Chang'e 5 sample return mission Options

[Phil Stooke]

Of course, a mechanical or electronic failure is likely to end the mission long before the RTG wears out (same as on Curiosity)

Phil

[yaohua2000]

Chang'e 5 atmospheric re-entry and parachute ejection system tested.

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[Paolo]

some scientific results from the lunar orbiting phase of the CE-5T1 mission:

A degree-100 lunar gravity model from the Chang’e 5T1 mission

Context. Chinese lunar missions have grown in number over the last ten years, with an increasing focus on radio science investigations. In previous work, we estimated two lunar gravity field models, CEGM01 and CEGM02. The recently lunar mission, Chang’e 5T1, which had an orbital inclination between 18 and 68 degrees, and collected orbital tracking data continually for two years, made an improved gravity field model possible.

Aims. Our aim was to estimate a new lunar gravity field model up to degree and order 100, CEGM03, and a new tidal Love number based on the Chang’e 5T1 tracking data combined with the historical tracking data used in the solution of CEGM02. The new model makes use of tracking data with this particular inclination, which has not been used in previous gravity field modeling.

Methods. The solution for this new model was based on our in-house software, LUGREAS. The gravity spectrum power, post-fit residuals after precision orbit determination (POD), lunar surface gravity anomalies, correlations between parameters, admittance and coherence with topography model, and accuracy of POD were analyzed to validate the new CEGM03 model.

Results. We analyzed the tracking data of the Chang’e 5T1 mission and estimated the CEGM03 lunar gravity field model. We found that the two-way Doppler measurement accuracy reached 0.2 mm s−1 with 10 s integration time. The error spectrum shows that the formal error for CEGM03 was at least reduced by about 2 times below the harmonic degree of 20, when compared to the CEGM02 model. The admittance and correlation of gravity and topography was also improved when compared to the correlations for the CEGM02 model. The lunar potential Love number k2 was estimated to be 0.02430±0.0001 (ten times the formal error).

Conclusions. From the model analysis and comparison of the various models, we identified improvements in the CEGM03 model after introducing Chang’e 5T1 tracking data. Moreover, this study illustrates how the low and middle inclination orbits could contribute better accuracy for a low degree of lunar gravity field.