MAVEN development to orbit insertion |
MAVEN development to orbit insertion |
Jul 30 2012, 02:31 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 60 Joined: 22-October 04 Member No.: 102 |
Not sure if this has been touched on before, I did not see a place for the MAVEN mission on the Past or Future missions subsection.
1)Will MAVEN have the ability to relay communication from the surface vehicles to Earth? 2)Am I correct in reading there are no visual cameras on MAVEN? Fair Use. http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/maven/scienc...rument-package/ The Particles and Fields Package, built by the University of California, Berkeley/Space Sciences Laboratory (SSL) with support from the University of Colorado Boulder/Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), contains six instruments that will characterize the solar wind and the ionosphere of the planet: •Solar Wind Electron Analyzer (SWEA) •Solar Wind Ion Analyzer (SWIA) •Suprathermal and Thermal Ion Composition (STATIC) •Solar Energetic Particle (SEP) •Langmuir Probe and Waves (LPW) •Magnetometer (MAG) The Remote Sensing Package, built by LASP, will determine global characteristics of the upper atmosphere and ionosphere via remote sensing. •Imaging Ultraviolet Spectrometer (IUVS) The Neutral Gas and Ion Mass Spectrometer (NGIMS), provided by GFSC, will measure the composition and isotopes of neutral ions. Apologies in advance if this has already been answered. (btw I think we do need a MAVEN sticky in future missions) John (Mars) |
|
|
Jul 30 2012, 03:34 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Forum Contributor Group: Members Posts: 1374 Joined: 8-February 04 From: North East Florida, USA. Member No.: 11 |
"NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., will provide navigation support, the Deep Space Network, and Electra telecommunications relay package."
Overview So yes to Q1. As far as I recall it's going to be NASA policy to fly a relay package on all NASA orbiters, and proberbly ESA has the same policy. |
|
|
Jul 30 2012, 03:49 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 293 Joined: 29-August 06 From: Columbia, MD Member No.: 1083 |
Yes to both questions. However, MAVEN will not as useful for surface communications since it will be in a highly elliptical orbit. It's possible after several years they might adjust the orbit to make it more comm-friendly, but I wouldn't count on it. For that very reason, a *possible* 2018 orbiter will almost certainly have future lander comm as one its primary objectives.
NASA pays to put an Elektra comm package on all Mars-bound spacecraft and will pay for one on the 2016 ESA Trace Gas Orbiter if/when it flys. That, in fact, is the only remaining US contribution to that mission. |
|
|
Jul 30 2012, 04:18 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 60 Joined: 22-October 04 Member No.: 102 |
Thanks, That was what I had assumed (Telecom on all orbiters) but could not find any mention (without knowing the Elektra package was that).
As much as I wish all missions could be mobile rovers / Sample Return / Human Exploration setup missions, we certainly need coverage for our landers and orbital relay capability. I was sad to see the MTO cancelled. I will have my mini mission control set up for next Sunday / Monday mornings MSL landing (with Odyssey thankfully back on track) which led me to that question about coverage. Thanks again. John |
|
|
Jul 30 2012, 05:08 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Forum Contributor Group: Members Posts: 1374 Joined: 8-February 04 From: North East Florida, USA. Member No.: 11 |
I believe the plan with MAVEN is to park it in a good orbit for communications once the primary mission objectives are achieved, I think I heard that on a conference one time. It would be illogical to put an electra onboard that could hardly be utilized.
|
|
|
Jul 30 2012, 06:12 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 293 Joined: 29-August 06 From: Columbia, MD Member No.: 1083 |
I believe the plan with MAVEN is to park it in a good orbit for communications once the primary mission objectives are achieved, I think I heard that on a conference one time. It would be illogical to put an electra onboard that could hardly be utilized. Yes, I've heard something similar. But I've also heard that they have intent to lower their "dip" altitude during an extended mission to get some additional science. The Elektra isn't useless in an elliptical orbit (see Mars Express for an example), just not as reliable for daily science relay operations like a lander would need. |
|
|
Jul 31 2012, 02:13 AM
Post
#7
|
|
Forum Contributor Group: Members Posts: 1374 Joined: 8-February 04 From: North East Florida, USA. Member No.: 11 |
|
|
|
Jan 31 2013, 01:18 PM
Post
#8
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 93 Joined: 21-January 13 Member No.: 6845 |
Well the comms orbit would be after an extended mission then . One scientist of MAVEN said in 2009 on a Marsexpress meeting they told nasa they will built in the electra package and nasa said no you also have to connect it. This brings it to the point the scientists will like to go deeper and deeper into the atmosphere and in the end burn the thing in a very low dip. The scientists are not in favor of the idea that the spacecraft although it is still working has to do relay work. I still hope for enough orbiting spacecrafts in the future. The ExoMars Tacegas Orbiter will also have an electra module. |
|
|
Jan 31 2013, 03:53 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 50 Joined: 16-January 06 Member No.: 646 |
This brings it to the point the scientists will like to go deeper and deeper into the atmosphere and in the end burn the thing in a very low dip. The scientists are not in favor of the idea that the spacecraft although it is still working has to do relay work. Given NASA's lack of any NASA-primary orbiters before the 2020 rover (concept), it is unlikely that NASA would be highly motivated to sacrifice the spacecraft for the ultimate "deep dip". Furthermore, with extended missions comes extended (though usually reduced) funding...and I have faith that the MAVEN PI and Co-Is will see the wisdom of continued, if reduced, funding and scientific returns enabled with a more telecom-friendly orbit. |
|
|
Jan 31 2013, 05:38 PM
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 293 Joined: 29-August 06 From: Columbia, MD Member No.: 1083 |
Per Bruce Jakosky at the pre-AGU MAVEN workshop, MAVEN's nominal orbit is not as unfriendly to rover/lander comm as one might think just by eyeball.
|
|
|
Jan 31 2013, 10:04 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 718 Joined: 22-April 05 Member No.: 351 |
For the 2020 rover mission, NASA is planning on having the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, MAVEN, and ESA/Russia's Trace Gas Orbiter. I believe the Odyssey will run out of fuel before then. MRO would be especially important for detailed imaging, although it has been actively imaging a list of candidate sites. I think that prophylactic imaging covers only the potential landing eclipse, not the full extent of the possible roving area. Anyone know for sure?
-------------------- |
|
|
Feb 2 2013, 11:20 AM
Post
#12
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 93 Joined: 21-January 13 Member No.: 6845 |
Per Bruce Jakosky at the pre-AGU MAVEN workshop, MAVEN's nominal orbit is not as unfriendly to rover/lander comm as one might think just by eyeball. The problem is not that they do not have a unfriendly orbit, but that they have to serve the rovers and their own science, puting some restrictions on them. |
|
|
Apr 9 2013, 09:42 PM
Post
#13
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1598 Joined: 14-October 05 From: Vermont Member No.: 530 |
|
|
|
Apr 10 2013, 03:34 AM
Post
#14
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2113 Joined: 13-February 10 From: Ontario Member No.: 5221 |
Was it ever explained why the ends of the solar panels are bent inward like that? Does it have to do with the magnetometers? I don't see how that angling would provide more power.
|
|
|
Apr 10 2013, 04:03 AM
Post
#15
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2173 Joined: 28-December 04 From: Florida, USA Member No.: 132 |
Was it ever explained why the ends of the solar panels are bent...? My guess: So they can be as long as possible and still fit in the fairing? Also, no solar cells are on the bent portions so nothing to do with power, just increasing the length (distance from craft).
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:47 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. |