Slashdot Mirror


Cassini Huygens Probe is Ready for Separation

Lucas.clemente writes "According to The Register, the Huygens probe has been given a clean bill of health and is ready for separation. The probe will enter the atmosphere of Saturn's moon Titan sometime around Christmas, and is expected to give us some of the most Alien landscape pictures ever taken."

45 comments

  1. Wrong Date by Philom · · Score: 5, Informative

    As usual, the /. blurb has the facts wrong. From the article:

    The Huygens probe will detach from Cassini on Christmas day, and drop into orbit around Titan, Saturn's biggest moon. On 15 January 2005 it will begin its descent into Titan's atmosphere ...

    1. Re:Wrong Date by snake_dad · · Score: 1

      please mod mr. AC up, he's right, no orbit for Huygens.

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
  2. Will it work? by digitalchinky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or experience some kind of shattering 'Separation'. (I hope not)

    There's something stunningly cool about pictures from 'other worlds' - amazing really. I do wish we would drop the 'financial' business sense, and just go in to space because we can. Does there even need to be a valid reason beyond 'why the hell not'

    1. Re:Will it work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because small minded people need to justify not only their existence, but everyone elses as well. To them space travel is absurd, as were trains, cars, and especially airplanes. Noone knew what the effect of them was going to be. Small minded people with no past experience (how could there be!) automatically assumed the worst.

    2. Re:Will it work? by raduf · · Score: 1

      There's something stunningly cool about pictures from 'other worlds' - amazing really. I do wish we would drop the 'financial' business sense, and just go in to space because we can. Does there even need to be a valid reason beyond 'why the hell not'

      Let's go! Would you like to make a small contribution to exploration funds? minimum is $990...

      We will go there someday, either because McDonalds will afford it as a marketing stunt or it'll be cost efective to mine the asteroids or some rich guy will make it fashionable to see the rings of saturn or...

      But the time is not now. And I say this after watching more Enterprise episodes then it's good for me :) We simply have too much to do down here, starting with small things like freedom of speech ;) to the big things like getting almost half the population into our world.

      I could remind you of all the people in africa who're starving, but let's face it, i care about them just as much as you do: not at all. But think of milions of people who don't read newspapers. Or watch TV. Or have jobs in the sense we understand it. There are maybe 3 bilon civilised people in the world, and that's counting all china and india. Just imagine how it would be with 6! The richness of industry, research, culture that can come!

      No, I don't think you can imagine. You're too engrossed in what's happening in your world... Don't you ever watch Google News or CNN and have a strong feeling you're only seeing part of the site of the same show over and over again? Don't you ever fing yourselves looking for the links to the rest of the site? Who THE FUCK cares about the SAME FUCKING bombing or elections or murder over and over again? Were are the news?! You know, the news? No, I doubt you do...

      That's enough... I have work to do, and it's not what i wanted to say in the first place. On the bright side, I doubt I'll get any mod points to speak of...

    3. Re:Will it work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "But the time is not now. And I say this after watching more Enterprise episodes then it's good for me :) We simply have too much to do down here, starting with small things like freedom of speech ;) to the big things like getting almost half the population into our world."

      This is way too simplistic. You forget that quality of life is many times driven by exploration. The exploration of the sciences (which for centuries were considered about as useful as arts--enlightening, but don't do anyting useful) has drastically changed the quality of life throughout the world. The exploration of our world has driven the technologies to make travel much faster. There are many examples, but the point is that there is a balance between direct aid to people to stop suffering and money to sciences and exploration that may not do anything useful (though history has shown that they certainly are a good investment). If you use all the money for aid, you wil never stop all the suffering, and science and exploration will stagnate. If you use all the money for science and exploration a significant increase in suffering will occur. If you make a balance, then over time as the benefits of science and exploration are realized suffering will decrease without additional money.

    4. Re:Will it work? by raduf · · Score: 1

      If you make a balance, then over time as the benefits of science and exploration are realized suffering will decrease without additional money.

      Just what I was saying... well, in reverse. Take care of things close to home, and resources for exploration will become available without effort.

      I think truth is somewhere in the middle, balance beeing the key word here. But my main point was that the real frontier _now_ it's down here, not up there, and there's more to gain for a buck invested in installing net in ghana then in exploring mars (x-prize stuff notwithstanding).

      On the other hand, maybe exploring space would create a sharper feeling that we're "down here" together... who knows.

    5. Re:Will it work? by grozzie2 · · Score: 1
      That's a hell of an idea, why dont you just pony up and buy the required equipment, and go do it.

      oh, you dont have the money to do it? Hmm, i wonder if that has anything with your 'drop the financial responsibility' attitude?

      Never ceases to amaze me how folks are so eager to spend a billion dollars of somebody else's money, but dont have 2 nickels of thier own to spare.

  3. the thing that's sad... by jeif1k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The thing that's sad to me is that for the amount of money we have sunk into the shuttles and various space stations, we could already have an entire fleet of robotic explorers throughout the solar system. As part of that, we'd have developed better propulsion systems, better navigation, stunning scenery, and a wealth of scientific results. If we were to follow such a course, we'd probably even have manned interplanetary voyages sooner than wasting our money on shipping people back and forth with dead-end technologies.

    So, while I agree that exploration is good in its own right, we need to apply financial sense to the effort of exploration itself, and we aren't doing that as much as we should.

    1. Re:the thing that's sad... by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, while I agree that exploration is good in its own right, we need to apply financial sense to the effort of exploration itself, and we aren't doing that as much as we should.

      Sorry to see you got moded as a Troll, because, as much as I hate to admit it, you do have a point.

      As spectacular as some of our maned missions have been, their cost/benefit ratio in terms of advancing the state of the art has been dubious. While putting men on the moon was quite possibly the greatest achievement in history, it really did little to help us develop a sustainable model for maned space flight.

      Perhaps by having invested more in infrastructure, as you point out, such as propulsion and navigation system, we would have had a more viable, economical and sustainable model for maned space flight, albeit at the sacrifice of immediately gratifying, but ultimately unsustainable, one shot deals like the Apollo program.

    2. Re:the thing that's sad... by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps by having invested more in infrastructure, as you point out, such as propulsion and navigation system, we would have had a more viable, economical and sustainable model for maned space flight, albeit at the sacrifice of immediately gratifying, but ultimately unsustainable, one shot deals like the Apollo program.

      Newsflash: Amiga Trombone of Slashdot.org has recently published a hypothesis on why the space program goes around in circles. It appears that the monkeys in charge of funding and PR have no patience at all! Who would have thought that human beings couldn't wait patiently for 20 years while the perfect reusable launch systems were developed to first travel into space? All these years it seems that people would rather the Agency go for the quick bodge, because they want their rocket launch at 6 PM in time for the evenening news, and they want it today! Tune in in 2020 for the next in this series of perfectly-written, carefully engineered responses.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  4. How in the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How in the hell do you pronounce Huygens? I'm guessing HEW-gens.

    1. Re:How in the hell? by madaxe42 · · Score: 1

      Sort of hoo-wee-jens

    2. Re:How in the hell? by mazarin5 · · Score: 1

      HOY-guns

      --
      Fnord.
    3. Re:How in the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      How in the hell do you pronounce Huygens? I'm guessing HEW-gens.

      All three suggestions so far are wrong, there is no English equivalent for the Dutch "ui" (or "uy" as it was spelled eons ago) sound. It is a bit like aye in "aye captain", but the mouth is shaped more like it is shaped for the "oh" sound, as in "oh boy", or maybe the "u" in "union". Sorry I can't be clearer than that, I'm not a linguist.

    4. Re:How in the hell? by BokanoiD · · Score: 1, Insightful

      the closest english equivalent would be "uy" as in "buy". the G would be best pronounced as in "good" not "germ" should be real easy for americans - just say "Buy guns" and replace the B with an H ;)

    5. Re:How in the hell? by eclectro · · Score: 1

      If I follow the instructions of the parent I come up with

      "whey - guns", as in milk whey

      follwing yours it would be "why - guns"

      I'm sure that we will see countless newscasters massacre it in the next few weeks, not that I'm any better.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  5. amazingly cool by jeif1k · · Score: 1

    Cassini/Hugens is just amazingly cool; we have no idea what we are going to find on the surface. Whatever we find, it's going to change our view of the solar system. And the implications of finding any indication of life in that environment would be staggering.

    1. Re:amazingly cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True. But the ESA doesn't really have a good track history of landing probes on other celestial objects. I'm really hoping that this is successful. But if you consider that they are:
      1) Landing in an environment of which we don't have a detailed understanding.
      2) Landing without reconnosaince photographs (for example, the Viking probes and the Russians failed landings had orbiters that could see the surface and make an educated guess about the safety of landing there. Even more recent probes had a good idea of the geography of the area that they were landing).
      3) Landing a probe that has been in space for 7 years! The longest that I know of a probe that landed on another object is 1 year for the Viking probes. There are alot of variables with space travel that don't get better with age.
      4) Landing a probe in an atmosphere that at launch time had only been studied by the Voyager probes 20 years before with a brief flyby. The characteristics of the atmosphere have until recently been largely unknown. And the data is still being evaluated. As we learned with Skylab, an atmosphere can change a significant degree from launch to the operations phase (Skylab burned up prematurely due to higher solar flux resulting in the expansion of Earth's atmosphere causing increased drag of the spacestation). Could there also be a chemical reaction with the atmosphere and the spacecraft (heat shield and parachutes in particular) that would destroy its ability to land softly? How will the critical reentry window vary for this atmosphere?
      5) And most importantly, trying to communicate after landing. Radiation doesn't do much good for any solid state components, but communications systems could easily have components fail (compared to other systems except the landing electronics) due to the high power used.

      If ESA succeeds with this landing, it will be (IMHO) the greatest accomplishment of their space program. But if they fail, it certainly won't be suprising seeing how daunting the challenge is.

    2. Re:amazingly cool by Decaff · · Score: 1

      I think this is exaggerated. It's only one moon! I don't see how exploring its surface is going to change our view of the solar system. As for finding life - Titan IS 'amazingly cool' - probably close to -200C! If there were some kind of life on the ice landscape or in any hydrocarbon seas we would probably not recognise it and it would be very, very slow!

      Having said all this, I think its potentially the most exciting space exploration event for decades.

    3. Re:amazingly cool by jeif1k · · Score: 0

      I think this is exaggerated. It's only one moon! I don't see how exploring its surface is going to change our view of the solar system.

      Because it may tell us a lot about how the solar system evolved and how most of the smaller planets started out as.

      As for finding life - Titan IS 'amazingly cool' - probably close to -200C! If there were some kind of life on the ice landscape or in any hydrocarbon seas we would probably not recognise it and it would be very, very slow!

      Not necessarily. While enzymatic reactions that our metabolism relies on slow to a standstill at those temperatures, completely different chemistries become possible as the basis of life. As a loose analogy, many supercomputers are cooled way down: cold actually helps information processing.

    4. Re:amazingly cool by Decaff · · Score: 1

      Because it may tell us a lot about how the solar system evolved and how most of the smaller planets started out as.

      This is not the same as changing our whole view of the solar system, I think. I may be being pedantic though..

      While enzymatic reactions that our metabolism relies on slow to a standstill at those temperatures, completely different chemistries become possible as the basis of life.

      True, but remember that water and carbon are very, very special in terms of their behaviour and possibilities. A combination of carbon chemistry in ammonia might be a viable alternative, but Titan is too cold even for that.

      As a loose analogy, many supercomputers are cooled way down: cold actually helps information processing.

      I think this is a false analogy. The reason that supercomputers are cooled is to prevent the chips melting! (Even the Pentium 4 comes close to self-destruction, and has speed-controlling circuitry).

      But anyway, this is about electronic processing: Chemical reactions are very, very, very much slower at the temperature of Titan.

    5. Re:amazingly cool by deglr6328 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're forgetting something......the probe was never primarily designed to land! 99% of its data is supposed to be taken as it falls through the atmosphere to the surface. If it does survive landing then that's just an extra bonus.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    6. Re:amazingly cool by jeif1k · · Score: 1

      I think this is a false analogy. The reason that supercomputers are cooled is to prevent the chips melting!

      Semiconductors generally work better if they are operated at lower temperatures. That is, if you cool your CPU to, say, -196C, you can actually run it faster than if you merely keep it around its nominal operating temperature (say +40C). Some supercomputers were designed around this extra performance boost (like the ETA10).

      Chemical reactions are very, very, very much slower at the temperature of Titan.

      A given reaction is slower. But there are many reactions that are way too fast at room temperature that become excellent candidates for living organisms at lower temperatures. I find it far more plausible that life evolved originally under Titan-like conditions and temperatures than on an anaerobic, wet earth.

      This is not the same as changing our whole view of the solar system, I think. I may be being pedantic though..

      Well, I think that depends on how you view the solar system, I suppose. To me, it makes a big difference to know what the original composition of the planets likely was.

    7. Re:amazingly cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A probe that fails to land probably has had a failure that would ruin the rest of the mission anyways. If the probe enters the atmosphere at the wrong time (for its window) it will burn up or be deflected giving no useful data. If the probe fails to actuate its parachutes it will have a very short mission giving little useful data. If there is a failure in the parachutes themselves the probe will have a very short mission giving little useful data. In fact my points 3-5 are still completely valid and I would argue at least that point 1 is important. Very smart people worked on this probe and this gives it a reasonable probability of success. But as another poster mentioned an at-launch time unknown communications failure almost lost the ability to get data from the Huygens mission. I think it is completely reasonable to be skeptical.

    8. Re:amazingly cool by Decaff · · Score: 1

      I find it far more plausible that life evolved originally under Titan-like conditions and temperatures than on an anaerobic, wet earth.

      How could it possibly? Carbon-based life on Earth is very finely tuned to an aqueous environment: every molecule in the cell requires either water or a lipid/water interface. Earth biochemistry simply won't work unless it's wet! There may be life on Titan (although I am very doubtful), but one thing is sure - its nothing at all like Earth life, and Earth life was never like Titan life! Despite what popular science articles like to say, Titan is nothing at all like the primitive Earth: it formed in a different region of the Solar system, and in totally different temperature and radiation regime. Titan has always been cold: The primitive Earth was hot.

      Well, I think that depends on how you view the solar system, I suppose. To me, it makes a big difference to know what the original composition of the planets likely was.

      We already have a very good idea! We have sampled meteorites, the Moon, Mars, and the atmosphere of Jupiter. We also have lots of samples of the Earth.

      One thing has become very clear since the Voyager missions to the outer planets - the moons of these planets are extreme and atypical places. If you examined Io, for example you would assume that the Solar system was filled with Sulphur!

    9. Re:amazingly cool by jeif1k · · Score: 1

      How could it possibly? Carbon-based life on Earth is very finely tuned to an aqueous environment: every molecule in the cell requires either water or a lipid/water interface. Earth biochemistry simply won't work unless it's wet!

      Well, then we obviously have to conclude that life around hydrothermal vents must have evolved independently from other life on earth because the temperature and chemical environment there would kill other life, right?

      There may be life on Titan (although I am very doubtful), but one thing is sure - its nothing at all like Earth life, and Earth life was never like Titan life!

      There is no justification for the "was never like Titan life" assertion. Life may well have formed under those conditions, then traveled to earth, and bombarded earth until, after hundreds of millions of years, finally some lucky combination of circumstances allowed it to find a niche and change in ways that would permit it to survive on such a hot and hostile world as ours.

      Despite what popular science articles like to say, Titan is nothing at all like the primitive Earth: it formed in a different region of the Solar system, and in totally different temperature and radiation regime. Titan has always been cold: The primitive Earth was hot.

      Titan is cold, the early earth probably was hot. That's why Titan probably preserved the environment of the early earth while earth changed dramatically.

      the moons of these planets are extreme and atypical places. If you examined Io, for example you would assume that the Solar system was filled with Sulphur!

      We don't treat moons as statistical samples, we treat them as objects with history and individual properties. We know why Io is covered in sulphur (incidentally, we are also learning that the solar system may well be filled with sulphur: it has dominated the planetary evolution on Venus, may have dominated the planetary evolution of Mars, and, in its own quirky way, is dominating the evolution of Io).

    10. Re:amazingly cool by Decaff · · Score: 1

      Well, then we obviously have to conclude that life around hydrothermal vents must have evolved independently from other life on earth because the temperature and chemical environment there would kill other life, right?

      Life around hydrothermal vents has a common biochemistry with other life. DNA. Lipid cell membranes. Mitochondria. Its all water-based! The discovery that life can exist, and thrive, at temperatures a few tens of degrees celcius higher than we thought is awesome, but does not mean that carbon-based life can even exist, let alone grow, at -200C. Its like finding an athlete who can jump a foot or two higher than anyone else: This does not mean you will find anyone who can jump a mile!

      There is no justification for the "was never like Titan life" assertion.

      Of course there is. There is not the slightest evidence that Earth-based life was ever in any way adapted to living at -200C in hydrocarbon lakes. There is no common factor in the environments. Earth life would undergo a combination of freezing and dissolving on Titan, and life adapted to Titan would melt and be poisoned on Earth. ....and individual properties...

      Exactly! That is why Titan is not going to reveal that much about the Solar System as a whole.

    11. Re:amazingly cool by jeif1k · · Score: 1

      [There is no justification for the "was never like Titan life" assertion.]

      Of course there is. There is not the slightest evidence that Earth-based life was ever in any way adapted to living at -200C in hydrocarbon lakes.


      Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence to the contrary. There was no evidence that life would exist around hydrothermal vents either, and most biologists would have considered the idea preposterous until it was actually found: after all, people thought they had lots of good reasons to think that enzymes couldn't possibly work at those temperatures. And, in fact, there is evidence that bacteria can live in hydrocarbon lakes and break down long, saturated hydrocarbons into methane.

      Lipid cell membranes. Mitochondria. Its all water-based!

      Quite to the contrary: biochemistry happens a lot in non-polar environments; water just makes up most of the mass of a cell because there happens to be a lot of it around. A biochemistry in which most of the mass of the cell is non-polar, with a few polar pockets, seems no more implausible than a biochemistry in which most of the mass of the cell is polar, with a few non-polar pockets. (It will be interesting to see what the composition of the bacteria living in oil is.)

      Exactly! That is why Titan is not going to reveal that much about the Solar System as a whole.

      Well, I'm glad you have it all worked out by ESP; NASA should just hire you instead of sending useless probes to moons just because they have the completely mistaken belief that doing so tells them something about the composition about the original solar system.

      Seriously: would you care to explain why you think that Titan does not preserve the environment of the early solar system (except for temperature)? For Io, Europa, and all the other moons, we know why. But Titan seems to have enough of an atmosphere, seems to be far enough from the sun and Saturn, to have preserved its original environment, as evidenced by the fact that it still has hydrocarbons on its surface. The only thing it is is cold--not so cold that all the stuff has frozen, but cold enough for it not to escape.

    12. Re:amazingly cool by Decaff · · Score: 1

      Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence to the contrary.

      True, but as Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I could just as easily say that all life on Earth originated on Jupiter! (and considering the cloud chemistry and temperature range, that is vastly more likely than Titan).

      There was no evidence that life would exist around hydrothermal vents either, and most biologists would have considered the idea preposterous until it was actually found: after all, people thought they had lots of good reasons to think that enzymes couldn't possibly work at those temperatures.

      Not really - they already knew of thermophiles in hot springs. (Although I admit that the presence of annelid worms at 80C is pretty awesome!)

      But as I said, these situations are about a difference in degree, not a fundamental change in type, of life.

      Quite to the contrary: biochemistry happens a lot in non-polar environments; water just makes up most of the mass of a cell because there happens to be a lot of it around.

      On the contrary - biochemistry is very rare indeed in non-polar environments. Almost all of it either in aqueous solution or on polar/non-polar boundaries; on or embedded in lipid membranes. Water is not only vital to the chemistry of almost all biochemical reactions, it's also a key factor in determining and maintaining the structure of almost all biological macromolecular structures.

      It's so vital that some organisms (spore-forming bacteria and tardigrades) successfully stop all reactions in their cells by removing water or almost completely drying out!

      And, in fact, there is evidence that bacteria can live in hydrocarbon lakes and break down long, saturated hydrocarbons into methane.

      Well, I'm glad you have it all worked out by ESP; NASA should just hire you instead of sending useless probes to moons just because they have the completely mistaken belief that doing so tells them something about the composition about the original solar system.

      Well, I admit I have been over-arguing my case! (I kind of enjoy the debate). NASA has a long history of exaggerating the benefits of missions! I certainly don't think the probes are useless - on the contrary I think these missions are scientifically stunning and exciting. What they are not likely to do is tell us fantastic new stuff about the whole 'solar system'. Titan is an unusual moon, and its certainly not unchanged from the origin of the solar system - its been hit by lots of UV light, for example, generating weird chemistry in the atmosphere.

      I guess I would rather NASA said 'Titan is a neat place to go to', as against the usual media-friendly statements: 'It will help us understand how the solar system formed' (Well, it might, a bit, but so does almost any exploration off the Earth). As for 'it's like the early Earth'... well, unless we had ice continents, I think not!

      I'm not sure we will agree, but thanks for the debate - it's been interesting.

    13. Re:amazingly cool by praedictus · · Score: 1

      Just a thought about the chutes. What kind of material will maintain flexibility at the temperatures that will be encountered in the atmosphere. First the probe will be scorched by re-entry, then flash frozen to the point where almost all materials become extremely brittle. The thermal stresses will be incredible on the electronics as well. I have a feeling there will be new Huygens-sized crater on Titan.

      --
      Watashi wa chikyubutsurigakusha desu.
  6. How will the descent go...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let's hope they didn't install the orientation sensor upside-down!

    (this is a reference to that particle-collecting probe that came back to earth and smashed instead of opening its chutes)

    1. Re:How will the descent go...? by deglr6328 · · Score: 1

      Let's also hope that what doomed the Beagle2 mission to Mars was NOT failure of the heat shield. Huygens uses a nearly identical design.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    2. Re:How will the descent go...? by eclectro · · Score: 1

      What's interesting is that the probe was indeed headed to failure,

      But it looks like it was averted by an engineer who applied some critical thinking.

      But you can't help but wonder if there isn't another "hidden issue."

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  7. Huygens will not orbit Titan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Your dates are correct (I think), but Huygens will not "drop into orbit around" Titan. Instead, Huygens will dive directly into Titan's atmosphere, making a descent that is expected to last a couple of hours before it reaches the surface.

    Entering a stable orbit around a single body such as Titan when arriving from afar costs fuel, something Huygens doesn't have very much of (if any at all). Cassini itself spent quite a bit of fuel to enter its orbit around Saturn on 1 July, and will spend more in January after dropping off Huygens simply to get back into the originally planned orbit (the initial phase was revised to cope with the Huygens-Cassini radio communication problem detected a few years ago). Many orbital changes will use gravity assists from Titan and other moons to conserve fuel.

  8. Separation Anxiety? by yabbo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think we need to be supportive for the Cassini craft, in this time of great sadness. Nobody likes to see their only probe leave the nest so early, let's pray that little Huygens has a safe journey.

    1. Re:Separation Anxiety? by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

      She's had seven years; I think the lil guy is mature enough as is. Reminds me of that quote: "The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot stay in the cradle forever."

      Ya hear that, NASA?

  9. Planetary Society's Huygens art contest by FleaPlus · · Score: 5, Informative

    This may be a little late, but the Planetary Society is running an art contest, challenging contestants to create a piece of artwork (including the computer-generated sort) depicting what they think Titan will be like. Entries can be submitted online, and the deadline is this Sunday.

    Here's the official text from the contest announcement:

    What lies beneath the hazy atmosphere that envelops Saturn's moon, Titan? Is the surface of the moon dotted with seas of liquid ethane? Do icy crags stretch towards a dim orange sky where high noon is only as bright as 1/1000th the level of daylight on Earth? No one knows -- yet.

    On January 14, 2005, The European Space Agency's probe Huygens will plummet through the atmosphere to give us our first detailed look at Titan. Before the probe breaks through the clouds to image this mysterious moon, we invite you to imagine what Huygens will find and enter The Planetary Society's art contest.

    HOW TO ENTER:
    Create an artwork representing what you imagine Titan looks like underneath its haze. Base your perspective on Huygens' journey. Are you viewing the planet from the air after Huygens breaks through the cloud or on the surface after the craft has parachuted to a landing? Did Huygens land on solid ground, or is she floating in an ethane sea? Send us your vision of what lies beneath the veil when you imagine Titan.

    Once you've finished your artwork, you can enter the contest online--you don't have to mail your artwork in! Just create it on the computer, or take a digital photo or scan your artwork. If you are not able to enter the contest digitally, you can mail your artwork to us.

    CONTEST QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

    Who can enter?
    Anyone aged 10 and above may enter. You can enter as a Youth (aged 10-17) or Adult (18 and over).

    What kind of art can I create?
    You can use any medium to create your artwork, and then show it to us by submitting a digital image through the online entry form.

    Or, if you choose, you can mail your art to us. If you mail your art, it cannot be larger than 1 by 11 by 17 inches (2.5 by 28 by 43 cm), and we will not return it to you. Send your entry to: Huygens Art Contest, The Planetary Society, 65 N Catalina Ave., Pasadena, CA 91106, USA. Click here for a donloadable entry form in PDF format.

    When does the contest end?
    Sunday, November 28, 2004 at 23:59 Pacific time.

    What can I win?
    Four First Prizes (two Youths, two Adults) and up to twenty Second Prizes will be awarded. A Grand Prize Winner will be chosen from among the First Prize Winners.
    The Grand Prize is a trip to Darmstadt, Germany to be on site at ESA's Space Operations Centre for the descent of the Huygens probe!
    All Winners' artworks will be displayed at ESA's European Space Operations Centre during the Huygens mission to Titan. All Winners will also receive a Planetary Society Prize Package including one year free Planetary Society membership, a Certificate of Honor, a Cassini-Huygens Mission Patch, an ESA poster, pin, and keychain, and a "Nine Planets" lithograph set.
    Two Special Prizes (one Youth and one Adult) will also be awarded for that art most closely resembling any portion of the actual Titan panoramic landscape taken by the Huygens probe during its final stages of descent. These awards will be made within 30 days following the return of the actual Titan image data, and will each consist of a framed and autographed Huygens photo of the Titan landscape.

  10. Landing isn't everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While it's true that this is a risky mission, it's a calculated risk. It's not like we could spend decades studying the surface of Titan in preparation for a landing, like Mars has been explored by telescope, when the cost of doing so would probably exceed that of the probe itself. We simply have few options besides waiting for improved technologies.

    And, while the characteristics of Titan's surface are essentially unknown, the composition of the atmosphere is somewhat better understood, and Huygens is supposed to transmit data during its estimated two-hour descent. I hope that will include pictures of the surface as well (after the heat shield has been dropped). Whatever is transmitted after a successful landing will be an extra bonus, but it's not like the mission will be a complete failure if the probe drops dead on impact. The precise extent of Titan's atmosphere is probably not much of an issue; Skylab was orbiting Earth for years while Huygens will plunge directly into it in a matter of minutes, and I suppose the parachute and other mechanics are designed to react to actual descent speed of the probe, not to the timer started by Cassini three weeks earlier.

    I know nothing of the physical testing this design has undergone, and I'm also curious about how the chemistry will affect Huygens' components. Still, those compounds aren't unknown on Earth, and chemical tests may very well have been performed.

    You mention communication problems after landing, but one problem threatened to render the Huygens-Cassini radio link unusable if it hadn't been discovered in time to be circumvented (by changing Cassini's planned trajectory to reduce its speed relative to Titan during Huygens' descent). Let's hope there are no more such flaws waiting to be discovered, because now is probably a bit late to work around them.

    Even if Huygens itself were to fail completely, Cassini will spend at least four years orbiting Saturn, and so far I find that just as exciting as waiting for January 15. Given the success of the Mars rovers, what says Cassini won't have learned a few more tricks before 2008 and have its mission extended a little?

  11. Autographed photo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    These awards will be made within 30 days following the return of the actual Titan image data, and will each consist of a framed and autographed Huygens photo of the Titan landscape.

    Who will autograph that photo? Huygens himself?

  12. Visible from Earth?? by another_henry · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From article:

    On 15 January 2005 it will begin its descent into Titan's atmosphere, an event that might even be visible from Earth, provided you have a decent telescope, and are in the right place at the time.

    Is this really possible? Considering this is all Hubble can make out of the whole moon, I find it hard to believe that the atmospheric entry could be bright enough to be seen from this far away. (The Cassini spacecraft itself is far far below the resolution of any Earth-based or orbital telecope)

    Would be cool though if Cassini could photograph Huygens' descent, but I expect this will be precluded by the attitute necessary for proper radio communication.

    --
    "Studies have shown that people who eat peanuts live longer than those who do not eat."
    1. Re:Visible from Earth?? by Ayaress · · Score: 3, Funny

      They said it "might" be visible if you have a "decent" telescope. Is it their fault that nobody's invented a decent telescope yet?

  13. It almost went horribly wrong... by MutantEnemy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interesting story here about how it almost went disasterously wrong...

    --
    Grr! Arg!
    1. Re:It almost went horribly wrong... by jd · · Score: 1
      Yeesh! The whole mission, nearly blown over - what? - a radio designer worried about Intellectual Property (I hate that word more than ever, now!) and top officials more concerned about looking good now (and blaming the techs later for any mistakes) than in the mission itself.


      I think we've found ourselves some "candidates" for the manned Mars mission. The great part of it is that NASA can save money by not building the return vehicle.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:It almost went horribly wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow! This article amazes me. Considering that NASA had (at the time of the communications error discovery) just lost 2 spacecraft in a short period of time, I would have expected every space agency with active interplanetary spacecraft to be analyzing their spacecraft extensively. The fact that the engineer had to do so much to get the ESA and NASA to listen to him absolutely astounds me. Three words (that seem to be becoming a cliche) sum it up for me: Failure of imagination.