[X] My Assistant

[dvandorn]

Just 'cause I said I would...

Hopefully, though, this whole episode has made its point -- NASA isn't afraid to tell overbudget missions to stand down.

I just *really* wish we could get the magnetometer back on the beastie, though...

-the other Doug

[J.J.]

^
The launch has been pushed back to July 2007. That's better than nothing, but time will tell if it stays in-budget.

[Marz]

^
The launch has been pushed back to July 2007. That's better than nothing, but time will tell if it stays in-budget.

Oh, I have no complaints delaying launch a year, so long as it flies.

So does this mean we can just add 1 year to the arrival times?
(2012=Vesta and 2016=Ceres?)

Ugh... these mission timelines are so painful! I'm beginning to loathe the "efficiency" of ion propulsion.

Other questions:
1. did the recent keck/hubble observations of Ceres place a size limit boundary on any possible moons?

2. are Vesta and Ceres expected to both have at least one moon? (seems like most main-belt 'roids have companions, right?)

3. aside from visual clues, are there any instruments on Dawn that can determine if there is a subsurface ocean on Ceres? Is this completely unlikely, without tidal heating... or has Enceledus taught us a sound lesson to expect the unexpected?

4. Is EVE simply a Dawn clone to visit Pallas and other big 'roids? Should a lander mission be in the works for Ceres (dare I say, sample return)?

5. any likelyhood of the Pentagon being told to "stand down" as we review their incredible cost overruns and in the meantime use that budget to fund EVE and Dawn's Early Flight?

[mchan]

3. aside from visual clues, are there any instruments on Dawn that can determine if there is a subsurface ocean on Dawn?

If the Dawn development team can't determine whether there is a subsurface ocean on Dawn, then the mission is doomed!