Europa PR, A couple of new posts to the Photojournal |
Europa PR, A couple of new posts to the Photojournal |
Dec 20 2007, 09:26 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2530 Joined: 20-April 05 Member No.: 321 |
Thick or Thin Ice Shell on Europa?
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA10131 Europa Tide Movie http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA10149 I'm not sure that there is any new science involved. Seems to me like some nice eye candy for the purpose of getting Europa into the collective consciousness before the next flagship is chosen. |
|
|
Dec 21 2007, 09:46 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
Io is just a whole order of magnitude more difficult to do, in-close. The radiation environment there is extraordinary. The surface conditions on most of the globe are straight from Dante's Inferno. Orbiters and landers would be fried extremely fast.
You almost have to do your Io science from something of a distance. -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Dec 22 2007, 02:45 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 220 Joined: 13-October 05 Member No.: 528 |
Io is just a whole order of magnitude more difficult to do, in-close. The radiation environment there is extraordinary. The surface conditions on most of the globe are straight from Dante's Inferno. Orbiters and landers would be fried extremely fast. -the other Doug I agree that doing an Io Orbiter or lander would be really expensive. And the science payload on something like JSO is also very heavy and very expensive. I was specifially reffering to the Billion Dollar mission class.... essentially a bit of a beefed up New Frontiers budget. For that price you could reasonably do a three axis stabilzed, moderately instrumented probe. Put it into a highly elliptical orbit and make repeated encounters. A single such flyby would return more data than Galileo did over it's entire mission. Even if the probe's electronics can only handle 10-20 flybys (which is roughly what Juno is designed for, IIRC) that is a hell of a science return. I keep hoping Europe would step up to that plate, see a chance to do some exciting science that the US wasn't interested in. Unfortunately they appear to have been hi-jacked by the Europa Mafia. They are also looking for partners. If that results in us somehow managing to afford both Titan and a Europa mission in the next 20 years, horay. Otherwise.... shame they didn't jump at Io while we were engaged elsewhere. Or at just about anything in the outer planets... there are so many lonely targets out there. Bare Bones Uranian Orbiter anyone? Anyone? |
|
|
Dec 22 2007, 04:54 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 715 Joined: 22-April 05 Member No.: 351 |
I was specifially reffering to the Billion Dollar mission class.... essentially a bit of a beefed up New Frontiers budget. For that price you could reasonably do a three axis stabilzed, moderately instrumented probe. Put it into a highly elliptical orbit and make repeated encounters. A single such flyby would return more data than Galileo did over it's entire mission. Even if the probe's electronics can only handle 10-20 flybys (which is roughly what Juno is designed for, IIRC) that is a hell of a science return. If if I remember the JSO report, they concluded that another Galileo-style orbiter would add enough understanding of the Galilean moons to be useful. An orbiter would be needed to get at the next level of questions. The EE report explicitly states that the key questions for Europa cannot be answered with flybys. I personally disagree. Not only did Galileo have very limited data return, its instruments were vintage 1975ish. Flying modern instruments would tell us a lot more. What would be lost for Europa would be the ability, as I read the report, to really nail down where to send a lander. Since the first lander will be able to study only the surface and near sub-surface, its really important to know where the surface has most likely interacted recently with the deeper subsurface. Also, it's essential to understand the terrain at ~1m scales to characterize lander safety issues. As for the cost of a Galileo repeat, I think that if it goes into the inner Jovian system, it may not fit within the budget of a New Frontiers. Juno fills the budget, doesn't have radioisotope power sources, and has modest radiation hardening. A Galileo repeat would have all those. A craft that stayed out near Ganymede with maybe a few Europa flybys might avoid the need for these budget busting features. It could also have even a larger camera than what JSO is proposed to carry for remote studies of Io (which I find fascinating). My emerging view is that the Jovian system is important to understand -- it seems to be a common planetary type around other stars. I think that a modest Galieo- style orbiter combined with a much less capable Europa orbiter a la the ESA makes sense as the next step. Studying that system, though, is just too hard because of the radiation and landers on Europa in interesting places is likely to be really hard -- there's lots of rough terrain. So I'd keep my investments in Jovian craft modest. And then I'd put my big money into Titan where the moon is endlessly fascinating, there's no radiation, and a wonderful atmosphere to simplify landing or floating about. -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th September 2024 - 01:50 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |