Landing on Mercury on equator at perihelion Options

[Rem31]

How will it be to make a manned landing at Mercury at its closest to the sun (perihelion) on its equator when the sun is in the zenith ,what are the dangers of a landing then? Do we need to be protected against the sunheat and radiation then? How strong is the heat and radiation of the sun then ,and is it dangerous when the solaractivity is high then? What kind of spacesuits do we need then? Better protected suits than we have used on the apollo moonlandings i think. Can you explain how a landing on Mercury will be when it is at perihelion and land on its equator with the sun directly overhead? I hope it will ever happen. Lets start discuss about it.

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

An ion drive would do well on a trajectory to Mercury. Plenty of solar energy.


I cannot calculate if such a trajectory is feasible, but I well see a probe launched at 11km/s from Earth on a sun orbit, spiraling closer an closer from Mercury orbit, until it is caugh in orbit around it. Then it continues braking with its ion drive untill it is on a low orbit. After of course a classical chemical rocket is necessary to land.

Such a mission would need much less fuel than braking all the speed from a direct approach with only a chemical rocket. So it removes part of the cost problem.


I feel that Mercury is not just the grey and boring world we currently imagine. Interesting and unusual geology may exist near the poles if there are sulphur deposits. And where this sulphur would come from? Volcanoes! Oh, better: sulphate rocks from an ancient ocean!!!

I think it is simply incredible that Mercury just stopped any large scale geologic activity sooner than the much smaller Moon. There is a mistery, worth at least an orbiter. With ion drive, it would not be so costy.

[ljk4-1]

I feel that Mercury is not just the grey and boring world we currently imagine. Interesting and unusual geology may exist near the poles if there are sulphur deposits. And where this sulphur would come from? Volcanoes! Oh, better: sulphate rocks from an ancient ocean!!!

I think it is simply incredible that Mercury just stopped any large scale geologic activity sooner than the much smaller Moon. There is a mistery, worth at least an orbiter. With ion drive, it would not be so costy.

I wonder if Mercury "stopped" its major geology because it did not have
a larger world near it to pull on it and attract more larger planetoids and
comets to hit it?

I also recall a theory in the 1970s that Mercury may have been a moon
of Venus, as it has one of the more eccentric solar orbits of the planets -
plus I am sure bearing some resemblance to our Moon may have been
the "inspiration" for the idea. Any merit to it? Or just not enough evidence?

My goodness - what if Mercury was "spawned" from Venus just as our
Moon was by a Mars-sized space rock hitting Earth, but this time the
planet was knocked away from Venus into its own solar orbit? Now we
would have an even greater need to get surface samples back from
both worlds!

[antoniseb]

I wonder if Mercury "stopped" its major geology because it did not have
a larger world near it to pull on it and attract more larger planetoids and
comets to hit it?

Another factor may have been that closer to the Sun the velocities of impacting planetoids is so high that a much larger fraction of the debris sprays away from the collision, so it's harder to build up a body down there.