IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

14 Pages V  « < 9 10 11 12 13 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Onwards to Uranus and Neptune!
Holder of the Tw...
post Aug 20 2009, 01:52 PM
Post #151


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 540
Joined: 17-November 05
From: Oklahoma
Member No.: 557



Don't forget one other possiblility, aerocapture followed by a satellite swingby to raise the periapsis. In Neptune's case you might be able to use Triton. For Uranus, well... probably not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Aug 20 2009, 02:06 PM
Post #152


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4404
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Holder of the Two Leashes @ Aug 20 2009, 02:52 PM) *
Don't forget one other possiblility, aerocapture followed by a satellite swingby to raise the periapsis. In Neptune's case you might be able to use Triton. For Uranus, well... probably not.


A problem with that is that the uncertainties concerning Neptune's atmosphere translate to a very uncertain trajectory. It would be very hard to pass close enough to Triton to get the desired effect without risking lithobreaking.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Holder of the Tw...
post Aug 20 2009, 04:29 PM
Post #153


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 540
Joined: 17-November 05
From: Oklahoma
Member No.: 557



There are various ways to address that problem. Observations of stellar occultations of Uranus and Neptune can help refine the models of their upper atmospheres. This is especially true of space based observations where you can observe a broader range of the spectrum, plus less noise in the signal.

Then there is the heatshield. The manned Gemini and Apollo capsules had off-center shields that allowed for some adjustment and piloting of the trajectory during entry. The same principle can be applied to aerocapture. With a sensitive enough inertial guidence system and enough built-in intelligence, the craft could fly its way through the upper atmosphere to the proper outcome for orbital speed and direction (within a reasonable initial approach, of course).

Finally, the craft doesn't have to immediately aim for Triton on the way out. The orbit would be a long loop outward that could have a period of maybe half a year. Such an orbit would be very sensitive at apoapsis to small adjustments leading to large changes in targeting later on, putting Triton well within range. On the way back to Neptune you make a close pass to the moon and ... there you go. It might be possible to "flatten out" the orbit, lowering apoapsis and raising the periapsis at the same time.

Plus, I don't think it really would take all that much fuel at apoapsis to raise the orbit out of the atmosphere, so a satellite flyby might not be all that necessary to save the spacecraft (highly desirable, though, to reduce the period).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tasp
post Aug 20 2009, 06:14 PM
Post #154


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 903
Joined: 30-January 05
Member No.: 162



There is a thread here somewhere (sorry don't have time to check right now) about aerobraking at Triton. As I recall, the scale height of that atmosphere is useful for the technique, and having an orbit about Neptune with your low point at the height of Triton's orbit might be handy.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Juramike
post Aug 20 2009, 06:47 PM
Post #155


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2785
Joined: 10-November 06
From: Pasadena, CA
Member No.: 1345



QUOTE (tasp @ Aug 20 2009, 01:14 PM) *
There is a thread here somewhere (sorry don't have time to check right now) about aerobraking at Triton. As I recall, the scale height of that atmosphere is useful for the technique, and having an orbit about Neptune with your low point at the height of Triton's orbit might be handy.


Uhhh, wait a minute, are you recommending to use Triton's atmosphere for aerobraking?


--------------------
Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Floyd
post Aug 20 2009, 09:08 PM
Post #156


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 910
Joined: 4-September 06
From: Boston
Member No.: 1102



tsp my be confused. Two earlier post were talking about Neptune aerocapture and swingby of Triton to raise periapsis--while avoiding lithobreaking. wink.gif





--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tasp
post Aug 20 2009, 09:59 PM
Post #157


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 903
Joined: 30-January 05
Member No.: 162



Here it is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gsnorgathon
post Aug 24 2009, 12:21 AM
Post #158


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 259
Joined: 23-January 05
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 156



Would it be possible to use an atmosphere probe to get enough info to mitigate the risks of aerocapture? It seems you'd want to have an atmosphere probe along for the ride anyway.

(And btw - isn't it lithobraking, rather than breaking? Though I guess both ultimately amount to the same thing... (and in Triton's case, wouldn't it be cryobraking? (And if you cried when your probe cryobraked and cryobroke, would anyone be so cruel as to call you a cryobaby?)))
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Greg Hullender
post Aug 24 2009, 10:17 PM
Post #159


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1018
Joined: 29-November 05
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Member No.: 590



I always assumed that "lithobreaking" was a deliberate joke. I prefer to call it "impact." :-)

--Greg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Aug 25 2009, 01:11 AM
Post #160


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4404
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Greg Hullender @ Aug 24 2009, 11:17 PM) *
I always assumed that "lithobreaking" was a deliberate joke. I prefer to call it "impact." :-)

--Greg



Yes, you assumed correctly. The "break" instead of "brak" was a tongue-in-cheek reference to what happens when one hits the lithosphere.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Juramike
post Aug 25 2009, 01:46 AM
Post #161


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2785
Joined: 10-November 06
From: Pasadena, CA
Member No.: 1345



QUOTE (Gsnorgathon @ Aug 23 2009, 07:21 PM) *
Would it be possible to use an atmosphere probe to get enough info to mitigate the risks of aerocapture? It seems you'd want to have an atmosphere probe along for the ride anyway.


You'd want the atmospheric probe to return data well before trying an aerocapture. You'd need the parameters well in advance to plan and design for how much fuel to carry for the retro-burn, the ballute design, etc..

Atmospheric probes might make the next Neptune mission aerocapture possible, but not the first one.



--------------------
Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
briv1016
post Nov 5 2009, 12:15 PM
Post #162


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 239
Joined: 18-December 07
From: New York
Member No.: 3982



In conjunction with the Decadal Survey, the "Giant Planets Panel" had a study performed in regards to a Neptune Orbiter/Flyby/Probe.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/pages/ima...0NeptuneRMA.pdf
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Drkskywxlt
post Nov 5 2009, 06:16 PM
Post #163


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 293
Joined: 29-August 06
From: Columbia, MD
Member No.: 1083



QUOTE (briv1016 @ Nov 5 2009, 06:15 AM) *
In conjunction with the Decadal Survey, the "Giant Planets Panel" had a study performed in regards to a Neptune Orbiter/Flyby/Probe.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/pages/ima...0NeptuneRMA.pdf


Unless something changed, this study also had a recommendation and co-sponsorship from the Satellites Panel due to the likely high emphasis on Triton science.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vjkane
post Nov 5 2009, 07:19 PM
Post #164


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 706
Joined: 22-April 05
Member No.: 351



QUOTE (Drkskywxlt @ Nov 5 2009, 07:16 PM) *
Unless something changed, this study also had a recommendation and co-sponsorship from the Satellites Panel due to the likely high emphasis on Triton science.

This assessment was commissioned as part of the first wave of mission assessments selected prior to the science community input. (See http://futureplanets.blogspot.com/2009/11/...ssessments.html). My understanding is that there will be several tens (low tens?) of rapid mission assessments and around a dozen full mission architectures and costings.

What I found interesting in this Neptune/Triton assessment was that the cheapest orbiter mission is probably about $1.5-2B, while the more capable missions are in the $3+B range. (Scaling from a New Frontiers flyby cost factor.) This suggests that there is an intermediate class of missions possible between flybys and full Flagship missions.

Fitting an intermediate mission into a $12B decadal budget with a moderate Mars program and JEO, however, would be difficult.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Greg Hullender
post Nov 8 2009, 01:56 AM
Post #165


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1018
Joined: 29-November 05
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Member No.: 590



I'm just absorbing the fact that a 14-year mission launched in 2035 (the latest date mentioned) would enter its extended mission just after I turn 90.

--Greg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

14 Pages V  « < 9 10 11 12 13 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th April 2024 - 04:14 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.