Plutos New Moons Part 2, News ... Options

[Guest_Myran_*]

Alan Stern Said: ....only HST was capable of the task, and it found them in just 8 minutes flat.

Once again we're reminded of the usefulness of Hubble, and the need of one repair mission to keep it going.
And no I cant place any bets on being alive in 2016, facts speaks against that so I close the book on Pluto by going with the 'collision created theory' for Charon and the two new moons.

[ElkGroveDan]

And no I cant place any bets on being alive in 2016, facts speaks against that so I close the book on Pluto

Now, now, one must remain an optimist. You never know what surprises lie in store in the near fututre. And if we don't figure it out with HST or some creative use of other instruments prior to NH, then there is always the possibility that Vulcans will land in Montana next year and take some of us on a tour of our solar system. Then you'll have your answers. (So be prepared to tell them how to pronounce "Quaoar" when you get there.)

[Bob Shaw]

Now, now, one must remain an optimist. You never know what surprises lie in store in the near fututre. And if we don't figure it out with HST or some creative use of other instruments prior to NH, then there is always the possibility that Vulcans will land in Montana next year and take some of us on a tour of our solar system. Then you'll have your answers. (So be prepared to tell them how to pronounce "Quaoar" when you get there.)

Er... ...2063?

Did I miss an episode or ten?

Bob Shaw

[Guest_Myran_*]

Well thank you ElkGroveDan trying to cheer me up. Actually im not the slightest depressed over this fact. But rather pleased that the 'space buff' part of me have gotten answers to most of the things i've wondered about our moons. As for Pluto i view the things we know as half the answer.

Vulcans? Oh you got me there, its my pointy MrSpock ears that helps me to be all logical about all these facts.
Everything sounds logical when I put them on. Dunno if that was the manufacturers intention, or should I turn them in for a refund?

[ElkGroveDan]

Did I miss an episode or ten?

It was a post-series movie called First Contact

[Jeff7]

Once again we're reminded of the usefulness of Hubble, and the need of one repair mission to keep it going.
And no I cant place any bets on being alive in 2016, facts speaks against that so I close the book on Pluto by going with the 'collision created theory' for Charon and the two new moons.

I remember reading somewhere online that they could build an upgraded Hubble and launch it for less than the cost of a servicing mission. Just getting the shuttle ready for launch is a huge expense. The major expense of designing the Hubble is paid for already - now they just would need to follow the existing plans to build another one.

[Bob Shaw]

I remember reading somewhere online that they could build an upgraded Hubble and launch it for less than the cost of a servicing mission. Just getting the shuttle ready for launch is a huge expense. The major expense of designing the Hubble is paid for already - now they just would need to follow the existing plans to build another one.

Jeff7:

Perfectly true.

I still reckon that the James Webb Space Telescope is too mechanically complicated *not* to be man-tended, however!

Bob Shaw

[ljk4-1]

Astrophysics, abstract
astro-ph/0511837

From: Andrew Steffl [view email]

Date (v1): Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:37:52 GMT (124kb)
Date (revised v2): Wed, 12 Apr 2006 21:25:39 GMT (249kb)

New Constraints on Additional Satellites of the Pluto System

Authors: A.J. Steffl, M.J. Mutchler, H.A. Weaver, S.A.Stern, D.D. Durda, D. Terrell, W.J. Merline, L.A. Young, E.F. Young, M.W. Buie, J.R. Spencer

Comments: 17 pages including 4 figures

Observations of Pluto and its solar-tidal stability zone were made using the Advanced Camera for Surveys' (ACS) Wide Field Channel (WFC) on the Hubble Space Telescope on UT 2005 May 15 and UT 2005 May 18. Two small satellites of Pluto, provisionally designated S/2005 P 1 and S/2005 P 2, were discovered, as discussed by Weaver et al. (2006) and Stern et al. (2006a). Confirming observations of the newly discovered moons were obtained using the ACS in the High Resolution Channel (HRC) mode on 2006 Feb 15 (Mutchler et al. 2006). Both sets of observations provide strong constraints on the existence of any additional satellites in the Pluto system. Based on the May 2005 observations using the ACS/WFC, we place a 90%-confidence lower limit of m_V = 26.8 (m_V = 27.4 for a 50%-confidence lower limit) on the magnitude of undiscovered satellites greater than 5" (1.1x10^5 km) from Pluto. Using the 2005 Feb 15 ACS/HRC observations we place 90%-confidence lower limits on the apparent magnitude of any additional satellites of m_V = 26.4 between 3"-5" (6.9x10^4-1.1x10^5 km) from Pluto, m_V = 25.7 between 1"-3" (2.3x10^4-6.9x10^4 km) from Pluto, and m_V = 24. between 0.3"-1" (6.9x10^3-2.3x10^4 km) from Pluto. The 90%-confidence magnitude limits translate into upper limits on the diameters of undiscovered satellites of 29 km outside of 5" from Pluto, 36 km between 3"-5" from Pluto, 49 km between 1"-3" from Pluto, and 115 km between 0.3"-1" for a comet-like albedo of p_V = 0.04. If potential satellites are assumed to have a Charon-like albedo of p_V = 0.38, the diameter limits are 9 km, 12 km, 16 km, and 37 km, respectively.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0511837

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

I remember reading somewhere online that they could build an upgraded Hubble and launch it for less than the cost of a servicing mission. Just getting the shuttle ready for launch is a huge expense. The major expense of designing the Hubble is paid for already - now they just would need to follow the existing plans to build another one.

Yup. More to the point, NASA KNEW this to be true almost from the beginning, and (according to the former head of the National Academy of Sciences' Space Science Board) actually threatened the scientific advocates of Hubble into keeping their mouths shut on the subject by informing them that unless they publicly backed Shuttle repair missions instead of launching Hubble replacements (which could be done on unmanned boosters), NASA would make sure they never got ANY kind of Hubble. (They had wanted one at a somewhat higher altitude, which would allow better and longer-duration observations but make Shuttle repair flights impossible.) Charming.

There also already exists a detailed design for a more capable but cheaper replacement Hubble -- called "Hubble Origins Probe" (you can find data on it in several places on the Web) -- which, however, has been ruled out for the time being in favor of yet another Shuttle repair flight.

[SigurRosFan]

The Positions, Colors, and Photometric Variability of Pluto's Small Satellites from HST Observations 2005-2006

- http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0605014

HST related paper with all four observations (15.1 and 18.1 May 2005, 15.7 February 2006, and 2.8 March 2006).