Re:Incomplete and out of date.
by
Zarhan
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Also, New Horizons is not an orbiter, it will simply fly past Pluto and get the data. Afterwards it may check out some nearby KBO as well.
Re:Solid State Age
by
Tmack
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Last I heard, we were in the middle of the information age. The Space Age started back when Sputnik was launched and ran through the 70s when the cold war was pushing the race to the moon etc... The information age then took over with microprocessor developement in the 70's, TCP/IP and fiber optics.
Tm
--
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
Re:Don't you just love it!
by
robsimmon
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Actually, the current record for "most powerful camera" around mars goes to Mars Global Surveyor's Mars Orbital Camera, launched in 1996, which itself was a duplicate of an instrument on the failed Mars Observer (1993).
Re:Probes certinally make more sense.....but
by
cosmo7
·
· Score: 4, Informative
This is so profoundly wrong. If the Russians didn't want to land men on the moon, why did they announce in 1962 that they intended to do just that?
The Russians did not land men on the moon because their plans were politically hashed and once they had developed a vehicle it was too late.
Re:Don't you just love it!
by
gloth
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Darn, I'll admit, you got me there...
The best achievable resolution is apparently better for Mars Global Surveyor, if not by much though: 1.5m vs 2m. The claim to fame of Mars Express seems to be the way that these hi-res shots are embedded in the low-res shots that they take to map the whole planet, which allows them to actually pin-point where the hi-res shots were taken, which, as some claim, is often difficult for the Margs Global Surveyor shots.
Anyway, good point made!
Re:A bit optimistic
by
GileadGreene
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Mars Exploration Rover (aka Spirit and Opportunity) managed to go from "approval to proceed" to launch in around 3 years (mid-2000 to mid-2003). And they built two of them. If MSL is already in the planning phase (actually it's been in the planning phase for a while now) then there's a reasonable chance that they could get something built within the 5 year timeframe suggested by a 2009 launch date. Hopefully with a little less stress on the project team than the MER team faced:-)
I don't recall exactly what the intended mission duration of MSL is, but IIRC "long-term" counts as anything that is significantly longer than the 90 sol lifetime MER. My understanding is that MSL will be returning to using radio-isotope thermoelectric generators (rather than photovoltaic cells) as the primary power source for the rover - thus the long life compared to the curent set of rovers.
but we don't need humans in space
by
kipsate
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Upfront: I am against manned space flight at the current state of the art.
Cost. Manned space missions are an order of magnitude more expensive than unmanned missions. This means that for the price of (God forbid) a manned space mission to Mars, ten or so smaller missions such as stated in the article could have been performed.
Effectiveness. Manned space missions are not as effective as often thought. The extra weight that the Space Shuttle has to carry just to accommodate the astronauts in space already consumes a significant part of its available payload capacity. This is at cost of available room for experimental equipment. Most experiments can be designed such that they can be done by robots.
Danger. Why risk lives?
I know that GWB in his Great Vision would like to see the flag of the U.S.A. proudly wave on Mars. This would cost billions of dollars - if it is possible at all (for starters, two years of accumulated radiation would surely kill the astronauts). And the main reason would be prestige, just like it was for the moon missions, as NASA admits:
NASA's budget is crippled by the costs of the manned space station ISS - which are between 60 and 100 billion dollars. Enough is enough!
-- My karma ran over your dogma
Re:Probes certinally make more sense.....but
by
GileadGreene
·
· Score: 3, Informative
You do realise that NASA launched a metric crapload of probes in the early days of the "space race", right? Things like Pioneer (of which there were several), and Mariner (of which there several). The Surveyor (IIRC) probe that the Apollo 12 mission deliberately landed near. Others I can't remember right now. To characterize the early US space program as focusing on manned missions only, is a gross distortion of the facts.
Re:Incomplete and out of date.
by
CheshireCatCO
·
· Score: 4, Informative
That doesn't illustrate how quickly things are changing, the postponing only occured a few days ago. It just represents unfortuante timing for the release of the article.
However, there is at least one glaring (to me) error: Cassini. Cassini doesn't arrive until July, so postpone your orbital insertion parties from June (which is what the article claims). And don't hold your breath on Huygens's launch into Titan: that doesn't occur until, I believe, the fourth orbit. (This is a change of plan from the original orbital plan. When they discovered the failure to account for the Doppler shift in the probe transmitter, they adjusted the first several orbits to make everything work out. However, the change of plan occured about two years ago, so it's a bit odd that the author of the article didn't find this out.)
Re:Probes certinally make more sense.....but
by
MrIrwin
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I was reffering to Energia which was slightly more powerful than Saturn V but less payload (Russians have a bit of offset from the equator!), and it was succesfully launched.
I think strictly it is considered a booster, anyway, see the link for the details.
AFAIK, this was used to lift the Russian clone of the shuttle, but I think Glasnost put an end to that program.
--
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal;-)
Too bad W is gutting space science at NASA...
by
Dr.+Zowie
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Did you notice that most of those missions were already launched? The budget projections for NASA are out for the next few years, and (at least for unmanned exploration and space science) they're not pretty.
NASA just cancelled an entire line of six spacecraft -- the Solar-Terrestrial Probes -- that have been on the drawing board since the mid 1990s. The Explorer line of missions is delayed indefinitely. Science funding is level for the next two years, then drops rapidly.
Meanwhile, countries like Japan, India, and China are building their space programs with vigor and dedication. Japan -- a nation the size of California -- will nearly match our rate of new scientific launches over the next decade.
The reason for the cuts in scientific launches at NASA is W's new manned-but-not-funded spaceflight initiative, which is diverting resources from the comparatively inexpensive scientific missions.
Re:Probes certinally make more sense.....but
by
lommer
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Um, if you read the page you linked to, it says that the four test-launches of the N1 that they did were all miserable failures - maybe this also had something to do with their decision to kill the plans?
Titan's Atmosphere 'Thin'?
by
cmholm
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Another error in the brief mention of Huygens: Titan's "thin" atmosphere. The surface pressure is estimated to be 4 to 10 times as high as Earth, although fscking cold.
And don't hold your breath on Huygens's launch into Titan: that doesn't occur until, I believe, the fourth orbit.
Which means we only have to wait until December '04.
-- Luke, help me take this mask off... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
Re:Probes certinally make more sense.....but
by
another_henry
·
· Score: 3, Informative
NASA has managed to lose the plans to Saturn V
This is an urban myth which I would like to dispel.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SATURN V PLANS Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, the Saturn V blueprints have not been lost. They are kept at Marshall Space Flight Center on microfilm. The Federal Archives in East Point, GA also has 2900 cubic feet of Saturn documents. Rocketdyne has in its archives dozens of volumes from its Knowledge Retention Program. This effort was initiated in the late '60s to document every facet of F-1 and J-2 engine production to assist in any future re-start. The problem in re-creating the Saturn V is not finding the drawings, it is finding vendors who can supply mid-1960's vintage hardware (like guidance system components), and the fact that the launch pads and VAB have been converted to Space Shuttle use, so you have no place to launch from. By the time you redesign to accommodate available hardware and re-modify the launch pads, you may as well have started from scratch with a clean sheet design.
-- "Studies have shown that people who eat peanuts live longer than those who do not eat."
Slashdot Mirror
Also, New Horizons is not an orbiter, it will simply fly past Pluto and get the data. Afterwards it may check out some nearby KBO as well.
Tm
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
Actually, the current record for "most powerful camera" around mars goes to Mars Global Surveyor's Mars Orbital Camera, launched in 1996, which itself was a duplicate of an instrument on the failed Mars Observer (1993).
This is so profoundly wrong. If the Russians didn't want to land men on the moon, why did they announce in 1962 that they intended to do just that?
The Russians did not land men on the moon because their plans were politically hashed and once they had developed a vehicle it was too late.
The best achievable resolution is apparently better for Mars Global Surveyor, if not by much though: 1.5m vs 2m. The claim to fame of Mars Express seems to be the way that these hi-res shots are embedded in the low-res shots that they take to map the whole planet, which allows them to actually pin-point where the hi-res shots were taken, which, as some claim, is often difficult for the Margs Global Surveyor shots.
Anyway, good point made!
I don't recall exactly what the intended mission duration of MSL is, but IIRC "long-term" counts as anything that is significantly longer than the 90 sol lifetime MER. My understanding is that MSL will be returning to using radio-isotope thermoelectric generators (rather than photovoltaic cells) as the primary power source for the rover - thus the long life compared to the curent set of rovers.
Upfront: I am against manned space flight at the current state of the art.
.
Cost. Manned space missions are an order of magnitude more expensive than unmanned missions. This means that for the price of (God forbid) a manned space mission to Mars, ten or so smaller missions such as stated in the article could have been performed.
Effectiveness. Manned space missions are not as effective as often thought. The extra weight that the Space Shuttle has to carry just to accommodate the astronauts in space already consumes a significant part of its available payload capacity. This is at cost of available room for experimental equipment. Most experiments can be designed such that they can be done by robots.
Danger. Why risk lives?
I know that GWB in his Great Vision would like to see the flag of the U.S.A. proudly wave on Mars. This would cost billions of dollars - if it is possible at all (for starters, two years of accumulated radiation would surely kill the astronauts). And the main reason would be prestige, just like it was for the moon missions, as NASA admits:
"the most persistent justification for the moon race was the matter of prestige"
NASA's budget is crippled by the costs of the manned space station ISS - which are between 60 and 100 billion dollars. Enough is enough!
My karma ran over your dogma
You do realise that NASA launched a metric crapload of probes in the early days of the "space race", right? Things like Pioneer (of which there were several), and Mariner (of which there several). The Surveyor (IIRC) probe that the Apollo 12 mission deliberately landed near. Others I can't remember right now. To characterize the early US space program as focusing on manned missions only, is a gross distortion of the facts.
That doesn't illustrate how quickly things are changing, the postponing only occured a few days ago. It just represents unfortuante timing for the release of the article.
However, there is at least one glaring (to me) error: Cassini. Cassini doesn't arrive until July, so postpone your orbital insertion parties from June (which is what the article claims). And don't hold your breath on Huygens's launch into Titan: that doesn't occur until, I believe, the fourth orbit. (This is a change of plan from the original orbital plan. When they discovered the failure to account for the Doppler shift in the probe transmitter, they adjusted the first several orbits to make everything work out. However, the change of plan occured about two years ago, so it's a bit odd that the author of the article didn't find this out.)
I think strictly it is considered a booster, anyway, see the link for the details.
AFAIK, this was used to lift the Russian clone of the shuttle, but I think Glasnost put an end to that program.
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)
NASA just cancelled an entire line of six spacecraft -- the Solar-Terrestrial Probes -- that have been on the drawing board since the mid 1990s. The Explorer line of missions is delayed indefinitely. Science funding is level for the next two years, then drops rapidly.
Meanwhile, countries like Japan, India, and China are building their space programs with vigor and dedication. Japan -- a nation the size of California -- will nearly match our rate of new scientific launches over the next decade.
The reason for the cuts in scientific launches at NASA is W's new manned-but-not-funded spaceflight initiative, which is diverting resources from the comparatively inexpensive scientific missions.
Um, if you read the page you linked to, it says that the four test-launches of the N1 that they did were all miserable failures - maybe this also had something to do with their decision to kill the plans?
And don't hold your breath on Huygens's launch into Titan: that doesn't occur until, I believe, the fourth orbit.
Which means we only have to wait until December '04.
Luke, help me take this mask off
This is an urban myth which I would like to dispel.
"Studies have shown that people who eat peanuts live longer than those who do not eat."