The Pioneer Anomaly Options

[remcook]

http://www.planetary.org/news/2005/pioneer_anomaly_faq.html

The planetary society may be checking it out...

The Planetary Society has committed to raise the funds to preserve the priceless Pioneer data from destruction.


After years of analysis, but without a final conclusion, NASA, astonishingly, gave up trying to solve the "Pioneer Anomaly" and provided no funds to analyze the data. The Pioneer data exists on a few hundred ancient 7- and 9-track magnetic tapes, which can only be read on "antique" outdated computers. The agency is going to scrap, literally demolish, the only computers able to access and process that data in the next few months!

[Steffen]

Sorry, but what is this anomaly about?
( I'm a Newbie asking too many questions )

[The Messenger]

Sorry, but what is this anomaly about?
( I'm a Newbie asking too many questions  )

Here is a concise summary by the three principles:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0411/0411077.pdf

And if you want to see how exhaustively this phenomena has been explored, here is another 55 pages:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0104/0104064.pdf

NASA's unwillingness to fund a follow-up mission, or even preserve historical data that may shed additional light is disheartening. We know our physical models are close, and we also know exceptions that may require new models, if they exist, must be hiding in the fringes. Anderson & company have tried every avenue they can imagine to null this anomaly as an artifact, and have been unable to do so.

[JRehling]

NASA's unwillingness to fund a follow-up mission, or even preserve historical data that may shed additional light is disheartening.
[...]
Anderson & company have tried every avenue they can imagine to null this anomaly as an artifact, and have been unable to do so.

From a risk assessment basis, I don't find it disheartening that no dedicated mission is on the books. For one, it's possible (even if unlikely, and I mean no disrespect to Anderson et al) that future analysis will lead to a forehead-slapping resolution to the anomaly. That head-slap would be a lot harder if we had a $150 million mission already in interplanetary cruise for no good reason when the anomaly were understood. It's also possible that a future mission could investigate this completely in line with its other, primary goals.

There is no way we can investigate various outer solar system objects in great detail without visits from spacecraft. There's no chance that an ingenious look at old data will suddenly give us maps of the unseen hemispheres of the uranian moons. But in this case, there is a chance, and there's no urgency to resolving the mystery before the ground on which it rests has been plowed into dust by means much, much cheaper than a spacecraft.

The disregard for the existing data is rather more disheartening, but simply goes to show how things can be neglected for their due worth by a boxology-driven bureaucracy like NASA.

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

From a risk assessment basis, I don't find it disheartening that no dedicated mission is on the books. For one, it's possible (even if unlikely, and I mean no disrespect to Anderson et al) that future analysis will lead to a forehead-slapping resolution to the anomaly. That head-slap would be a lot harder if we had a $150 million mission already in interplanetary cruise for no good reason when the anomaly were understood. It's also possible that a future mission could investigate this completely in line with its other, primary goals.

There is no way we can investigate various outer solar system objects in great detail without visits from spacecraft. There's no chance that an ingenious look at old data will suddenly give us maps of the unseen hemispheres of the uranian moons. But in this case, there is a chance, and there's no urgency to resolving the mystery before the ground on which it rests has been plowed into dust by means much, much cheaper than a spacecraft.

The disregard for the existing data is rather more disheartening, but simply goes to show how things can be neglected for their due worth by a boxology-driven bureaucracy like NASA.

I agree with this, especially with the conclusion. THE EXISTING DATA MUST BE KEPT SAFE and analyzed completelly. The results must be confirmed by other flights (of which it can be a secondary goal) before sending a dedicated mission.