IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
LRO's secondary payload decided (already!)
Guest_BruceMoomaw_*
post Apr 7 2006, 03:47 AM
Post #1





Guests






http://www.spaceref.com/calendar/calendar.html?pid=3967 : "Exploration Systems managers will brief news media at 2 p.m. EDT Monday, April 10, about plans to conduct high risk and high return research of the lunar surface using a new spacecraft. The press conference will be held in the NASA Headquarters auditorium, 300 E Street S.W., Washington. The press conference will air live on NASA TV and NASA.gov. Reporters may ask questions from participating NASA locations.

"NASA managers, engineers, and scientists have been reviewing secondary spacecraft proposals that take advantage of the payload capability of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, the rocket that will launch the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter in October 2008. Associate Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Scott Horowitz and lunar program managers will announce the winning proposal and discuss its unique mission."

Courtesy of an Inside Source, I've learned tonight what the choice is -- but I need to tell Simon Mansfield about it first.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
remcook
post Apr 7 2006, 09:52 AM
Post #2


Rover Driver
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1002
Joined: 4-March 04
Member No.: 47



already?

if they want to launch in 2008, I guess it's necessary!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Analyst_*
post Apr 7 2006, 10:06 AM
Post #3





Guests






Good guess.

There is talk about sending something to the surface. I can't imagine designing and building and testing a lander in 2.5 years. MER was very agressive with 33 (?) months.

Analyst
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Apr 7 2006, 12:19 PM
Post #4


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13780
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



I think Space Daily has the story as well -

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/JPL_Set_...ar_Mission.html

I'm guessing that it's a 'dumb' impactor - i.e. one not intended to survive the event. I wonder if they plan to do ranger style imaging on the way in, in which case it's the DI Impactor model basically.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disownedsky
post Apr 7 2006, 01:16 PM
Post #5


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-January 06
Member No.: 660



QUOTE (BruceMoomaw @ Apr 6 2006, 11:47 PM) *
Courtesy of an Inside Source, I've learned tonight what the choice is -- but I need to tell Simon Mansfield about it first.

mad.gif
Well, I'm a little disappointed that NASA can't keep a better lid on such announcements. All the competitors deserve to find out at the same time.

And apparently, you're not the only one with an Inside Source. I'll just say people should keep their mouths shut until the word is official.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Apr 7 2006, 02:29 PM
Post #6


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



I heard that it will "loiter" for up to 3 months (in L2 I think) waiting for LRO to be checked out and then make its death dive
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Apr 7 2006, 02:57 PM
Post #7


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13780
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



Well - loitering means that the impact will have to be from orbit, thus it will have to have it's own means of Delta V and thus attitude control I presume ( perhaps cold-gas attitude control with a solid kick for deorbit? ) and of course, that means the impact speed will be lower than if they went 'straight in' on the outbound trajectory. AND - the orbiter will have to haul the impactor into orbit (thus extra fuel for the LOI)

Of course, we have no details - so it'll be interesting to see what they have actually proposed.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Apr 7 2006, 03:15 PM
Post #8


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



It is not part of LRO but a separate spacecraft. It is not to affect LRO with respect to LV integration. I stated it might be loitering at L2
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Apr 7 2006, 04:05 PM
Post #9


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13780
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



Ahh - it just shares the LV, it doesnt deploy from the orbiter...hadn't realised that.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mariner9
post Apr 7 2006, 05:11 PM
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 216
Joined: 13-October 05
Member No.: 528



I wonder how many people at JPL are calling this "KREEP Impact" ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disownedsky
post Apr 7 2006, 08:38 PM
Post #11


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-January 06
Member No.: 660



QUOTE (djellison @ Apr 7 2006, 08:19 AM) *
I think Space Daily has the story as well -

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/JPL_Set_...ar_Mission.html

I'm guessing that it's a 'dumb' impactor - i.e. one not intended to survive the event. I wonder if they plan to do ranger style imaging on the way in, in which case it's the DI Impactor model basically.

Doug


Hmm.. my best information (probaly not as direct as Moomaw's) is it's NOT the impactor, but we shall see on Monday. I can see the logic though - given the tight cost cap and short schedule, a spacecraft with no science instruments of its own would have the best chance of making it. OTOH, has JPL ever done ANYTHING for 50 million?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Apr 7 2006, 08:41 PM
Post #12


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13780
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (disownedsky @ Apr 7 2006, 08:38 PM) *
has JPL ever done ANYTHING for 50 million?


Sojourner?..umm....

I'm all out smile.gif

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Myran_*
post Apr 7 2006, 09:41 PM
Post #13





Guests






QUOTE
Mariner9 wrote: I wonder how many people at JPL are calling this "KREEP Impact" ?


Well it might turn out to be true and then your joke will be nothing more than one platitypus. tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_BruceMoomaw_*
post Apr 8 2006, 03:09 AM
Post #14





Guests






Late news: I learned this afternoon, to my dismay, that I'd misinterprted what my source had told me. While the selected mission will definitely be an impactor, Keith Cowing is correct in saying that there are TWO impactor missions among the finalists -- and he may perhaps also be right in saying that the alternative impactor proposal from Ames Research Center is likely to be selected (although it's a much more complex and risky mission design than JPL's). What threw me, and made me jump to a premature conclusion, was that the Ames impactor is actually called a "satellite" instead of an impactor -- although it turns out that, like JPL's concept, it will actually start out as an Earth satellite in a very elongated orbit and then later run head-on into the Moon as a South polar impactor.

Anyway, I now have complete details on design of the Ames impactor from the same source, and will be including both this correction and additional information on both impactor concepts in a follow-up "SpaceDaily" story tonight. Sorry about that...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disownedsky
post Apr 10 2006, 06:33 PM
Post #15


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-January 06
Member No.: 660



Just watched the announcement, and yep, it's the Ames impactor, and uses the upper stage as impact mass. It's carry quite a lot of instruments, actually, and they're partnering with Northrup Grumman. I just can't believe they have much hope of meeting the cost target.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st October 2014 - 12:16 PM
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 a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.