ESA Gives Green Light To Rosetta

JoeRobe writes "An ESA review board has given the green light for launch of the Rosetta Spacecraft in January 2003. The Rosetta Mission is one of the ESA's boldest missions to date. Over the next eight years, the spacecraft will conduct two asteroid (Otawara and Siwa) flybys and finish off by dropping a lander onto the surface of comet Wirtanen."

Comments

Comet Lander

[Cuchullain]

I wonder what kind of biological, or pre-biological materials we will find on the comet?

This may either confirm or deny the "life seeded by comets" theories you hear in pop science from time to time.

Either way, VERY COOL, if it works.

Cuchullain

Re:Comet Lander

[CaptMonkeyDLuffy]

Well, while finding biological or pre-biological material on comet would certainly be an important discovery, it really wouldn't prove the 'life seeded by comets' claims.

If we find organic matter on a comet, then that doesn't mean the only source of organic matter is comets. The only way to truly prove those theories would be to disprove all other possible sources of 'original organic matter.' Finding organic material on a comet would simply prove that comets are a possible source, not that they are the definitive source.

And, arguing in the other direction, even if organic matter isn't found on this particular comet, there are still many others that haven't been checked. Just because one comet doesn't contain organic matter, doesn't mean all comets don't.

Re:Comet Lander

[yoinkslap]

you must remember, this is only one comet. there are plenty out there. assuming the theory is true, this might just be one that doesnt have any biological materials on it.

then again, it might.

Rosetta! Rosetta! Rosetta!

[edbarrett]

Hey, that's me!

its good to see multi function missions

[JamesCronus]

its great to see mission packing a hell of a lot more science, used to be the case where that would have required about 4 completly seperate vehicals etc to do this much science. or they're trying to economise

Re:its good to see multi function missions

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, the exact opposite arguement is what led to NASA's "faster-better-cheaper" philosophy when Goldin was administrator. Missions like Voyager, Galileo, Cassini, and Mars Observer packed a heck of a lot into a single mission in terms of science. That made them very expensive (quite the opposite of economical to be sure!). The "faster-better-cheaper" idea was that multiple, more focused missions (less science per mission) was more economical and prudent (not all your eggs in one basket).

-ac

Change in mass

[yoinkslap]

what kind of implications will landing this on the comet have? will it affect the comets orbit? yea, its not a huge change in mass by any means, but it doesnt have to be out in space!

Re:Change in mass

[yoinkslap]

also something else i just thought of:
what if by landing, we inadvertantly kill off any biology on the surface? materials which, given time, might have reached a planet and developed a species, intelligent or not.

raises some interesting moral questions :/

Re:Change in mass

[Anonymous Coward]

>yea, its not a huge change in mass by any means, but it doesnt have to be out in space!

Why is that? Intertia is intertia. It doesn't matter if you are in space or not. The probe's mass is inconsequential to the orbit of the comet they will land on (assuming they can pull it off!) because the comet's mass is orders of magnitude larger. More likely to affect a comet's orbit is the loss of mass due to ablation when it gets close to the sun (and forms a tail and all that).

-ac

-ac

Re:Change in mass

[yoinkslap]

what i mean is that even a minute bump could push it off course by a few thousand kilometers over time.
of course, gravity will still pull it roughly back on course i guess.

Re:Change in mass

[Anonymous Coward]

i can't think of how just landing would kill anything. unless it was big, the only one of its kind, and the lander dropped on its head!

interesting question though... i'm thinking more along the lines of contamination. i'm sure the esa folks have struggled with this issue too.

-ac

About the Lander part

[BenV666]

Will the pilot of the lander be chosen by the Lunar Lander game? I sure hope this lander has better controls... ;)

Point taken, however...

[Cuchullain]

True enough. But discovering biological material, especially active or vigorous material, would lend credence to the theory. I suppose I phrased my comment badly, as I didn't really mean "PROVE" in the full scientific sense.

I was mainly spewing out a thinking point, and the fact that I am impressed with the project.

Don't get me wrong about the theory either, I am actually a detractor of the 'Life seeded by comets' theory. I just think it would be uber interesting to find and examine extra-terrestrial life. At least till the lander runs out of power, or out of range.

Cuchullain