Slashdot Mirror
Launch Date for First Solar Sail due Monday
PGillingwater writes "The Planetary Society (home of SETI) is planning to launch the first Solar Sail Spacecraft, Cosmos 1, later this month. The exact launch date is scheduled to be announced on Monday, May 9. This event represents one of the first privately-funded space missions with the objective of pure research. It will be launched from a Russian submarine in the Barents Sea. The spacecraft consists of a body surrounded by 8 triangular sails, that will use the tiny force of reflected sunlight to (potentially) accelerate to tremendous speeds. Unfortunately, the craft is not expected to leave Earth's orbit due to degradation of the mylar materials, but should be a proof of concept for subsequent missions."
I guess the degradation could not have been solved in this manner, as it's the sunlight itself that is causing it.
This post has been modded down -5(Not US-centric). Please read the posting rules and/or watch fox news to prevent this in the future.
Thanks,
Slashdot
The first rule of USENET is you do not talk about USENET.
But if theren't any carcasses around to get the "great science" and do something with it, the value of "great science" is somewhat diminished. ;)
Unless you believe in pure research for it's own sake...
Agile Artisans
Hiow is reserch for it's own sake different from survival of the species for it's own sake.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
RTA. It is launched from orbit. A Volna rocket (plus some other bits and pieces) places the spaceship in orbit, where it will sit for a few days before the sail is deployed.
What's more, you might want to think about what being "out of orbit" actually means. The moon is in orbit around the earth. I expect that if they got it that far (or to the same gravitational potential), they'd be very pleased with themselves. Although given that it's an experimental craft it might be more useful to them if they kept it closer.
Seriously, this sounds like the Russians are developing a "stealth" satellite launch capability.
No, it sounds like they're desperate for cash and have huge amounts of military hardware lying around. Selling launch capability to the highest bidder is preferable to selling ICBMs to the highest bidder.
Well, if you call a test of the deployment system a spacecraft... From your linked article:
The S-310 rocket which was launched from Uchinoura Space Center at 15:15 of August 9, 2004, carried two kinds of deploying schemes of films with 7.5 micrometers thickness. A clover type deployment was started at 100 seconds after liftoff at 122 km altitude, and a fan type deployment was started at 169 km altitude at 230 seconds after liftoff, following the jettison of clover type system. Both experiments of two types deployment were successful, and the rocket splashed on the sea at about 400 seconds after liftoff
So, Cosmos 1 might still get to be the first.
"Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
The Orion project was canned for some good reasons.
:wq
That was a suborbital launch. This is an orbital launch; so they'll actually be able to measure how well it works in practice.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"when the above post gets +5 insightful on slashdot!
...pssst... hint: it was a joke!
Best. Webhost. Ever. Dreamhost.
Refusing to sit back and let the inevitable happen is what separates us from animals.
... which is (9.3 x 10^-6 m/s^2kg/m^2) * A/m. With m = 100 kg and A = 600 m^2 (see the FAQ, that works out to be an acceleration of 6 x 10^-5 m/s^2, or 6 microgees.
But it is falling. I don't know if the estimate has been refined in the light of more recent data, but Earth has somewhere on the order of 100 tons of material falling on it every day and multikiloton explosions occur in the upper atmosphere quite frequently. It doesn't make sense to justify a space program on the basis of the few asteroid impacts that get through, but we will get hit by pretty large asteroids at some point unless we divert them.
You are confused about probability.
The probability mankind will be wiped out by an object from space today is low enough almost no sane person would be concerned about it. The probability it might occur in your lifetime is low enough it causes you no concern.
However it's not just likely the earth will be struck by an object large enough to cause mass extinctions -- in the fullness of time it is a certainty. We don't all need to worry about this but if mankind is to survive to reach the galactic diaspora you wrote of someone must.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
First, I would not call subcontracting to a reasonably decent design bureau in one of the two most advanced space technology powers outsourcing.
Second, as far as cost and POC design Russians are a better choice the Americans. They generally tend to do loads of POC work instead of at-desk design and modelling (just look how many different POCs were done for the Buran for example). As a result they are much better at understanding the concept of a POC and doing it cheap and cheerful without unnecessary overengineering. If it has to fly for real first time and money is (nearly) unlimited it makes sense to hire Boeing or someone similar. But not for a POC. Russians do it better. It is the way they do stuff.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/