so to image a 100-pixel-wide Galilean satellite with our color camera we will need to store the full 4000-pixel width of our CCD array.
*


Would it be too picky and petty to remind John that the CCD array is 5000 pixels wide? wink.gif Of course, that just makes his point that much stronger.

Posted by: tfisher Nov 8 2005, 06:35 PM

QUOTE (Comga @ Nov 8 2005, 12:20 AM)
Would it be too picky and petty to remind John that the CCD array is 5000 pixels wide?  wink.gif  Of course, that just makes his point that much stronger.
*


I've also seen the number 5024 pixels somewhere. Unfortunately the "public consumption" websites are pretty coy about such details. (Is it because they are afraid people will compare these numbers with their digital cameras and wonder why they have more megapixels in their hands than the fancy space probe?) Anyway, here is what I can glean about resolution. Maybe someone can confirm or correct these numbers?

Ralph: 5000x(arbitrary) pixels at 12bpp. For science images, this will sweep across a target pushbroom style (time delayed imaging or TDI in modern parlance) taking data either in 4 color bands (red, blue, near IR, methane) simultaneously or through a panchromatic (clear) filter. There is also a 5000x128 pixel framing mode, mainly for navigational use. It is sensitive to visable and near IR light from about 400 to 1000 nm.

Leisa: 256x(arbitrary) pixels with 256 spectral channels at 12bpp. This also images in TDI mode. This is sensitive to IR from about 1000 to 2500 nm.

Alice: 32x1 pixels with 1024 spectral channels at 16bpp. (maybe possible to produce an image by slewing?). It either works in "histogram" mode summing hits at each location on the detector or "pixel list" mode producing a list photon hits at 4ms cadence. This is sensitive to UV from 50 to 185 nm.

Lorri: 1024x1024 pixels at 12bpp. This is works in framing mode. It is sensitive to visible light (very sensitive in fact: out at pluto exposure time is around 1/10 of a second!) and has a field of view of 0.29 degrees for long telephoto opportunities. It also has a binned 256x256 pixel mode for faint object imaging.

Posted by: JRehling Nov 8 2005, 08:53 PM

QUOTE (john_s @ Nov 7 2005, 10:40 AM)
Sorry, but we won't be able to adjust the Jupiter flyby timing to optimize the view of the moons- we'll take what we can get.  We can't afford the fuel it would take to slow down or speed up to catch Callisto, for example.  As soon as we launch we will know our Jupiter flyby date and thus the flyby geometry for the moons, and as I remember no launch date gives us a really close look at Callisto.
*


If an ideal Callisto flyby had taken place, it would have been about 40 times the planned Pluto flyby C/A (actually, eerily close to 40.00 times, as I did the math...). An ideal Ganymede flyby would have been about 3 times farther than that, so if a pixel is 50 m at Pluto, it could be as good as 600 m at Ganymede. Murphy's Law may put both Ganymede and Callisto on the far side of Jupiter at the flyby... we'll see! But the light sensitivity sounds like a showstopper for great visible-wavelength imaging anyway. The best hope may be that spectroscopy can get a bit higher spatial resolution at Ganymede and Callisto to get readings on distinct terrain types.

Jupiter, of course, will fill the frames rather nicely even from 32 Jr. The spectroscopy of Jupiter itself will be nice to see.

Posted by: john_s Nov 8 2005, 09:02 PM

QUOTE (tfisher @ Nov 8 2005, 06:35 PM)
I've also seen the number 5024 pixels somewhere.  Unfortunately the "public consumption" websites are pretty coy about such details.  (Is it because they are afraid people will compare these numbers with their digital cameras and wonder why they have more megapixels in their hands than the fancy space probe?)  Anyway, here is what I can glean about resolution.  Maybe someone can confirm or correct these numbers?


*


The New Horizons website does have a http://www.pluto.jhuapl.edu/spacecraft/instruments.html that gives the details for the instrument payload. Your summary is pretty much correct! Yes, I goofed on the MVIC detector length- 5000 pixels is the correct number.

Posted by: Decepticon Nov 8 2005, 11:21 PM

Will this probe carry a gold disk of some kind? Ala Voyager/Pioneer

Posted by: punkboi Nov 9 2005, 12:20 AM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 8 2005, 04:21 PM)
Will this probe carry a gold disk of some kind? Ala Voyager/Pioneer
*


It will be carrying a compact disc bearing the names of people who submitted 'em through the New Horizons website

Posted by: edstrick Nov 9 2005, 07:47 AM

I suspect some of the most valuable PICTURES during the Jupiter flyby will be of the moons in Jupiter shadow. Io's multi-colored aurora are spectacular, but Galileo's images are pretty horrible due to radiation noise and low light levels. I don't think there was any direct imaging system detections of airglows or hypothetical irradiation induced "iceglows" at the other satellites. Timing of the flyby may randomly allow an observation of Ganymede or Callisto, much more likely for Europa and especially Io because of their shorter orbital periods. Might be able to see torus emissions at Io, too.

Nightside Jupiter imaging.. auroras, airglows and lightning may well be spectacular. Does the spacecraft go through Jupiter's shadow?.... High phase angle ring images which really brings out faint ring-dust features are also potentially spectacular.

Posted by: ljk4-1 Nov 9 2005, 02:30 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 8 2005, 06:21 PM)
Will this probe carry a gold disk of some kind? Ala Voyager/Pioneer
*


Go to this post for a response from the New Horizons team on their decision not to include any kind of message/information packet:

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=1467&view=findpost&p=25901

Posted by: ugordan Nov 9 2005, 03:16 PM

QUOTE (john_s @ Nov 7 2005, 10:40 PM)
The data rate from Jupiter isn't our limiting factor on data storage, it's more to do with the complexity of managing our memory which means that we can only fill up one 32 Gbit section of the solid-state recorder once during the flyby.  Plus we won't be able to crop our images before storing them, so to image a 100-pixel-wide Galilean satellite with our color camera we will need to store the full 4000-pixel width of our CCD array.
*

Didn't you devise any smarter lossless image compression algorithm that would know black space when it sees it? IMO, that sort of thing was feasible probably even in the days Cassini was designed (as opposed to the lossless-although-line-truncating algorithm implemented) let alone today. Sort of like dividing the frame conceptually into two categories: empty space (which would be all low intensity background noise) and actual useful data. The encoding tables could be optimized for two extreme cases then. I read about even more advanced concepts, actually analyzing images taken through different filters and transmitting back only differences, this would be perfect for pushbroom cameras as there wouldn't be any alignment issues due to spacecraft attitude changes.

Hm, maybe I'm getting a wee bit too technical here rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Myran Nov 12 2005, 08:20 PM

Transmitting the difference information was something used on Voyager for the Uranus & Neptune encounters, but this perhaps not the same as what you suggest ugordan.

Posted by: Decepticon Nov 12 2005, 08:23 PM

QUOTE (ljk4-1 @ Nov 9 2005, 09:30 AM)
Go to this post for a response from the New Horizons team on their decision not to include any kind of message/information packet:

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=1467&view=findpost&p=25901
*



This is very upsetting to me at least. I will email them telling them of my disappointment. sad.gif

Posted by: just-nick Nov 13 2005, 01:42 AM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 9 2005, 08:16 AM)
Didn't you devise any smarter lossless image compression algorithm that would know black space when it sees it?
*


I'm no compression expert, but unless you've got very fast algorithms working in some sort of swap space, you'll still need to stuff all the images into your main memory during the flyby. NH isn't packing a great deal of computing power, so I'd suspect that compression is happening offline, after the hectic time of the flyby so you avoid taxing the computing system any more than necessary. That means you're still maxed out by the capacity of your recorder.

But once all is said and done, I can't imagine some sort of lossless (or even lossy) compression isn't being used for transmission back to Earth.

Anyone in-the-know got anything to correct there?

--Nick

PS -- I'd also like to welcome myself to posting after a couple months of lurking and enjoying the best SNR on any Internet forum I've ever seen. Of course its all going downhill now...

Posted by: mcaplinger Nov 13 2005, 02:01 AM

QUOTE (just-nick @ Nov 12 2005, 05:42 PM)
I'm no compression expert, but unless you've got very fast algorithms working in some sort of swap space, you'll still need to stuff all the images into your main memory during the flyby.  NH isn't packing a great deal of computing power, so I'd suspect that compression is happening offline...
*


Lossless compression algorithms can certainly be fast enough to be applied in real time, if that's desirable. For example, the MGS/MOC lossless compressor can compress the raw pixel rate of 5 megapixels/sec. I'm not certain, but I suspect that the NH camera pixel rate is less than that; it probably doesn't need to be more than a megapixel/sec or maybe even less. It would also surprise me if NH was using lossy compression; we certainly didn't propose that for our unselected PKB instruments.

Posted by: mcaplinger Nov 13 2005, 03:21 AM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 9 2005, 07:16 AM)
Didn't you devise any smarter lossless image compression algorithm that would know black space when it sees it?
*


If you are using a first-difference-based lossless compressor, you can get this for free depending on what encoding table you use and what your black-space noise level is. For example, on MGS/MOC, we use a table that compresses black space 8:1, and we occasionally use this for star calibration images.

Posted by: hendric Nov 13 2005, 07:49 AM

QUOTE (john_s @ Nov 7 2005, 11:40 AM)
... and the fact that our cameras are designed to work at Pluto's dim illumination levels and thus will tend to give overexposed images at Jupiter
*


John,
How do you plan to commission the instruments after launch? Taking pictures of DSO's? I'm sure some amateur astronomers could recommend a few for you to try out...

Posted by: JRehling Nov 13 2005, 06:03 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 12 2005, 01:23 PM)
This is very upsetting to me at least. I will email them telling them of my disappointment. sad.gif
*


Personally, I think an intricate spacecraft with nuclear power and state of the art computers on board, on a trajectory that will communicate its origin for at least tens of thousands of years is a pretty good message that doesn't need much elaboration.

Posted by: ljk4-1 Nov 14 2005, 02:42 AM

QUOTE (JRehling @ Nov 13 2005, 01:03 PM)
Personally, I think an intricate spacecraft with nuclear power and state of the art computers on board, on a trajectory that will communicate its origin for at least tens of thousands of years is a pretty good message that doesn't need much elaboration.
*


Any interstellar vessel crew, human or otherwise, that eventually finds NH is not going to find its technology, and certainly not its computers, to be very advanced.

It will say something about us, though, to be sure - mainly, why did they attach a data disc that apparently had its data wiped out by cosmic radiation so soon after it left? And what's that odd rectangular symbol with the bicolor stripes? Are those supposed to be stars in the upper left corner? Why didn't they give us some kind of detailed record about themselves, especially if they sent this robot probe into interstellar space? Were the beings who made this craft so primitive that they didn't even consider the rules of galactic ettiquite?

Just ten years after the Voyagers were launched, they kept saying how a home PC could do more than the combined might of the probes' computer systems.

As for messages and information packets on future interstellar probes - which I think should be mandatory, as we will be sending vessels into the greater galaxy - a committee independent of the mission teams, if necessary, needs to be formed to design and implement data records on the probes.

Carl Sagan and his team showed us the way, as they had to instigate and do almost all the work on the Pioneer Plaques and Voyager Records, as apparently almost no one at NASA seemed to show any real care or concern about the fact that those probes were going to exit our Sol system into the Milky Way for the first time in human history. Hardly an insignificant event.

If deep space mission teams are unable and unwilling to put data records on their probes, then they should let others handle that signficant detail. Anyone interested in helping to form a group on this matter?

Posted by: mike Nov 14 2005, 06:27 AM

Every probe we send into space is an expression of who we are. Any advanced alien species will be able to look at the instruments we included and the specific implementation of the craft and discern far more about the human species than you may imagine. If we were to put, say, images or videos of people dancing, dressed in particular cultural garb, the aliens may just ask themselves "Why did they put videos of people dancing on a probe designed to explore the universe?" Then, they would probably obliterate our entire galaxy, because dancing is against all that is Good.

I'm just not sure we can predict that any particular addition to the probe would have any particular effect whatsoever. Personally I'd rather we had more instrumentation to detect just what's out there than that we had a video of some sort of cultural activity. We can save that stuff for our diplomatic probes. If you want to throw on a CD with Bach, or Fifty Cent, or Coldplay, or a picture of people eating sushi, or curried rice, or a McDonald's hamburger, or the latest episode of 'Everybody Hates Chris', or whatever, then go for it, but only if it doesn't interfere with what we know will grant us something useful.

A purely 'diplomatic probe' would be fine with me, or maybe someday we'll be able to pack every instrument we could ever want on one platform and still have room left over, and hey, why not stick whatever you want on there (a piece of the World Trade Center, an unexploded suicide bomb, a Snickers bar, a copy of the UN charter, pictures of people playing jump rope, whatever ya want).

Posted by: ugordan Nov 14 2005, 08:21 AM

QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Nov 13 2005, 05:21 AM)
If you are using a first-difference-based lossless compressor, you can get this for free depending on what encoding table you use and what your black-space noise level is.  For example, on MGS/MOC, we use a table that compresses black space 8:1, and we occasionally use this for star calibration images.
*

That's sort of what I was getting at. If the scan lines were encoded on the fly after being read out, there wouldn't even need to be a large memory buffer to store the whole image at first, like just-nick pointed out. I wonder if there would be a significant improvement if the image was processed in 2D, dividing it into variously sized blocks that are either black space or useful data. In any case, I'd think stating that you need to store the whole 5000 pixels to capture a Jovian moon can be a bit misleading in this perspective.
Then again, I really don't know about the inner workings of NH so I can't say anything for sure.

Posted by: ljk4-1 Nov 14 2005, 02:01 PM

QUOTE (mike @ Nov 14 2005, 01:27 AM)
Every probe we send into space is an expression of who we are.  Any advanced alien species will be able to look at the instruments we included and the specific implementation of the craft and discern far more about the human species than you may imagine.  If we were to put, say, images or videos of people dancing, dressed in particular cultural garb, the aliens may just ask themselves "Why did they put videos of people dancing on a probe designed to explore the universe?"  Then, they would probably obliterate our entire galaxy, because dancing is against all that is Good.

I'm just not sure we can predict that any particular addition to the probe would have any particular effect whatsoever.  Personally I'd rather we had more instrumentation to detect just what's out there than that we had a video of some sort of cultural activity.  We can save that stuff for our diplomatic probes.  If you want to throw on a CD with Bach, or Fifty Cent, or Coldplay, or a picture of people eating sushi, or curried rice, or a McDonald's hamburger, or the latest episode of 'Everybody Hates Chris', or whatever, then go for it, but only if it doesn't interfere with what we know will grant us something useful.

A purely 'diplomatic probe' would be fine with me, or maybe someday we'll be able to pack every instrument we could ever want on one platform and still have room left over, and hey, why not stick whatever you want on there (a piece of the World Trade Center, an unexploded suicide bomb, a Snickers bar, a copy of the UN charter, pictures of people playing jump rope, whatever ya want).
*


You seem to be equating data records on interstellar probes with poorly planned and stocked time capsules. No one is going to (or should not at least) just throw a bunch of random "junk" into such a record on such a vehicle. Though as any anthropologist will tell you, one often learns a lot more about a community through its refuse than its official records and monuments. But that doesn't mean we should just send whatever into the galaxy, at least not at this early stage.

I am well aware that much can be learned about our level of technology and other things just by examining a probe. But any probe by itself will leave quite a bit unanswered about us and our world. Adding information about us will not harm anything.

Any ETI that is bent on harming or destroying us will do so regardless of what may or may not be on such a data record. I also have my doubts about marauding aliens scouring the galaxy looking for worlds to conquer, but that is for another topic.

While I certainly would not oppose it, I also do not think at this stage we should build and launch a purely "diplomatic" probe, as you call it, unless we have an actual destination for it and some means of getting it there a bit faster than what we can muster at present.

You may find the ideas on this Web site of interest:

http://www.winlab.rutgers.edu/%7Ecrose/cgi-bin/cosmicB.html

Posted by: john_s Nov 14 2005, 04:51 PM

QUOTE (ugordan @ Nov 14 2005, 08:21 AM)
That's sort of what I was getting at. If the scan lines were encoded on the fly after being read out, there wouldn't even need to be a large memory buffer to store the whole image at first, like just-nick pointed out. I wonder if there would be a significant improvement if the image was processed in 2D, dividing it into variously sized blocks that are either black space or useful data. In any case, I'd think stating that you need to store the whole 5000 pixels to capture a Jovian moon can be a bit misleading in this perspective.
Then again, I really don't know about the inner workings of NH so I can't say anything for sure.
*


These are good suggestions, and indeed, there are many ways that on-the-fly compression could be enabled. But every feature that's added to the software carries the risk of adding bugs too, and more testing is needed to check everything out. Therefore we are keeping things very simple for the Jupiter flyby, so the flight software team can concentrate on the really crucial details that affect the health of the spacecraft.

So the plan is that we'll fill up one 32 Gbit buffer with uncompressed data (including all 5000 lines of every MVIC image), and use the second 32 Gbit buffer for compression of the data prior to downlink to Earth.

Posted by: ilbasso Nov 14 2005, 05:35 PM

A prototype for a diplomatic probe exists already, one that is fluent in over 6 million forms of communication:

Posted by: mike Nov 14 2005, 06:49 PM

My point in mentioning in all that 'junk' is that all those things are surely very popular - what makes them so horrible? What do you think we should place on a probe meant to inform an alien species just what we're all about? Personally, I haven't the vaguest idea.. a copy of the entire planet, miniaturized somehow, is all that currently comes to mind.

Posted by: ljk4-1 Nov 14 2005, 07:01 PM

QUOTE (David @ Nov 14 2005, 12:02 PM)
Not that, in my opinion, that would do much good.  I think the complete failure of SETI to turn up anything thus far tells us one of two things, and probably both: one, that intelligent species, assuming there to be others than humans, are scattered thinly across the universe; there might be no more than one per galaxy. Two, that carrying living beings across interstellar space is very, very difficult, and that optimistic scenarios about colonizing the entire galaxy in a matter of a millennia are untenable.

One thing we can be pretty sure about is that when humans emerge from the solar system, they are not going to find great Star Empires and Space Trading Federations full of busy aliens waiting for them -- or we would have learned of them already.  Instead there will be a vast, desolate, and wild sky.
*


The Milky Way Galaxy is 10 billion years old, 100,000 light years across, and contains 400 billion stars. And the only recently technological beings on Sol 3 think that after a few decades of sporadic searches into space that they are going to find ETI, or have said beings find them?

Especially if the ETI are really advanced, why would they contact us? We might serve as an anthropological study of sorts, which would likely mean Do Not Disturb the Study Subjects.

To an earlier point you made, I never considered probes with data records to be the best way to communicate with ETI - at least if you wanted a fast response. As you can see above, I am well aware of the distances and numbers involved with the task. I just think it would do well for both us and any other residents of the Milky Way to preserve some record of ourselves that will long outlive Earth.

Maybe the chances of an ETI finding such a probe or SETI succeeding as we are currently conducting it are slim, but as they said in the famous 1959 Nature paper on the subject:

"The probability of success is difficult to estimate; but if we never search, the chance of success is zero."

http://www.coseti.org/morris_0.htm

The odds of any of our probes being found out there are slim, but if there is that chance, then we should send them out with some record of who were are and what our world is like. Is it really such a problem?

Posted by: ljk4-1 Nov 14 2005, 07:04 PM

QUOTE (mike @ Nov 14 2005, 01:49 PM)
My point in mentioning in all that 'junk' is that all those things are surely very popular - what makes them so horrible?  What do you think we should place on a probe meant to inform an alien species just what we're all about?  Personally, I haven't the vaguest idea.. a copy of the entire planet, miniaturized somehow, is all that currently comes to mind.
*


The contents of the Voyager Records are a good start.

http://re-lab.net/welcome/

Have you ever read Murmurs of Earth?

Posted by: john_s Nov 14 2005, 07:17 PM

QUOTE (hendric @ Nov 13 2005, 07:49 AM)
John,
  How do you plan to commission the instruments after launch?  Taking pictures of DSO's?  I'm sure some amateur astronomers could recommend a few for you to try out...
*


We'll mostly be photographing boring stuff like stars to calibrate and commission the instruments. Deep-space targets are an interesting idea, though our maximum exposure time with LORRI is about 10 seconds, which would cramp our style. The Jupiter encounter is also an important part of the calibration process, despite the saturation problems with MVIC and LORRI, because the Jupiter system will give us our only extended (non point source) targets before Pluto.

Posted by: mike Nov 14 2005, 08:38 PM

No, I haven't read Murmurs of Earth.

They did cover a wide variety of subjects with their imagery - I only knew about the plate with the naked people and the basic model of our solar system.. Realistically of course you can't include everything. If there was enough worldwide interest there could be a submission process followed by a voting process - what better way is there? Britney Spears, iPod nano, and [insert other popular thing here], here we come. smile.gif I'm sure we'd have a christian bible, and a buddhist statuette, and [insert other religious artefact here], too, and anything of any moderate popularity.

I still say put the stuff on only if there's extra weight that can't be used on another instrument or more fuel (is more fuel ever not useful?). By the time the probe reaches the edge of the solar system, everything on it will be terribly unfashionable and when the aliens mock us for our afros and polyester suits, we'll feel like jerks - I know it sounds like I'm joking, but that's what will happen - "Oh, you thought we all still only had TWO arms? We can have as many as want now, of course.. Our ancestors just weren't very smart back then.." "Oh, you thought that tube-shaped metal thing with the giant flat bars and jets was our best mode of transportation? Oh, you thought that dinky probe wasn't outdated 1,000,000,000 years ago?"

I like data, being sent back, lots of data. smile.gif But really, it does seem a shame to not send out something - how about every 5 probes or so they send out a larger than usual batch of terribly outdated photos and movies and books, and we can be embarassed at the 1,000,000-year reunion - along with everyone else. smile.gif If nothing else it would be good for PR (eventually everyone could get a chunk), and it would give us a snapshot of what life was like when the probe was launched.

Another way of looking at it is what sort of alien probe would I want slamming into the ground at my feet - I would much rather have a probe packed with advanced technology than one with pictures of variously-cultured people dancing, climbing mountains, etc., and even a picture of an advanced alien craft wouldn't be much use - detailed plans would be nice, though (Contact, anyone).. but it would be interesting to see how the guys who built it looked, how they talked (or flashed, or transmitted). And realistically a larger portion of people would enjoy that, and who knows, bah.

I return to my original assertion that we have no idea what result any particular probe will generate, and that personally I want to know what's beyond the glow of our sun, so instruments for me, cultural stuff later, maybe. And if you think I rambled too much, IT'S CULTURE, BABY

Posted by: JRehling Nov 14 2005, 09:45 PM

This thread is becoming a demonstration of signal to noise ratio on the Internet.
Maybe we could create a separate topic branch for "Highly speculative topics rooted barely in fact" and keep the Saturn, Pluto, etc., branches a rich source of discussion on those topics.

Posted by: hendric Nov 14 2005, 11:02 PM

QUOTE (john_s @ Nov 14 2005, 01:17 PM)
We'll mostly be photographing boring stuff like stars to calibrate and commission the instruments.  Deep-space targets are an interesting idea, though our maximum exposure time with LORRI is about 10 seconds, which would cramp our style.
*


Well, just basing on what's on the opposite side of the sky from the sun the day of launch, there should be a nice grouping of "bright" DSOs to try for, including M31, The Pleiades, the Virgo galaxies, M51, Orion nebula, and a large number of open clusters in the area. I couldn't find any really detailed instrument information on LORRI or RALPH, but based on 5000 lines at 20 urad/pixel, should give ~5.7 degrees, enough for a very cool picture of M31.

10 seconds might not be long enough, but if you're afraid of oversaturation of the CCDs and will have to image in Jupitershine, maybe M31, M51, or the Orion nebula will work. The open clusters should definitely be worthwhile targets, like the Pleiades, the Beehive, or others. A few months after launch the best globular clusters should be far enough away from the sun.

I'm sure I'm screwing something up along the line. Can you talk about the basics of the cameras, like resolution, focal length and F/ratio? I'm sure the QE must be pretty close to 100%, and since LORRI is a clear filter it gets the best case light.

Of course, beyond the first commissioning shots I'm sure it would be difficult to justify to the DSN to take photos of DSOs for EPO...

Posted by: ljk4-1 Nov 15 2005, 03:52 PM

QUOTE (JRehling @ Nov 14 2005, 04:45 PM)
This thread is becoming a demonstration of signal to noise ratio on the Internet.
  Maybe we could create a separate topic branch for "Highly speculative topics rooted barely in fact" and keep the Saturn, Pluto, etc., branches a rich source of discussion on those topics.
*


You gentlemen are absolutely right. In fact, not only will I no longer even consider the idea of ETI or sending probes with messages on them for them, I have even begun to question the concept of Pluto as an actual world. After all, I have never seen it with my own eyes. Oh sure, there are photos and such of this "Pluto", but they can easily be faked. Most of them just look like a star anyway. And what decent astronomer would seriously name a planet after a cartoon dog? What next, a warrior princess?

tongue.gif

Posted by: Rob Pinnegar Nov 15 2005, 04:14 PM

Okay, that's funny... but he's right, guys. The reason this forum is so good is that it has been kept as a science forum instead of a speculation forum. If we start getting away from that, we will start losing some of the scientists who like to post here. IMHO, this type of thing really is best nipped in the bud.

One place you might want to check out is the subforum titled "Community Chit Chat" that appears near the bottom of the main Unmanned Spaceflight page. If you really want to chat about speculative stuff, that might be a good place to do it. (I'm suggesting this because, although I'd really like to see this forum retain its quality, I don't much relish the idea of telling people to shut up -- that really isn't a very effective way of encouraging people's interest in science.)

Posted by: spfrss Nov 16 2005, 09:42 AM

QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Nov 7 2005, 04:32 PM)
Very nice pictures. The inquietud I have is that the probe is totally covered by a gold sheed except to the nuclear stick which looks somewhat worn with lots of scars.

Rodolfo
*


as the picture captions says, the RTG is a dummy, I think used for weight/balance testing.

IMHO the flight one will be installed at launchpad or just befoe encapsulating NH in PF.

live long and prosper

Mauro

Posted by: BPCooper Nov 16 2005, 08:34 PM

QUOTE (spfrss @ Nov 16 2005, 05:42 AM)
as the picture captions says, the RTG is a dummy, I think used for weight/balance testing.


Mauro
*


It was a dummy used for just that, yep. The real one looks nearly identical, if not exactly.

The RTG will not be covered in gold.

Posted by: Comga Nov 17 2005, 03:40 AM

Weeky NASA update on expendable launchers

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/launchingrockets/status/2005

Mission: New Horizons
Launch Vehicle: Lockheed Martin Atlas V 551 (AV-010) Launch Pad:
Complex 41, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla.
Launch Date: Jan. 11, 2006
Launch Window: 2:08 to 4:07 p.m. EST

The bottom portion of the payload fairing was installed this week on the Atlas V. A Launch Vehicle Readiness Review was successfully completed Tuesday. The fit check of the Radioisotope Thermo-electric Generator power system with the spacecraft was performed last week. The generator will be installed for flight at the launch pad. A "dry" spin balance test of the spacecraft will be completed this week. After Thanksgiving, hydrazine fuel for attitude control and course-correction maneuvers will be loaded on the spacecraft and a "wet" spin balance test performed.

Posted by: BPCooper Nov 17 2005, 03:48 AM

The past few days neither the real or mockup RTG was installed. It looks (on the web feeds) like a cylindrical aluminum fitting similar in size, but it's hard to tell details. Does anyone know what that is? Perhaps just ballast to keep it balanced.

Posted by: Redstone Nov 17 2005, 05:03 AM

The flight RTG was not installed, but there was a fit check made. The flight RTG will be installed once the spacecraft is atop the rocket. I suspect this is because generally it is best to have as few people around an RTG as possible.

Here is a picture of the real RTG being removed from New Horizons after the fit check.

Posted by: Alan Stern Nov 17 2005, 10:45 AM

QUOTE (BPCooper @ Nov 17 2005, 03:48 AM)
The past few days neither the real or mockup RTG was installed. It looks (on the web feeds) like a cylindrical aluminum fitting similar in size, but it's hard to tell details. Does anyone know what that is? Perhaps just ballast to keep it balanced.
*


Good question, here's the scoop:

That's the mass model that simulates the mass and moments of inertia of the RTG.
It doesn't look as much like the real deal as the black thermal/electrical simulator
does, but it is what you want to have on for spin balance.

-Alan Stern

Posted by: BPCooper Nov 17 2005, 01:51 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Nov 17 2005, 06:45 AM)
Good question, here's the scoop:

That's the mass model that simulates the mass and moments of inertia of the RTG.
It doesn't look as much like the real deal as the black thermal/electrical simulator
does, but it is what you want to have on for spin balance.

-Alan Stern
*


Interesting, thanks. Is that simulated RTG not useful for spin balance testing? And was that simulator an active heat and electrical generating system minus the Pu?

Posted by: Alan Stern Nov 17 2005, 01:55 PM

QUOTE (BPCooper @ Nov 17 2005, 01:51 PM)
Interesting, thanks. Is that simulated RTG not useful for spin balance testing? And was that simulator an active heat and electrical generating system minus the Pu?
*


The thermal/electrical simulator has no radioactive material. It doesn't match the
mass properties at all.

-Alan Stern

Posted by: RNeuhaus Nov 17 2005, 02:11 PM

What is the purpose of the balancing test? In the space has no gravity and the balance of weight is of no matter or not?

As it is performing, I see that the weight balance is of vital importance and would like to understand its implications to the navigation control during the space cruise.

Whenever the spacecraft is in the space, does it matter the stability of route toward Pluton?

Does the balancing of rotation stability of spacecraft is like to balance a new tire?

Rodolfo

Posted by: Alan Stern Nov 17 2005, 02:43 PM

QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Nov 17 2005, 02:11 PM)
What is the purpose of the balancing test? In the space has no gravity and the balance of weight is of no matter or not?

As it is performing, I see that the weight balance is of vital importance and would like to understand its implications to the navigation control during the space cruise.

Whenever the spacecraft is in the space, does it matter the stability of route toward Pluton?

Does the balancing of rotation stability of spacecraft is like to balance a new tire?

Rodolfo
*


It has nothing to do with the trajectory.

During the final phase of launch and most of the flight to Pluto, NH is spinning
endlessly like a top in order to simplify operations and reduce the amount of fuel
needed for pointing. The s/c has to be balanced for the spin to be stable and
without any excessive nutation. Thus the need to do the spin balance testing.
This was done back in Maryland and then again for a final check at the Cape
with the spacecraft fully configured for launch.

Posted by: dvandorn Nov 17 2005, 02:46 PM

Ah, the old misunderstanding -- if there's no gravity in space, why worry about mass distribution?

Just because you're in a microgravity environment does not mean that mass goes away. Mass is a constant -- a kilogram of mass is a kilogram of mass, whether it's on Earth and weighs a kilogram or its in deep space and "weighs" nothing. (And no, I'm not inviting discussion of far-end-of-the-bell-curve theories about mass itself changing based on its distance from other large masses.)

Mass works the same way in space as it does on Earth, too -- it takes the same amount of force to overcome inertia in a microgravity environment as it does deep within a gravity field. So, balance is ultimately the same wherever you are, and it's just as important to know the mass balance on a spacecraft as it is on any piece of machinery you're going to be moving.

I hate to admit, I'm unsure whether New Horizons is planned to be spin-stabilized or three-axis stabilized. If it's to be spin-stabilized (which I'm thinking it is), then the mass balancing is even more important. It's exactly like the tire example you mentioned -- if there's a mass imbalance in a spinning object, the object will begin to wobble, and the wobble will reinforce itself until the object flies apart or until other motions couple into the wobble and the thing goes entirely out of control.

But even for three-axis-stabilized craft, you need to know your mass distribution very accurately, so you can place your thrusters in the right places, and fire them properly, to achieve both attitude and translation changes. Especially when you translate (i.e., change your overall path and speed), you have to thrust through your center of mass, and so you need to know your center of mass pretty accurately.

-the other Doug

Posted by: dvandorn Nov 17 2005, 02:48 PM

That's what I get for taking 15 minutes to write and edit my post -- Alan got in ahead of me. biggrin.gif

Yeah, I thought NH was to be spin-stabilized for most of its flight, I was just not completely sure. Thanks for the confirmation, Alan!

-the other Doug

Posted by: RNeuhaus Nov 17 2005, 03:11 PM

Good explanations. I was able to grasp them.

I tought the spin had the purpose to distribute uniformly the heat, cool and solar radiation and cosmic as I have learned it from others spacescrafts which orbit around the Earth and also to Moon and Mars.

As the spacecraft is going farther from the sun, the spin for this space might be less importance every time it is moving further away. Now I realice that the spin helps the spacecraft to avoid any wobbing during its trajectory and also to helps to manage better the thrusters after knowing the mass' properties of NH.

Well, as I see it, NH will be spinning on all way toward the Pluto. It would become an even more complicated to control the pointing of any navigation instrument to stars, to photograph any images on planets when the spacecraft is spinning.

Then maybe, before to take any picture, or any measurement, one of three (x-y-z?) reaction wheels will be activated to stop before conducting any science activities when it is flying-by to any celestial bodies (Jupiter, Galliean Moons, Saturn?, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto and its three moons).

Here, I have an inquietant question. It is related to reaction wheels as it is one of the most delicate since it has short Meant Time Between Failures. Will the NH have enough redundancies to cover all NH's lifetime trip to Pluto. I am thinking that the spinning factor will help to NH to avoid the use as less as possible the wheel reactions or not?

Rodolfo

Posted by: BPCooper Nov 17 2005, 04:58 PM

QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Nov 17 2005, 09:55 AM)
The thermal/electrical simulator has no radioactive material. It doesn't match the
mass properties at all.

*


Despite not having the Pu, as I know, I would have figured it was designed to have the same mass/weight while still providing power using electricity.

Posted by: john_s Nov 17 2005, 05:56 PM

QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Nov 17 2005, 03:11 PM)
Then maybe, before to take any picture, or any measurement, one of three (x-y-z?) reaction wheels will be activated to stop before conducting any science activities when it is flying-by to any celestial bodies (Jupiter, Galliean Moons, Saturn?, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto and its three moons).

Here, I have an inquietant question. It is related to reaction wheels as it is one of the most delicate since it has short Meant Time Between Failures. Will the NH have enough redundancies to cover all NH's lifetime trip to Pluto. I am thinking that the spinning factor will help to NH to avoid the use as less as possible the wheel reactions or not?

Rodolfo
*


That's correct, we stop the spin when we want to make observations. However we do not carry reaction wheels- instead we use thrusters for controlling the spacecraft orientation and spin. This saves us mass compared to using reaction wheels, and eliminates a moving part that might fail, as you say. However it means that we have to be conservative in our maneuvering, because we have only a limited fuel supply. So spin mode helps us save fuel.

Posted by: BPCooper Nov 18 2005, 05:41 AM

Spin test Monday:

http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/images/medium/05pd2498-m.jpg


Posted by: Alan Stern Nov 18 2005, 10:04 PM

New Horizons highlights for the week ending 11/18/05 include:

* Conducted Autonomy Review on 11/15
* Conducted Pre-Fueling Review on 11/16
* On basis of the above, decided to delay hydrazine fueling by six days to allow
for additional autonomy testing on the spacecraft and NHOPS.
* Observatory hydrazine fueling now scheduled for Sunday, 12/4. No change
to beginning of launch window; holding firm at 1/11/06.
* Completed dry spin balance on 11/17. No surprises.
* MSIM 4 Part 3 repeat for pactice began 11/17 and is scheduled to complete 11/19.

Posted by: Rakhir Nov 20 2005, 03:31 PM

New Horizons Launch Preparations Move Ahead
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/news_center/news/111805.htm

"Rocket motor set to boost NH toward Pluto will be delivered safely and within the rigorous engineering standards demanded in the assembly and testing of such hardware.

Boeing replaced the five striking workers with six non-striking workers; the extra assembly worker was added to provide additional oversight. Each of the six current workers has at least eight years of experience with Boeing upper stage motors and is fully qualified to work on the project.

"We expect this experienced team to finish processing the rocket motor on schedule, so New Horizons can meet its prime launch opportunity in January."

Posted by: Comga Nov 20 2005, 07:32 PM

QUOTE (BPCooper @ Nov 17 2005, 10:58 AM)
Despite not having the Pu, as I know, I would have figured it was designed to have the same mass/weight while still providing power using electricity.
*



If you need to confirm what Alan says, look at the image from BPCoooper in

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=675&pid=27817&st=285&#

You will see the dummy RTG on the floor during the spin test. The blur of the RTG mass simulator is metalic gray, without heat fins. Obviously a completely different piece of hardware. Perhaps trying to get the power, mass, CG, and all other parameters equal to the real RTG was more complex than just building two simpler devices, one for temporary power, one for the spin tests.

Posted by: Decepticon Nov 26 2005, 03:34 PM

I have a question that has been asked of me before but I really had no answer to.


Are Pluto and Charon close enough to cause tidal heating?
Could Pluto's core be warm?

Posted by: john_s Nov 26 2005, 04:49 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 26 2005, 03:34 PM)
I have a question that has been asked of me before but I really had no answer to.
Are Pluto and Charon close enough to cause tidal heating?
Could Pluto's core be warm?
*


They are certainly close enough, but closeness isn't the only requirement. For one body to cause tidal heating in another, the relative distance and/or orientation of the two bodies must change, so that there's some periodic change in the shape of the body being heated- it's the changing shape that causes the heating. Pluto and Charon are locked into almost perfectly circular orbits around their center of mass, so while each is creating a large bulge in the surface of the other, the bulge never changes shape, so there's probably no significant tidal heating.

Pluto's core might still be warm, but it would be from radioactive heat in its interior, not from heating by Charon.

Posted by: tasp Nov 26 2005, 04:57 PM

QUOTE (Decepticon @ Nov 26 2005, 09:34 AM)
I have a question that has been asked of me before but I really had no answer to.
Are Pluto and Charon close enough to cause tidal heating?
Could Pluto's core be warm?
*



Assuming Pluto and Charon did not form tide locked (probably a pretty good bet), they would have interacted tidally till they did achieve lock.

Dissipation of significant amounts of heat in either body, considering their composition, would have been very interesting.

Consider that we know Charon's surface is depleted in methane compared to Pluto. Considering the volatility of methane, we may have some evidence of a past period of significant tidal heating on Charon.

Perhaps the NH mission will photograph signs of past heating on Charon.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)