Michael Meyer, about Phoenix and MSL |
Michael Meyer, about Phoenix and MSL |
Dec 23 2006, 09:43 AM
Post
#16
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
MSL will still have a battery, as all other RTG powered spacecraft have - to allow for peak power useage over and above the RTG output.
Doug |
|
|
Dec 23 2006, 01:51 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 6-April 06 From: Cape Canaveral Member No.: 734 |
MSL will still have a battery, as all other RTG powered spacecraft have - to allow for peak power useage over and above the RTG output. Doug Actually, MSL will be powered by the battery and the RTG will be used to charge it. Mission ops will be much like MER where there will be periods of "inactivity" to allow the battery to recharge. |
|
|
Guest_Analyst_* |
Dec 23 2006, 02:54 PM
Post
#18
|
Guests |
MSL will still have a battery, as all other RTG powered spacecraft have - to allow for peak power useage over and above the RTG output. Voyager did not have a battery, I am pretty sure Pioneer 10/11 didn't have one too. Not sure about Galileo and Ulysses, but I guess both didn't have one eighter. Cassini has one to power the radar. New Horizons doesn't have one. I believe the ALSEPs did not have a battery too. It's pretty uncommon for RTG spacecraft to have a battery. Analyst |
|
|
Dec 23 2006, 05:10 PM
Post
#19
|
|
Dublin Correspondent Group: Admin Posts: 1799 Joined: 28-March 05 From: Celbridge, Ireland Member No.: 220 |
It's pretty uncommon for RTG spacecraft to have a battery. That is probably true but a power subsystem that enables power acumulation enables much higher peak power loads than the peak power output from your RTG and that is a very good thing for a rover even if it is not hugely important for orbiter\flyby space craft. It wouldn't be a very effective use of the resources when you have 2400 whr of power per sol but you keep yourself limited by a 100watt peak load. |
|
|
Dec 23 2006, 05:23 PM
Post
#20
|
|
Interplanetary Dumpster Diver Group: Admin Posts: 4404 Joined: 17-February 04 From: Powell, TN Member No.: 33 |
Voyager did not have a battery, I am pretty sure Pioneer 10/11 didn't have one too. Not sure about Galileo and Ulysses, but I guess both didn't have one eighter. Cassini has one to power the radar. New Horizons doesn't have one. I believe the ALSEPs did not have a battery too. It's pretty uncommon for RTG spacecraft to have a battery. Analyst Pioneers 10 and 11 did have a battery, though it was useless by the later part of the mission. -------------------- |
|
|
Guest_Analyst_* |
Dec 24 2006, 09:32 AM
Post
#21
|
Guests |
|
|
|
Dec 24 2006, 10:52 AM
Post
#22
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I thought they did....MSL certainly will, and I know others have, I assumed they all had - my bad.
DOug |
|
|
Dec 24 2006, 11:06 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2488 Joined: 17-April 05 From: Glasgow, Scotland, UK Member No.: 239 |
Strangely, Sojourner's battery was a primary - ie non-rechargeable - battery - the solar panel didn't recharge it; and many allegedly 'non-nuclear' spacecraft have employed 'heaters' which use radioactive decay to heat the vehicle. Funny old world, eh?
Bob Shaw -------------------- Remember: Time Flies like the wind - but Fruit Flies like bananas!
|
|
|
Dec 27 2006, 12:57 AM
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 166 Joined: 20-September 05 From: North Texas Member No.: 503 |
Off topic...
But when we get around to sending a lander/rover into Shackleton Crater at the lunar south pole, will there likely be only a battery to power it, for a short-term mission? I can't imagine sending an RTG there if there is a hope to use any possible ice resources that may exist. And a solar panel wouldn't be of much use in a perpetually shadowed crater. David |
|
|
Dec 27 2006, 08:52 AM
Post
#25
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2488 Joined: 17-April 05 From: Glasgow, Scotland, UK Member No.: 239 |
Off topic... But when we get around to sending a lander/rover into Shackleton Crater at the lunar south pole, will there likely be only a battery to power it, for a short-term mission? I can't imagine sending an RTG there if there is a hope to use any possible ice resources that may exist. And a solar panel wouldn't be of much use in a perpetually shadowed crater. David David: An RTG would be ideal - simple, light, happy in the cold and darkness! And although you might not want to hug one on a long-term basis, pretty safe. One problem with RTGs is their rarity - fuel and hardware production is erratic, to put it mildly. Alternatives *might* include a long power cable leading to a sunlit lander, or even an internal combustion engine (the exhaust would be fun!). Still, there *have* been stranger propulsion systems suggested over the yeras, such as the mobile windmill on Venus (I kid you not)... Bob Shaw -------------------- Remember: Time Flies like the wind - but Fruit Flies like bananas!
|
|
|
Guest_Geographer_* |
Jun 21 2007, 10:00 AM
Post
#26
|
Guests |
Of all the things to protest in the world, tiny nuclear reactors on one-way trips into space for the pursuit of science is awfully trivial. I don't understand why procuring RTGs is a problem: shouldn't NASA with its government connections get top priority?
|
|
|
Jun 22 2007, 11:31 AM
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 6-April 06 From: Cape Canaveral Member No.: 734 |
Of all the things to protest in the world, tiny nuclear reactors on one-way trips into space for the pursuit of science is awfully trivial. I don't understand why procuring RTGs is a problem: shouldn't NASA with its government connections get top priority? Government connections? NASA is the government and that why RTG procurement is hard. The "people" want a rigorous (maybe overly) process to make sure the environment and people are not endangered. As for "top priority", there are other goverment users |
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 04:47 AM
Post
#28
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1870 Joined: 20-February 05 Member No.: 174 |
There's also the one minor detail.. Nukes are *** EVIL ***. Only practitioners of the dark side of the force dabble with nukes... (etc. etc. etc.. froth, rage, babble....)
I was VASTLY relieved that there has been a declining trend of anti-nuke hobbyists entertaining themselves at the Cape from Galileo to Cassini to New Horizons... may that trend continue! |
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 08:16 AM
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 599 Joined: 26-August 05 Member No.: 476 |
Government connections? NASA is the government and that why RTG procurement is hard. The "people" want a rigorous (maybe overly) process to make sure the environment and people are not endangered. As for "top priority", there are other goverment users Interesting last comment. There were press stories that mentioned the use of RTG's by remote information collection equipment emplaced on the ocean floor and in the Himalayas. But that was during the Cold War. I was VASTLY relieved that there has been a declining trend of anti-nuke hobbyists entertaining themselves at the Cape from Galileo to Cassini to New Horizons... may that trend continue! One can count on the hardcore anti-nuke folks to be at the MSL launch. |
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 04:51 PM
Post
#30
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1281 Joined: 18-December 04 From: San Diego, CA Member No.: 124 |
One can count on the hardcore anti-nuke folks to be at the MSL launch. So they will then be standing in the "radioactive fallout zone" if there is a launch vehicle failure? Seriously, if one is going to spend one's time protesting nuclear material on top of a rocket, one would probably want to spend some time worrying about these ones, instead of a wee lil' RTG.... EDS - feel free to cull if too political for the board. -------------------- Lyford Rome
"Zis is not nuts, zis is super-nuts!" Mathematician Richard Courant on viewing an Orion test |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd September 2024 - 02:29 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. |