Re:Incomplete and out of date.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: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: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.
Re:Incomplete and out of date.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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.