My Assistant
Site Message
  |
A British lunar mission? |
 Jun 6 2008, 09:46 PM
Post
#31
|
|
 Senior Member  Group: Members Posts: 3516 Joined: 4-November 05 From: North Wales Member No.: 542  |
QUOTE (SFJCody @ Jun 6 2008, 10:29 PM)  I'm worried for two reasons: 1) Penetrators are high risk landers and Moonlite will only carry four. Hitting a rock= goodbye data return. 2) Luna-Glob will launch first, carry more penetrators (both Japanese and Russian designs) and may well steal Moonlite's thunder 1/ Only four - now let me see - that would be 'Me', 'Mam', 'Dad' and 'Gran'. 2/ I'm not worried. The more the merrier, and the more designs the better too. I hope they cooperate on the global distribution to maximise the geophysics payoff. |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 8 2008, 10:20 PM
Post
#32
|
|
 Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
MoonLITE has been given the go-ahead for Phase A technical study. We're looking at a 2014 launch at present, it seems.
http://www.scitech.ac.uk/PMC/PRel/STFC/MoonLite1108A.aspx Here's a recent article from Astronomy & Geophysics about the science. http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~iac/AG_MoonLITE_article.pdf --Emily -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2008, 11:09 PM
Post
#33
|
|||
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14445 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I got to see one of the test articles at the UCL RPIF today (thanks Pete!)
Smaller than I was expecting - but far less damaged than I was expecting. Two of the test-electroncis modules were there as well - one a battery pack, one an electronics pack - all set hard in an Epoxy. Not the best Photos, maybe Ted got some better.
Attached thumbnail(s)
|
||
|
|
|
||
| Guest_PhilCo126_* |
 Dec 15 2008, 09:11 AM
Post
#34
|
|
Guests |
Thanks for sharing those photos Doug... what's the diameter of that penetrator?
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 5 2009, 09:11 AM
Post
#35
|
|
 Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
QUOTE (djellison @ Dec 15 2008, 12:09 AM) Two of the test-electroncis modules were there as well - one a battery pack, one an electronics pack - all set hard in an Epoxy. Interesting... I was wondering: what happens if one of the electronic components fails? Do they need to change the whole epoxy block? This is quite likely going to cause lengthy delays during final preparation and launch... |
|
|
|
|
Jan 5 2009, 09:18 AM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
... I am going to be banned...
Why post this, and yet STILL post the comments that you know are about a banned subject. They've been deleted. Final Warning. - ADMIN |
|
|
|
|
Jan 5 2009, 09:54 AM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14445 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
QUOTE (Paolo @ Jan 5 2009, 09:11 AM) This is quite likely going to cause lengthy delays during final preparation and launch... What if ANY component on a near complete spacecraft fails? It's a huge job. At least with this design, you can simply drop in a replacement block rather than go in with a soldering iron. Modularizing the whole thing is actually, I would have thought, a good thing. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 5 2009, 10:08 AM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
QUOTE (djellison @ Jan 5 2009, 10:54 AM) At least with this design, you can simply drop in a replacement block rather than go in with a soldering iron. Yes of course, I only think it will be a bit awkward to change a whole block on the completed spacecraft instead of changing an electronics board or something like that. But of course there is probably no other simple way of doing that |
|
|
|
|
Sep 14 2009, 05:39 PM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 14 2009, 05:47 PM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14445 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
BNSC and STFC are really not in my good books right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th October 2024 - 02:44 PM |
|
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE 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. |
|
