Slashdot Mirror
European Moon Mission Ready for Launch
merryprankster writes "Europe's first mission to the Moon is set for blast off from Kourou in French Guiana just after midnight, local time, on Sunday. SMART
1 will study the composition of lunar rock through X-ray observations. The probe uses a new solar electric propulsion system which converts solar energy its panels into motion via the expulsion of ions. Details at the ESA mission site."
I think that the ESA agrees with you. The SMART-1 is out to test new technology, not only to collect data on the moon. The cost of the SMART mission is around 110 million , about a fifth of the usual cost of the big ESA projects. The SMART-1 is set to get a real test of what they found out with the Artemis, when they used that new propulsion to correct the orbit error (more than it was originally intended to do).
;)
It's all about the technology. And a couple of extra satellites to justify the cost of launching the Ariane of course
---- Take the Space Quiz!
It took the apollo astronauts four days to get to the moon and four days to get back.
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
The article mentions that it is lightweight, only 367kg but NASA's first lunar orbiter weighted 386kg. So 40 years later we have a 19kg savings and it takes 15 months to get there. I love progress...
$#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
The SMART 1 is going into Lunar polar orbit with 14 meter solar panels unfurled. With the solar wind push aiding on one side and opposing on the other will the ion engine have enough thrust to counter the effects of the solar wind?
Maybe, if they did half-turns of the solar panels on every orbit they could elongate the orbit enough to break free or perhaps make Earth one of the axis points. ???
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
IAAP and I can say: Yes space is naturally chock full of radiation. Astronaughts regularly come home having recieved their maximum allowable yearly dosage. In fact, there's a special exemption from these OSHA / DOE guidelines for astronaughts... Uranium is relatively abundant (rare compared to say, iron, but available in LARGE quantities) in the solar system. It stands to reason that there are trace quantities of Plutonium as well.
The reason ion engines are a good thing is because they are so efficient. But they also have their share of problems.
;) I did my senior thesis on a solar electric propulsion Mars mission, and I find it to be far more interesting than most people seem to.
The figure of merit for rocket propulsion is specific impulse (Isp). It is a measure of unit thrust per unit mass of fuel consumed per unit time. Conventional (chemical) propulsion, such as solid rocket boosters, have an Isp in the 200 - 300 range. But they generate many many thousands of kilonewtons of thrust. That's why we use them for launching things out of gravity wells.
Ion engines, on the other hand, have Isps from 2000 - 3500 (though the higher end of that range is only test-stand stuff right now). They, however, produce only millinewtons of thrust, and cannot be used for fast orbit transfers or launches. But they can be made small. Very, very small, with correspondingly small amounts of fuel, which is pure joy for aerospace engineers trying to design robotic missions.
Unfortunately, they are also power-hungry little buggers. A single ion engine can use a kilowatt of power while running...and they must be running all the time to generate enough delta-v to have an effect on the course of a spacecraft. (Delta-v is the measurement of how much of a change in a velocity vector is necessary to effect the desired change in course, and mission designers begrudge every cm/s...every maneuver burns propellant, and there are no gas stations in space.) There are only two ways to get power in space right now: solar cells, and some form of nuclear decay. Only solar cells have a good enough power/mass ratio to run ion engines, and as missions proceed farther out from the Sun, array area must be bigger, which adds mass. It's a tricky balancing act.
For this mission, however, the craft will always be close enough to the sun to generate the power it needs fairly easily. (Except when it's in shadow, but that's why we have storage batteries.)
Ion propulsion is an old technology, incidentally. It's been around in some form or another since the 60's. It's only recently that it became economical, though.
I could go on for pages, but I'm unconvinced anyone wants to see that.
-Carolyn
Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
Remember, heavy elements are made in supernovae, and elements heavier than Uranium have too short a half life to have lasted long enough to be around. Uranium is only around because it's got an enormously long half life. Radioactive elements lighter than Uranium with short half lives are found in nature only because they decayed from heavier elements with longer half lives. So no, there's no plutonium out there.
It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
Maybe it can take some pictures of that American Flag and the tire tracks while it's up there.
Don't know what good it'd do, since the conspiracy theorists would simply say something about the pictures being covertly doctored by the French government after the the probe landed in order that they might get back in bed with the U.S Government..
They'd get more Fox News airtime, but at least we'd have a few converts.