Kepler Mission |
Kepler Mission |
Sep 24 2005, 04:23 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 3-July 04 From: Chicago, IL Member No.: 91 |
This NASA Discovery mission is to be launched in June 2008 and will search for Earth-size and smaller planets. Launch was originally scheduled in 2007 but delayed by 8 months due to "funding constraints".
Here's the official web site: http://www.kepler.arc.nasa.gov/ |
|
|
Mar 7 2009, 07:45 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 5-January 06 Member No.: 636 |
Congratulations on a succesful launch to everyone involved with the Kepler mission.
I have two questions which someone here may be able to enlighten me on: 1. Why wasn't an L2 orbit used (similar to the forthcoming Herschel and Planck missions)? Wouldn't an L2 orbit give a longer mission lifetime? 2. If/when an exo-planet is detected, is there any way to determine the eccentricity of it's orbit (either by Kepler or by ground based observations)? Best regards, Brian |
|
|
Mar 8 2009, 01:49 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 213 Joined: 21-January 07 From: Wigan, England Member No.: 1638 |
1. Why wasn't an L2 orbit used (similar to the forthcoming Herschel and Planck missions)? Wouldn't an L2 orbit give a longer mission lifetime? I recall L2 being mentioned early on, but they descoped along the way in order to fit on a Delta II -- it's sobering to think Kepler was rejected four times before being accepted! |
|
|
Mar 8 2009, 06:11 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 5-January 06 Member No.: 636 |
I recall L2 being mentioned early on, but they descoped along the way in order to fit on a Delta II -- it's sobering to think Kepler was rejected four times before being accepted! Thanks Del. I'm certainly glad Kepler made the cut in the end!Some back-of-the-envelope calculations tell me that Kepler has a max. dV of ~23m/s (assuming 12kg propellant, ISP 2000Ns/kg) From what I can find out on the web, Herschel(direct injection to L2 halo orbit) will need ~200m/s dV (inc. safety margin). So Kepler would require ~90kg of extra propellant on board to match that. The largest component of the Herschel dV budget seems to be for correction of launcher error. So I guess it's largely down to the accuracy required for a launch to L2 halo orbit (compared to a launch to Earth-trailing heliocentric orbit). @scalbers: Thanks so much for the link to the Kepler/Planet Detection Methods page. That makes the limitations of the different methods quite clear. I was just wondering if a system similar to the Earth/Sun were detected, could we tell whether it was a "habitable" place (low eccentricity) or being alternately roasted and frozen every orbit (high eccentricity). Best regards, Brian |
|
|
Mar 8 2009, 07:53 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 723 Joined: 13-June 04 Member No.: 82 |
That makes the limitations of the different methods quite clear. I was just wondering if a system similar to the Earth/Sun were detected, could we tell whether it was a "habitable" place (low eccentricity) or being alternately roasted and frozen every orbit (high eccentricity). It would be possible to determine that a particular planet had a high-eccentricity orbit using only transit information (under certain viewing circumstances), but many high-eccentricity planets would not be recognized as such. The time between successive planetary transits (combined with the primary star's estimated mass) determines the semi-major axis, while the total duration of the transit from first to last contact is determined by the "impact factor" (how central the transit is, relative to the stellar disk), the diameter of the stellar primary and the velocity of the planet while transiting in front of the star. So if the stellar parameters are reasonably well-known, a transit duration longer than that expected from a central transit of a low-eccentricity planet says that the planet must be slower (and hence farther from its primary) at that moment than expected at any time in a low-eccentricity orbit, and so its eccentricity must be high. However, a transit duration less than the expected duration of a central transit and a low-eccentricity orbit means little, since the transit might be off-center or grazing, which would reduce its duration as well. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:42 PM |
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. |