Slashdot Mirror


Proposed NASA Mission Would Sail the Seas of Titan

The BBC has a report on a proposal that will be submitted to NASA for funding — a mission to Saturn's moon Titan that would deposit a lander on its hydrocarbon sea. (We recently discussed the widely-circulated photo of sunlight glinting off one of Titan's seas.) "The scientific team behind the idea is targeting Ligeia Mare, a vast body of liquid methane sited in the high north of Saturn's largest moon. ... 'It is something that would really capture the imagination,' said Dr Ellen Stofan, from Proxemy Research, who leads the study team. 'The story of human exploration on Earth has been one of navigation and seafaring, and the idea that we could explore for the first time an extraterrestrial sea I think would be mind-blowing for most people,' she told BBC News. ... The Titan Mare Explorer (TiME) has already been under study for about two years. It is envisaged as a relatively low-cost endeavor — in the low $400m range. It could launch in January 2016, and make some flybys of Earth and Jupiter to pick up the gravitational energy it would need to head straight at the Saturnian moon for a splash down in June 2023."

197 comments

  1. Sailing the myriad seas? by newcastlejon · · Score: 5, Funny

    The story of human exploration on Earth has been one of navigation and seafaring, and the idea that we could explore for the first time an extraterrestrial sea I think would be mind-blowing for most people

    Oh come on, everyone knows that once you invent satellites the whole map is revealed!

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    1. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 1

      Just imagine what'll happen when they circumnavigate Titan and figure out it's actually round!

      --
      Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    2. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by msauve · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your point is correct. "The story of human exploration" and seafaring was purposed on finding the distant shore, and what was there. On Earth, other than finding new life forms, the surface of the sea is pretty uninteresting. For a space mission, you can go to that distant shore directly. Not much chance of finding life in a sea of methane (and if there were life, you'd expect it to be everywhere in that sea).

      Other than providing a gimmick to make this different than previous missions, what's the point? Land something in a sea of methane and look for what? Sail around to find more liquid methane?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Sanat · · Score: 0

      I certainly hope that they don't use retro-rockets to lower the floating device down to a sea of methane. It might not be a pretty picture.

      Sort of reminds me of the guy that was brazing a part onto his shotgun barrel having forgotten to unload it first.

      --
      And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
    4. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by geckipede · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The gravity is weak enough and the atmosphere thick enough that you barely even need a parachute. In any case, the only thing rockets could do to the methane there would be to boil some of it - there's no free oxygen out there to react with.

    5. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Lord+Pillage · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unfortunately both of those incidents require oxygen to occur. Tough luck there's not much of that on Titan.

      --
      try { Signature mysig = new CleverAttempt(); } catch(NonCleverSignatureException e) { postanyway(); }
    6. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Sanat · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did know that actually, but thanks for sharing it in more detail.

      It was just my pathetic attempt at being silly.

      --
      And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
    7. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by SleepingWaterBear · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, conditions on the earth vary dramatically with location, even ignoring biological and biogenic variation. It seems to me that a vessel capable of performing tests over a wider area can't help but provide better data. One of the big downsides of the Mars rovers is that they're restricted to such a small portion of the planet's surface, especially since for the Titan mission this can apparently be achieved on a low budget. I mean, what reason do we have to think that the chemical composition of the ocean and atmosphere don't vary with location? What about things like currents, and winds? Maybe we'll find something that's entirely unexpected!

      Maybe Star Wars was right and planets other than earth are all 'desert' planets or 'ice' planets with uniform conditions all around, but if not, this seems worthwhile!

    8. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by FiloEleven · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are a number of good reasons for doing this.

      The primary objective of the mission would be to determine the precise chemistry of one of these lakes; but also to do meteorology, to help scientists better understand how the "methane-ologic cycle" on Titan actually works.

      It would give scientists the opportunity to study shared climate processes at work under very different conditions.

      "If we have models that will work on Earth and on Titan then we can be much more confident that those models understand the fundamentals of what's going on," explained the researcher from the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory.

      "The photogenic appeal and the mystique of exploring a sea on another world speak for themselves, but there is a genuine practical application to do with the science that will help us address problems here on Earth."

      Plus it's already been under study for two years, and it would test a "novel power system," the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator.

      ASRGs would give TiME sufficient energy to support a very capable instrument suite and a direct-to-Earth communications system to get its data home.

      Not to mention that Titan looks like one of the best nearby candidates for life, specifically in its seas and not on its surface. Landing on Titan's shores is apt to be far less interesting than in its seas.

    9. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just imagine what'll happen when they circumnavigate Titan and figure out it's actually round!

      So is a pizza. That doesn't mean it isn't also flat. Titan could be the same way. They always warn you about falling off the edge - but what if something comes FROM off the edge?! Didn't think of THAT, DID you?!

      That's right...I went there.

    10. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Pingmaster · · Score: 1

      Wait wait wait, so you're saying that Titan could have a cheese stuffed crust too?

    11. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by thrawn_aj · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Other than providing a gimmick to make this different than previous missions, what's the point? Land something in a sea of methane and look for what? Sail around to find more liquid methane?

      You're probably right. Aw hell, scratch the 'probably'. Speaking purely personally though, this is the first time in the past 10 years I've actually felt a stirring in my heart about space exploration. This Titan thing actually brought back some of the magic of space that used to come through so vividly in the science fiction of the 80s (before the post-modernist hacks stank up the place). Huh, let's just say that as a taxpayer, I wouldn't be in the least upset if this mission actually happened. In fact, I'd be out there cheering it on all the way. Go figure :). Guess science is far from unemotional eh?

    12. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If we knew what we'd find, there would be little point in going. And why are you so sure that we shouldn't find life in a sea of methane? Sure, nothing evolved on earth would survive there, but that's the point - it wouldn't be life evolved on earth. Maybe the ammonia seas of other moons are better candidates what with amonia sharing some of the "unique" properties of water (like floating ice) but I'm not as certain as you about where life can and can't evolve, given time and space.

      And then of course there's the whole "exploring for the sake of exploring" thing. To get any real data we need to land something on Titan, and the most obviously interesting places are the methane lakes. You could land on a shore but with the dense atmosphere there's probably going to be waves and it's easier to just go ahead and build a boat then to build a crawler that can also tolerate being under water.

    13. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by thrawn_aj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Heh, yeah. First thing I thought of too. This better be a sailboat they're planning to use. Wait, does Titan have strong winds?

    14. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      The gravity is weak enough and the atmosphere thick enough that you barely even need a parachute. In any case, the only thing rockets could do to the methane there would be to boil some of it - there's no free oxygen out there to react with.

      Point taken (and very good point :)) but surely it's not that simple. If the boat's engine has a combustion chamber of any kind, surely there will be some oxygen on board. Oxygen leaking out near nozzles or methane/other hydrocarbons leaking IN could be just as bad. Of course, running any kind of engine inside a new kind of atmosphere means completely rethinking (or at least thinking through) the engine design and combustion chemistry. What's waterproof may not be proof against liquids with different physical and chemical properties.

    15. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      Wait wait wait, so you're saying that Titan could have a cheese stuffed crust too?

      It's _possible_. There's only one way to be sure - someone's going to have to go out there. Any volunteers?

    16. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      And how do you propose the engines work? maybe they should carry their own oxygen with the vessel while it is in space?

      Unless of course they go for the bouncy ball approach vector.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    17. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by sapphire+wyvern · · Score: 1

      Doesn't shotgun propellant contain its own oxidiser?

    18. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by aldo.gs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Apollo Program used to reveal cities back in the day :P

    19. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > Sail around to find more liquid methane?

      Sail around and observe thousands of miles of shoreline. Study the atmosphere and seabottom at widely separated points. This ship will travel farther in a day than a Mars rover can in a month.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    20. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Nadaka · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Navigating by sea is easy and cheap. By targeting the sea, you may be able to visit and study its entire shoreline. If you landed on the shore instead, you are limited to that area you land in.

    21. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wow, you clearly are not a rocket scientist are you? Rockets always carry their own oxidizers. How do you think we landed on the moon, that place doesn't even have an atmosphere.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    22. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by SimonInOz · · Score: 1

      Arhhh, me lad, I've sailed the seven seas, 'tis time for another.

      Can ye be drinking the sea, I is asking meself?

      --
      "Cats like plain crisps"
    23. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I am dissapointed this did not come from the pizza anology guy...

    24. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      I am dissapointed this did not come from the pizza anology guy...

      Hush up, you. You got what you paid for.

    25. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ammonia ice doesn't float.

    26. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless of course it hits a methane-berg and sinks.

    27. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by mangu · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oxygen leaking out near nozzles or methane/other hydrocarbons leaking IN could be just as bad

      No worse than oxygen leaking in or methane leaking out of a natural gas powered car on earth.

    28. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by mangu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or it could be like a Swiss cheese: round, flat, and hollow at the same time.

    29. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gunpower contains an oxidizer, it will burn or explode without additional oxygen. How do you think it explodes inside the cartridge? And who modded that comment Informative?

    30. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      I agree with the strong impact it would bring, 'fire up them rockets boys, we're going to Titan'

      Can we hook up a waterskiing bot to it for MAXIMUM effect? Maybe the GenX kids with their love of extreme sports (freestyle boarding/skiing, mountain biking whatever) would become the future explorers or even engineers. Hell there won't be rocks to slow this thing down. And don't forget a possible epilog: let it sink and shoot out a couple more snapshots at us; who knows, something could be blinking down there.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    31. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      um did you read the person i was responing too? who was saying that there would be no oxygen on titan so that you wouldn't have to worry about explosions. however in order to have rocket engines you need oxygen which is exactly what I was pointing out.

      So we are literally going to send oxygen to a place with none.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    32. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just imagine what'll happen when they circumnavigate Titan and figure out it's actually round!

      ...I think your ships get +1 movement bonus? :)

    33. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by J05H · · Score: 1

      Does it come with ethane-frosted garlic sticks?

      --
      gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
    34. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Heck - get some wings strapped to your arms, and you could fly in its atmosphere.

    35. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      I wonder if it would see anything worth while once its cameras are coated with tarry goo.

      --
      ...
  2. Odds of finding alien life? by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

    At least it could find a few sirens.

    1. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Bat+Country · · Score: 1

      They'd have better luck trying Europa... At least they think there may be liquid water under the ice on Europa. Find some mermaids.

      Come to think of it, whatever happened to that Europa lander they were planning which was supposed to bore through the ice?

      --
      The land shall stone them with the bread of his son.
    2. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Come to think of it, whatever happened to that Europa lander they were planning which was supposed to bore through the ice?

      Maybe it could share a launch with TiME? Its much harder to do a soft landing on Europa of course.

    3. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by newcastlejon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Europa? But we're not allowed to attempt any landings there!

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    4. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      At least it could find a few sirens.

      My money's on Shrieking Eels.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Informative

      Come to think of it, whatever happened to that Europa lander they were planning which was supposed to bore through the ice?

      As soon as you do this you risk contaminating what is underneath so you have to do this incredibly carefully. Last I heard it was on hold until they had figured out how to do it such a way that they did not introduce any contaminants in the process. They are looking to use a lake under the south pole for practice:

      http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-driller-02b.html
      http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/earth_sciences/report-11000.html

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    6. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about lasers?

      that'd be awesome.

    7. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Europa? But we're not allowed to attempt any landings there!

      Well, we still have a few weeks before we're supposed to get the warning.

    8. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't be silly. There's no sharks in space.

    9. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They also have to make sure they can safely transport any mermaids they find back to earth.

    10. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by apostrophesemicolon · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Europa lander did go up there, landed and took some video for a few second until some kind of mecha broke it. And that's the last we heard from it.

      Care to buy my ancestor's glasses?

    11. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, regular lasers then, instead of *frickin lasers.

    12. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      And yet no one worries about Space Pirates, the greatest threat to intergalactic ships.

    13. Re:Odds of finding alien life? by BluBrick · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly. There's no sharks in space.

      Maybe not yet!

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
  3. Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would seriously be interested in donating maybe a hundred dollars toward something like this, and I can't be the only one. Are there any non-profit organizations that fund similar missions?

    1. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem is, even the best commercial spacecraft can't even go to the moon, let alone further. The best thing that could be done is donating money to a college or university that develops the technology that is used by NASA or the ESA that would allow them to do it. Any money put into non profits would quickly go to waste, theres just no way you can send something to Titan without governmental assistance.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      I would seriously be interested in donating maybe a hundred dollars toward something like this, and I can't be the only one.

      Find just 3,999,999 more, and you'll have enough for this mission.

    3. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A better place to donate for space projects would be the Planetary Society's solar sail proof-of-concept project.
         

    4. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by sznupi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_Space_Exploration_&_Technology_Initiative might be closest to what you want, they are building lunar orbiter, to be launched in 2012 (and they already have some major successes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSETI_Express_Satellite ); though I don't know if there's a way to donate, or if they even need it.

      Or pick one of the teams from Google Lunar X PRIZE; not only you should find some with great chance of success, but also accepting donations.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Any money put into non profits would quickly go to waste, theres just no way you can send something to Titan without governmental assistance.

      I think you mean "without a government-sized budget", right? Non-profits aren't all that well-funded because average people are paying over half of their incomes to taxes. Fix one, fix the other.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by FlyMysticalDJ · · Score: 1

      So the target goal is precisely 4,000,099? Because if not, I think you used too many sig figs. Also, is 4 million really a good indicator of cost for such a mission? Seems a little low to me honestly. Then again, I don't know diddly squat about space travel costs. Of course, I may just be looking far too deep into a silly comment...

    7. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      That sounds plausible, but after a little searching the only research I managed to find on the web suggested that a decrease in estate tax would result in a loss of charitable donations because there is less incentive for tax-free donations.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    8. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      More people. (3,999,999 + 1) * $100 = $400,000,000, which is the cost mentioned in the summary.

    9. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      That sounds plausible, but after a little searching the only research I managed to find on the web suggested that a decrease in estate tax would result in a loss of charitable donations because there is less incentive for tax-free donations.

      Could be, but I wasn't talking about inheritance - rater everyday people having their everyday wages confiscated.

      Estimates including gas tax, property tax, liquor tax, tobacco tax, embedded income taxes (~22% of everything you buy goes to pay the producers' income taxes) and finally actual income tax range from 55% to over 70%. Counting fiat inflation estimates range to over 90% for a lifetime of earnings and savings.

      If people had "just" 50% more money in their pockets they'd be feeling much more charitable. I'd certainly done to something like (but not) the Planetary Society. I suspect their budget would even top NASA's.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    10. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was mostly interested in how giving was related to income and sales taxes, but the only thing I could find was the estate tax study.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    11. Re:Are any non-profits doing anything like this? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      No only the free market can possibly do anything. Government sucks at everything it does. You must be new here. [/libertarian][/sarcasm]

  4. Titan Landing Probes by ranson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interestingly enough, the Cassini Orbiter's landing probe, the Huygens, which landed on Titan a few years back, was designed with floatation devices, just in case it hit liquid instead land (ultimately it hit land). An interesting fact about Titan: the high density of the atmosphere, combined with a much lower gravitational force than that of earth results in very soft probe landings. In fact, it is hypothesized that on Titan, a human could strap fake wings on his arms and fly -- now if only we breathed methane and could survive at temperatures colder than -200F...

    1. Re:Titan Landing Probes by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I suppose another way would be to build a balloon borne probe, probably using hydrogen for buoyancy. It could compress the hydrogen to land, and release hydrogen to lift.

    2. Re:Titan Landing Probes by slashchuck · · Score: 1

      Read "The Quiet War" by Paul McAuley Fascinating SF novel of humanity on Titan and other moons of Saturn.

      --
      $sig not found
    3. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      In fact, it is hypothesized that on Titan, a human could strap fake wings on his arms and fly

      No, honey, I haven't gone cookoo; I'm practicing for emergency landings on the Titan mission.
       

    4. Re:Titan Landing Probes by deglr6328 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's missing from this discussion, and so far as I can see from any proposal site discussions on this mission, is how to get the data back from the probe! If this is going to be a lander without an orbiter, you have a SERIOUS problem of how to get data back to earth. We talked about this very topic 5 years ago here after Huygens landed. People are going to want high-res images, audio and at least some video in addition to all the other basic science data from this mission. That is a HUGE amount of information to get back to earth from a billion miles out, while floating on a lake of CH4 under a thick atmosphere. The Huygens probe had 2 redundant, 8 watt, medium gain (partially directional) on board radio transmitters that sent all the data from the probe through the Cassini orbiter relay system. It took VLBI aperture synthesis, simultaneously using ~20 of some of the largest radio telescopes around the world JUST TO HEAR THE CARRIER SIGNAL of Huygens as it descended on Titan. We couldn't get any actual data directly from Huygens, we couldn't hear modulation of the signal clearly from that far away.

      Huygens had a power budget from its NaS batteries of ~250W, you're not going to do much better than that with a sterling radioisotope generator for this proposed mission. So you have maybe 20W of radio power to use on this mission in order to get all your data back from Titan, you NEED to use a directional (high gain) antenna to do that. How the hell do you accurately and consistently point a high gain antenna directly at earth when rotating and bobbing around wildly while floating over the waves of a Titanian lake?!

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    5. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      There's also Stephen Baxter's Titan. The ending is uplifting, and gives the reader hope for the (distant) future of humanity.

    6. Re:Titan Landing Probes by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      TFA says this:

      ASRGs would give TiME sufficient energy to support a very capable instrument suite and a direct-to-Earth communications system to get its data home. The generators - TiME would carry two - could conceivably sustain several years of service on the lake surface.

      Would 500W be enough? You seem to know what you're talking about, but I suspect NASA does too. It would be interesting to find out how (and if) they overcame the objections you raise.

    7. Re:Titan Landing Probes by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Ah but that discussion talks about phased arrays and even if you need a steerable antenna I suppose thats a lot easier to do these days with microcontrollers and compact servos.

      Indignant antenna designers are invited to contemplate ABM search radars...

      -Arthur C Clarke

    8. Re:Titan Landing Probes by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Actually, someone posted below that the ASRG is rated at 140W, so the total would be 280W. Looks like your power estimate is spot-on.

    9. Re:Titan Landing Probes by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Dunno I found the book to be a bit of a downer over all. Baxter can't be a happy guy if he is having thoughts like that all the time.

    10. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      As usual - beam data to a satellite and then send to Earth,

    11. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet no one now reading this remembers the James Blish story 'How Beautiful With Banners'.

      That is all...

    12. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speak for yourself. Personally, I have gone cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

    13. Re:Titan Landing Probes by tftp · · Score: 1

      There's also Stephen Baxter's Titan. The ending is uplifting

      Unfortunately I have read the book. The ending is absurd, so it's pointless to debate whether it is uplifting or not. Besides, before you get to the ending you must make your way through the preceding chapters without tearing the book into shreds. It's indeed not for everyone to read about several suiciders who fall prey to one horrible accident or another, without any hope of surviving and seeing Earth die. And all that is for nothing, of course. What an invigorating story it is not!

    14. Re:Titan Landing Probes by tftp · · Score: 1

      that discussion talks about phased arrays

      You need to know your orientation and position to control the antenna. On Earth that would be done with GPS augmented with an inertial system when GPS signal is not available. Additionally you need to know the orientation, that can be done (again on Earth) by magnetic compass and by Sun/stars. On Titan there is no GPS, not much is known about its magnetic field (and interference from Saturn is huge,) and astronomy may or may not work depending on how fast the vessel moves and what is visible in the sky. Liquid methane probably also has low viscosity, which makes things worse.

    15. Re:Titan Landing Probes by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Liquid methane probably also has low viscosity, which makes things worse.

      OTOH the low gravity, small influx of energy and dense atmosphere might mean the seas of Titan are rather calm. BTW, the atmosphere is rather hazy, so there would be indeed a problem with aiming - but perhaps the lander will use strong signals transmitted to it from Earth as a beacon?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    16. Re:Titan Landing Probes by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Disagree with you, agree with the two responses.

      Among the most depressing books I've read. The US becomes a religious dictatorship and develops a custom virus to kill people of Chinese descent? In retaliation, China throws an asteroid at earth, killing all humans?

      Overly depressing.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    17. Re:Titan Landing Probes by tftp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't know about the "small influx of energy," that's basically one of objects of research here. The Sun is definitely far away, but Saturn is close, and its gravitational interference should be considerable, so far that Titan is locked in position just as our local Moon is. There are also clouds forming and dissolving, which must influence the weather.

      perhaps the lander will use strong signals transmitted to it from Earth as a beacon?

      Let's say the distance from Earth to Saturn is 10 A.U. (it varies, obviously). That would be 149.60×10^10 meters. The path loss (using the Friis transmission equation) is 300 dB at 30 GHz. Antennas of Deep Space Network give you gain of 80 dB. The antenna on the lander, as a guess, will give you 40 dB at best if it is a fixed parabolic dish. 300 - 80 - 40 = 180 dB (in either direction.) If we transmit from Earth at 1 MW, that would be 90 dBm. Then the signal at the front end of the receiver on Titan will be -90 dBm. This is not a problem in itself, modern receivers can work with even smaller signals. A ham receiver (like K3) will detect a signal at -136 dBm within 500 Hz.

      But there is still a problem. High gain antennas have, by definition, a narrow beam. It's like a telescope. But you can't look through a telescope to find a star! Your field of vision is too small. But if you make the beam wider the signal disappears! So here is the catch 22 - you can receive the signal from Earth only if you already know where it is coming from :-) Phased antenna arrays are kind of convenient for beam-forming on the fly, but they are typically not as good as a simple dish (or else we'd all use only them.)

      There may be a way to do it still. First of all, you may make your receiver so good that it will detect the signal even with antenna configured for a wide beam. You only need a few bits per second at that stage. It helps a lot that you are swimming in the sea of cryogenic liquid, you can cool your front stage somewhat - not as He would allow, but still -160C is better than nothing.

      Alternatively, look for a signal with a wide beam, but that signal won't be coming from Earth. Find a stronger signal - from the Sun, or from some pulsars, or from anywhere else that can be used as a good astronomical marker. That assumes that your communication system covers the right frequency band.

      But all in all, it's too much risk for such a trivial [today] problem. Your mission may easily fail just because the lander can't find Earth - and that happened more than once with other probes, it's not unusual. Especially when you don't have a clue what you are landing into. If I were to plan the mission, I'd splurge on a proper set of one orbiter and one or two landers. It's a good distance to Saturn, many years in transit, so you want to make one mission count. Cost should not be such a concern when you are doing the most complex rocket science that there is.

    18. Re:Titan Landing Probes by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. I wonder if normal emission from Earth (TV, FM Radio, Radars) could be used as a beacon.

    19. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leave something in orbit to relay.

      Or use the RTG to charge something up, then discharge that power quickly to transmit a burst.

    20. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Hey! I'm trying to get people to read the book. These spoilers are counterproductive!

    21. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there any chance that the Cassini mission might still be going in some kind of "standby-like" mode for that long? Yes, 2023 is a looooong time away, and I'm not sure what the final plan is for Cassini at mission end. I know they've talked about ditching it into Saturn to avoid the potential of contaminating moons such as Enceladus. On the other hand, the Voyagers are still going since 1977, so there is a precedent for some kind of activity decades later, and Cassini presumably has the necessary relay hardware in place because it was already used for Huygens.

    22. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Uruviel · · Score: 1

      You have a sea full of methane. Why not take a methane fuel cell of some sorts with you and use the sea to fuel your communications apparatus. It's a long shot, sure, but it's the first time we don't actually need to worry about fuel in outer space.

    23. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Balloon antenna, class D transmitter.

    24. Re:Titan Landing Probes by happy_place · · Score: 1

      Is it possible to put a transmitter relay in Titan orbit so that the probe doesn't have to work so hard?

      --
      http://www.beanleafpress.com
    25. Re:Titan Landing Probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, you could do a simple hot-air type ballon using surplus-waste heat from the RTGs.

  5. Picture by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wikipedia has a picture showing the probe floating on Titan.

    One question I can immediately see an answer to is whether the ASRG generates as much power in vacuum as it will on the surface of Titan. My assumption is that having a weaker heat sink will reduce power output but I can't confirm that.

    1. Re:Picture by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      My assumption is that having a weaker heat sink will reduce power output but I can't confirm that.

      I really ought to know the answer to this, but at least they'll have convection to help.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    2. Re:Picture by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      One question I can immediately see an answer to is whether the ASRG [wikipedia.org] generates as much power in vacuum as it will on the surface of Titan. My assumption is that having a weaker heat sink will reduce power output but I can't confirm that.

      On the contrary, a vacuum makes a very poor heat sink. If anything, being immersed in an atmosphere that is as cold as Titan's may lower the effective Tc due to the higher thermal conductivity of the surrounding atmosphere. The lower the Tc, the higher the Carnot efficiency although any effect either way probably won't amount to much in terms of an efficiency difference.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    3. Re:Picture by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      No thats what I mean. If they use this stirling engine will they get sufficient power to run the vehicle while they are in vacuum?

    4. Re:Picture by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      I'm sure they've thought of this. The engine is rated at 140W and presumably is tested for the conditions it will endure especially vacuum operation. Then again they did have errors in the burn calculations of that one probe that was destroyed in the Martian atmosphere. Trivialities like forgetting to convert standard to metric...

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    5. Re:Picture by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      The heatsink might be smaller but being immersed in liquid methane, or in a thick very cold atmosphere, ought to make it work like gangbusters - much better than in air on Earth at 70 deg. The real issue will be keeping it from freezing but the delta-T should be incredible.

                Brett

    6. Re:Picture by maxume · · Score: 1

      This paper doesn't split the performance characteristics out for the different environments (page 6):

      http://esto.nasa.gov/conferences/nstc2007/papers/Shaltens_Richard_D2P1_NSTC-07-0138.pdf

      Given the operating temperatures of 650 and 850 F, it may be that the heat sink is not a particularly limiting factor.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:Picture by jisou · · Score: 1

      my question is do you honestly need a heat sink? i mean the moon is at least negative 162 C (260 F). not to mention a dense atmosphere is much denser hence it can conduct heat better.

    8. Re:Picture by sznupi · · Score: 1

      OTOH it seems they are targeting this stirling generator first and foremost for Titan mission; perhaps generally for bodies with significant atmosphere, where it works much better? And you don't need much power while in transit.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    9. Re:Picture by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      In vacuum, yes. On Titan, probably not.

    10. Re:Picture by asaz989 · · Score: 1

      But does it need as much power in vacuum? All of the sensors will be useless during the journey, and the communications system probably won't be sending back all that much to Earth. I'd guess that in vacuum, the engine will be purely devoted to propulsion.

  6. Low cost? by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 0

    For US$400 million, people could create a Wikipedia of open technology and help the human race transition to a post-scarcity society. Instead we get a boat ride? (Not to say it is not a cool idea.)
        http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/index.htm

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re:Low cost? by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      Probing things is what we do. I dare say the first probe was a finger, now look at us! We shall continue to probe where no probe has probed before!
      Probe on my friends, probe on.

    2. Re:Low cost? by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That "boat ride" is about .01% of the federal budget or what we spent on Iraq in less than 10 hours.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    3. Re:Low cost? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? Resources will always be scarce as long as we use only the resources on the Earth.

      Besides that, someone has to do the work, and work isn't free or cheap.

    4. Re:Low cost? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Post-scarcity society? Not in our wildest dreams. Even Stephenson's Diamond Age was set in a society with scarcity, albeit one of a different variety, and we're not anywhere close to even that level of technology.

      Do you mean a society that doesn't include economic growth? That defies human nature, and would require a society so oppressive that Stalin would look like a hippie.

      As for as NASA: sure, it produces pretty pictures and produces technological spin-offs, but it also maintains our prestige in the world by employing top scientists to do top research. It continues a 400 year old tradition of discovery, and ennobles the human spirit. It's wonderful.

      I am tired of people complaining about NASA's budget. It's really a bargain. A penny out of every dollar you pay in taxes goes toward it. If you've printed out a gorgeous photograph for your well, or read an article and said "hrm, that's interesting", or eaten freeze-dried food, you've more than gotten your money's worth.

    5. Re:Low cost? by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hrm, let's see ... spend $400 million to explore grand new vistas and expand the sum total of human knowledge ... or spend $400 million on a website. I dunno, that's a tough one ...

    6. Re:Low cost? by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 1

      Another way to look at it:

      If you took the money that went into making "Waterworld" and "Van Helsing" you'd almost have $400 mil. Throw in "King Arthur", and you've got an extra $35 million left over. (Source)

      I would gladly have sacrificed those gems of cinematography for the sake of space exploration.

    7. Re:Low cost? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      I'm torn about "King Arthur", at least it gave us good soundtrack ;)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    8. Re:Low cost? by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      What about recycling? Or imagination? As long as we have endless power from the sun, we can support lots of activity on Earth. I'm all for space habitats -- but why not just build them directly, rather than mess around with more "exploration" instead of actually building habitats that we knew how to build in the 1970s (Gerry O'Neill)?

      With 3D printing and robots, work can be free and cheap -- in fact, that is a major crisis right now with the jobless recovery as trends in automation and better design are leading to widespread structural unemployment, that given limited demand by healthy humans for more stuff, means an end to mainstream economic cycles.

      Here is an alternative:
      http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna5.htm
      """
      "It works like this. Let's say that you own a large piece of land. Say something the size of your state of California. This land contains natural resources. There is the sand on the beaches, from which you can make glass and silicon chips. There are iron, gold and aluminum ores in the soil, which you can mine, refine and form into any shape. There are oil and coal deposits under the ground. There is carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen in the air and in the water. If you were to own California, all of these resources are 'free.' That is, since you own them, you don't have to pay anyone for them and they are there for the taking."
      "If you have a source of energy and if you also own smart robots, the robots can turn these resources into anything you want for free. Robots can grow free food for you in the soil. Robots can manufacture things like steel, glass, fiberglass insulation and so on to create free buildings. Robots can weave fabric from cotton or synthetics and make free clothing. In the case of this catalog you are holding, nanoscale robots chain together glucose molecules to form laminar carbohydrates. As long as you have smart robots, along with energy and free resources, everything is free."
      """

      I see the top post (my first) got modded down to zero, likely by pro-space people. Why are technologists often so blind to thinking through the implications of all the technology they are making? School is no doubt part of it. We need to use what we have to build a better world right here and right now, and then there will be lots of resources for space exploration and many other things. NASA and the space community have had a lot of good ideas already. Let's try using some of them to make the Earth a better place that works for everyone:
      http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/

      Wikipedia only took about US$2 million to get to critical mass. A technology library (would probably be much more than a website) might only cost US$100 million or so to get to such a critical mass.
      http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/72fde8fa2a33ded8
      """
      So, to recap, there are a few paths to go down, ideally in parallel:
      * fund a specific hardware project like Factor-e-farm, CubeSpawn, RepRap or whatever, hoping to push it along specifically (or maybe several);
      * fund a specific simulation project like Second Life or some massive multi-player game that connects to open manufacturing, where people are creating 3D models that work in that world (or maybe several);
      * fund new software tools that make open design easier for everyone;
      * fund some sort of integration service, seen socially as the Wikipedia of open manufacturing, whatever that would look like whether it had a wiki aspect or not, like, Appropedia, SKDB, NIST's SLIM, my attempts at OSCOMAK/PointrelSemanticDesktop, or whatever, which defined a standard way to encode manufacturing recipes and licenses so everything interlinked and could be analyzed and visualized somehow (like to tease out the minimal self-replicating system that met some criterion);

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    9. Re:Low cost? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      You have no idea what manufacturing actually is...

      Those 3D printers are toys, for prototyping only and HIGHLY inefficient for mass manufacturing.

      The biggest reason for joblessness in the western world in manufacturing is the rise of China, not automation.

      Even if you have smart robots and a source of energy(in this case, a LOT of energy negating any and all green movements), you still need tools, lots and lots of tools. These are expensive and require a lot of capital.

      Automation is what allows Western companies to be competitive with Chinese ones. However that only works to a point as the Chinese aren't stupid and do heavily make use of automation technologies themselves. The difference comes in the fact that they use 2-3x more people to do the same job someone in the West might do but they also pay them 3-4x less than an equivalent Western worker.

  7. heheheh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone else think of sailing the sausage seas?

    1. Re:heheheh by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 1

      I thought about the Primus CD: "Sailing the Sea of Cheese."

      --
      This ain't rocket surgery.
  8. It'll SINK by Whiteox · · Score: 1

    Damn idiots! What do they expect?
    'Landing' a probe on a sea of liquid hydrocarbons....
    I hope it's got floaties on it.

    --
    Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    1. Re:It'll SINK by mdenham · · Score: 1

      Right, it'll sink. Just like the Apollo capsules sank when they did re-entry into the ocean.

    2. Re:It'll SINK by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Buoyancy won't be the same on Titan because the hydrocarbon fluid will have a lower density than water and the atmosphere is much more dense. But that said buoyancy on Titan is easy to calculate and I would be surprised if the designers of TiME have not done their sums.

      Gus's mercury sank BTW.

    3. Re:It'll SINK by msauve · · Score: 1

      Right. We haven't sunk a capsule since Liberty Bell 7.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re:It'll SINK by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Gus's mercury sank BTW.

      I'm guessing that this probe PROBABLY won't have any explosively-operated escape hatches ...

  9. I'm glad they admitted their motivations by RepelHistory · · Score: 2, Insightful

    'It is something that would really capture the imagination,' said Dr Ellen Stofan, from Proxemy Research, who leads the study team. 'The story of human exploration on Earth has been one of navigation and seafaring, and the idea that we could explore for the first time an extraterrestrial sea I think would be mind-blowing for most people,'

    Sometimes the point of science need be be nothing more than to capture our imaginations and/or blow our minds.

    1. Re:I'm glad they admitted their motivations by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      They can't tell you the REAL reason. I mean the tax payers would bit a bit ticked off, and feel like we'd been "had" if the $400M price tag was just to deliver a chronosynclastic infundibulum!

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  10. hydrocarbons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Where did this methane come from? The common wisdom is that terrestrial hydrocarbons come from old dead stuff. Maybe not?

  11. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by Brett+Buck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This sort of BS analysis has been around forever. What do you think it going to happen with the $400 million? Think we are going to launch it into space? That goes to creating jobs, and the various space programs are *a lot* more effective than the close to $2 *trillion* spent on the other bogus stimulus plans in actual job creation. Even Governor Moonbeam himself has recognized the value of the space program in economic terms.

            Now, if all we were going to do was pay someone to tell us what Titan is like, certainly the information would not be worth it. Pure science has never been and will never be the purpose of NASA. But building things to find out (and this creating movement in the economy and jobs) pays off.

            Brett

           

  12. Set it on fire for SCIENCE. by Phlogiston+4+Lyfe · · Score: 1

    At the end of its mission, the sea should be set aflame. For science!

    1. Re:Set it on fire for SCIENCE. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Good luck finding oxygen to help it keep going.

  13. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It never ceases to amaze me what we'll spend money on.

    It's certainly a better use for 400M than bailing out a bunch of banks...

    What exactly is the point of this $400M venture, other than it would be "really cool" to sail the seas of ass gas?

    Furthering human knowledge and exploration of our solar system.

    Oh, wait, I forgot. We have no debts on Earth to worry about right now, financial or otherwise for the human race. Nevermind. It's all good, obviously.

    Sitting here on Earth for perpetuity won't solve our problems. Most of the problems we have here on Earth that are able to be addressed at all are largely the result of a poorly structured economic system in one form or another.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  14. This is exactly what we should be doing by DesScorp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This idea is beyond awesome. Sending a "ship" to sail the seas of another world. And the price... $400 million... is uber-cheap in the world of space exploration.

    Unless we can send a man to a near-Earth asteroid, this is the kind of exploration NASA should be doing... not manned attempts at Mars. Not yet.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:This is exactly what we should be doing by QuoteMstr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not yet.

      What exactly are your prerequisites for a manned mission then?

    2. Re:This is exactly what we should be doing by DesScorp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not yet.

      What exactly are your prerequisites for a manned mission then?

      My concerns here about manned exploration are twofold:

      One, unless we're going to build a real, permanent base on the moon, and actually keep men there for extended periods of time, then we shouldn't be going back to the moon right now. It'd be a waste, and nothing more than reliving old glories without breaching new frontiers. And with declining budgets, if we actually did go back to the moon, we wouldn't stay. Again, it would essentialy be doing it just to say that we still could. A waste. So the first argument is about needless waste of funds.

      Two, as far as the other oft-proposed trip... to Mars... we shouldn't do it because of cost, but mostly, because the technology just isn't there. Specifically, we're lacking a way to keep astronauts fed and healthy for the very long trip. Suspended animation is still science fiction at this point, so unless a true breakthrough in space travel speed is found, we currently have no way to send a bunch of men on a months-long journey to another planet and back, at least not in a manner that we can afford.

      The asteroid mission right now is the only place we can actually land a man involving fairly short distances, and with the virtue of it being real exploration, literally where no man has gone before.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    3. Re:This is exactly what we should be doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, and there's the aspect of actually getting something in return, like mining for resources, using the moon as a forwarding point for assembling and launching high-payload crafts, which is simply not possible or extremely expensive on earth. If we won't do it, space exploration will simply take x times longer.

    4. Re:This is exactly what we should be doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Long term base is actually the reason of returning to Moon.
      2. #1 is the learning area for Mars so the knowledge needed for Mars will come from the moon base.
      3. "Suspected animation"? Why would anyone need that for Mars? People live on the space station longer than it would take to reach mars.
      4. Do you actually have a clue regarding asteroids to know what you are talking about? You know that most of them are wacky orbits creating somewhat of a large problem if you want people onboard.

    5. Re:This is exactly what we should be doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something like 5kw power should be able to sustain an ecosystem that would support astronauts indefinitely. The sun is about 1kw/m2 (I think, perhaps more) at Earth. The more surface area you get on your greenhouse, the more power the algae see. Won't taste great "stock", but a little GMO, or shit even shrimp in there...think in 3 dimensions, it's not kansas.
      Makes oxygen, shrimp and consumes CO2. Comes with salad. Micronutrients and lift weight for the H20 are the limiting factors.

    6. Re:This is exactly what we should be doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really like the single man, one way mission to Mars as proposed and rejected by NASA (thinking in error that the PR would be negative). It's the best way to start building a colony, and there are unlimited volunteers for the proposal.

  15. May I be the first to say: by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    Fuck the moon! Fuck mars*! THIS is the stuff! Yeah!

    To me that would be the coolest mission, since the moon landing. The only other thing I can think of, that comes close, are the satellites that are already leaving the solar system.

    (* To those with emotional deficiencies *nudge* *nudge*: Of course I don’t mean that we should completely ignore mars, or even the moon. It’s just that it’s silly to focus on a moon landing, when on the other hand, you got stuff like this! The stuff that is every scientist’s and every layman’s wet dream of exploration. The feeling of being on a place, that others can’t even imagine!! And the science that would come out of it, would just be crazy!)

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    1. Re:May I be the first to say: by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I actually think a manned mission to Titan should be considered. I would suggest using fission reactors and ion drives for propulsion. Degree of difficulty might be about the same as the Apollo program in 1960 or so.

    2. Re:May I be the first to say: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You high, nigga.

    3. Re:May I be the first to say: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually think a monorail, a giant popsicle skyscraper AND an escalator that leads to nowhere should be considered. I would suggest using solar power and electric motors for propulsion (as needed). Degree of difficulty might be somewhat less than the Apollo program in 1960 or so.

  16. And Maryann's shorts by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    "Skipper, I thought you said this was only a three hour tour."

    1. Re:And Maryann's shorts by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      "Skipper, I thought you said this was only a three hour tour."

      "I'm sure it appears to be, from some reference frame."

      "Fuck you, Professor."

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  17. Amazon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Link to a filehost or torrent instead of Amazon, and then we'll care.

    1. Re:Amazon? by slashchuck · · Score: 1

      Link to a filehost or torrent instead of Amazon, and then we'll care.

      I got my copy from the local public library.

      --
      $sig not found
  18. Screw your satellites by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    blacksheepwall

  19. Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by tetrahedrassface · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Not trying to flame or troll, but these missions keep coming up. Even proposed and not funded like this one to Titan, take away from where we sorely need to explore. Poor Europa languishes! Europa quite possibly has the best odds of actually having something worth the funding of mission; namely life. While I note the Planetary Society has pushed for a Europa mission for what seems like years now, the date of even some weird overly complex multi-national mission in 2020 is suspect.. Why on Earth is a mission to Europa not fast tracked? A craft much like Cassini/Huygens with some radar to actually see under the ice could have been designed, built and launched 10 or 15 years ago. Titan has already had a lander. Cassini is in orbit around Saturn, and while neat and cool, only Enceladus might have life, but the odds of life on Enceladus seem dimmer and more remote. Despite statements that are politically motivated (read: funding) what is the fun factor of going to Titan when we have a fruit before us in Europa that desperately deserves to be explored? I don't know these answers but when you look at the frozen surface of Europa and notice the red striations that appear in cracks in the water ice it sure looks like iron or possibly sulphur, but most likely something along the lines of halobacteria just like this!

    Maybe our agencies don't want to find life yet, as some societal and religious aspects of there being life somewhere else would drive the religious folk crazy, or maybe they don't want to contaminate Europa. Whatever the reason they need to get off of their collective rear ends (asses) and do a mission there before even going back to Mars. I just get tired of the new bright and shiny and unpaid for missions, and some of the more dumb funded one that just go in circles snapping images of useless real estate, when Europa truly deserves, on all levels, a serious series of missions that bring light to what resides under the ice.

    1. Re:Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by dirkdodgers · · Score: 1

      I agree. I wish our leaders would go back to publicly embracing what space exploration is about. It's about imagination, about hope and inspiration, about the ennoblement of the human spirit, and yes, also about some really cool science. My hope was that Obama would recognize this, but so far he doesn't seem to be able to see much beyond science as some kind of economic stimulus.

      What greater question is there for every human being, regardless of how rich or poor they may be, than whether we are alone in the universe?

      To die having not done everything we could to look right under our noses would be agony.

    2. Re:Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      Europa quite possibly has the best odds of actually having something worth the funding of mission

      A mission to Europa is being planned too (see the post upstream of us about how they plan to test the Europa probe here on Earth by using an Antarctic under-the-ice lake).

      The only difference is that this one to Titan is actually easier/cheaper to do, which is why it may happen first, but eventually Europa will be seeing a probe from us as well (pending approval from 'Dave', of course).

    3. Re:Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      My hope was that Obama would recognize this, but so far he doesn't seem to be able to see much beyond science as some kind of economic stimulus.

      To be fair, Obama did have big, ambitious plans for NASA, but that was before the economy tanked...

    4. Re:Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE.

      (maybe Clarke & Kubrick had it right... or maybe they scared off the scientists... or maybe I'm just trying to convince the filter that's I'm not yelling)

    5. Re:Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by sznupi · · Score: 1

      "Go back"? I think you overestimate the scientific motives behind funding of missions in "glory times of space exploration". For politicians it was mostly about upping the other guys.

      If anything, we have right now the era which you wish would be "back". Purely scientific factors as the major reason of directing funds.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:Europa or bust -- Titan sucks.. by Trapezium+Artist · · Score: 2, Informative

      Err, that is exactly where the Europa Jupiter System Mission (EJSM) currently under study by ESA and NASA is suppose to go, as the name suggests.

      Yes, it's more expensive than TiME and will, in principle, take longer to develop, because it's bigger and more ambitious than TiME, but it's much further along in terms of studying its technical feasibility, and so (IMHO) has a better chance of happening before TiME does. Plus, NASA is not exactly swilling in cash at the moment and if EJSM is chosen for implementation, it'd be a struggle to do TiME as well.

      More details at:
      http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=42291
      http://opfm.jpl.nasa.gov/europajupitersystemmissionejsm/
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Jupiter_System_Mission

      TiME does sound like a very exciting concept, but I too am worried about how they intend to get data back to Earth without an orbiter relay: the numbers don't immediately stack up for an omnidirectional broadcaster from the surface of Titan, as the power available is essentially the same as Huygens had (just much longer-lived) and there's no way we can count on Cassini to be working by then to act as a relay.

  20. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

    It's certainly a better use for 400M than bailing out a bunch of banks...

    Seriously. $400M here, $400M there...pretty soon we're talking real money ;)

  21. But it doesn't capture the public's imagination by dirkdodgers · · Score: 1

    Human exploration is what capture's the public's imagination.

    We are driving robots around on the surface of Mars. That is really cool. As a kid I never thought this is how it would happen.

    We have now sent probes outside our own solar system. That is a humbling experience, to be be alive in the generation in which mankind first extends its reach beyond its home solar system.

    But apart from a few news broadcasts and scoping out some pictures on the internet, the public has hardly batted an eye. We need to get back to pushing the boundaries of human space exploration. Yes there are more practical matters to apply resources to, yes it violates a minority's view of the philosophy of government, but I am hard pressed to care.

    We have one life to live. Let's push as hard as we can, as far as we can. Let's put a permanent base on the Moon in 10 years. Let's put a permanent base on Mars in 15 years. Let's mine asteroids for resources. Let's turn those bases into colonies.

    Where's our perspective? Where's our human spirit? The problems we face on this pale blue dot are utterly insignificant in scheme of the cosmos.

    Let's go see what's out there, or fail spectacularly trying, but at least having tried.

  22. Alien Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    two words: what if?

  23. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wouldn't mind paying my taxes toward space missions like this; it's all the other frivilous crap like bailouts, corporate welfare, corn subsidies and unnecessary wars that are really disgusting uses of tax dollars.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  24. Gas station Titan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forget exploration.

    Send a fleet of container ships and balloons with siphons to such the gasoline and other distillates from the surface up to the orbiting gas-cans. From Titan, just a small nudge from orbit and the ride is free all the way back sun-ward to Earth.

    Remember boys, don't flame a fag out their or the whole thing will ignite.

    1. Re:Gas station Titan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama will never allow this! He intends to fully live up to his agreement to keep Saudi Arabia the Earth's gas can. Just look at all the cash he gets from the Saudi Kingdom through the US Postal Service. You'd think he must think he's Al Capone and the money is Canadian Whiskey.

      "What are we doing here?"

      "A liquor raid!"

      "Here! ... At the U.S. Post Office?!"

      "Ness, it's no secret of where the booze is, and who is behind it."

  25. Re:Sailing the myriad Centauri seas? by macraig · · Score: 1

    Do you still have an old Pentium III in the corner that you play that game on?

  26. Re:Sailing the myriad Centauri seas? by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

    Nope, I play Civ IV on an old P4 in the corner.

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  27. NASA already had plans for post-scarcity by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    3D printing, robots, AI, better design, renewable energy, and so on. These things can produce more than most people need for a good life. How about NASA spending money on this old idea first?
        "Advanced Automation for Space Missions"
        http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/
    "What follows is a portion of the final report of a NASA summer study, conducted in 1980 by request of newly-
    elected President Jimmy Carter at a cost of 11.7 million dollars. The result of the study was a realistic proposal for a self-replicating automated lunar factory system, capable of exponentially increasing productive capacity and, in the long run, exploration of the entire galaxy within a reasonable timeframe. Unfortunately, the proposal was quietly declined with barely a ripple in the press. What was once concievable with 1980's technology is now even more practical today. Even if you're just skimming through this document, the potential of this proposed system
    is undeniable. Please enjoy. "

    But now, we get "taken for a ride" by a few scientists instead.

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  28. Kill the alien life while looking for it? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The story of human exploration on Earth has been one of navigation and seafaring

    The story of human exploration on Earth has also been one of spreading disease and wiping out indigenous populations. Bacteria are known to survive the radiation and vacuum and cold of space quite nicely, thank you. I do not think this is a good way of looking for alien life.

    1. Re:Kill the alien life while looking for it? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Though conditions on Titan are unlikely to be conductive to any form of Earth bacteria.

      Europa, Mars or Ganimede OTOH...yeah, we really need to try to sterilize probes to those (and this is also why a manned mission to Mars might be not such a great idea for a long time)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Kill the alien life while looking for it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do not think this is a good way of looking for alien life.

      And why did you think we were hunting for extraterrestrial life? Why would it be so important to find life somewhere? It's quite obvious it exists, although based on previous observations and human behavior these are the reasons:

      A) Have sex with it.
      B) Eat it.
      C) Put it in a zoo.
      D) Exterminate it.
      E) Worship or convert it.
      F) Study it, then either of the above or a combination thereof.

    3. Re:Kill the alien life while looking for it? by corbettw · · Score: 1

      You're saying bacteria could survive in the frozen expanse of Titan, but they couldn't withstand the full force and fury of humanity? I'm not quite sure what to make of that line of thinking: either you really hate humanity and think we're nothing but destructive, or you stand in awe of our power, or some combination of the two. Either way, you strike me as being quite delusional and not interesting in the least bit.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    4. Re:Kill the alien life while looking for it? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      *Any* combination of those two attributes would make for an interesting person. You ought to write a book on the people you know who make such a person seem boring.

    5. Re:Kill the alien life while looking for it? by radtea · · Score: 1

      The story of human exploration on Earth has also been one of spreading disease and wiping out indigenous populations

      Now, now... sometimes we enslaved them rather than exterminating them. It wasn't all bad.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  29. Laura by tsa · · Score: 1

    Maybe our Laura could go there. She would be the first teenager to sail the seas of Titan, which is much cooler than being the youngest kid to sail around Earth.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  30. Arrr by r0b!n · · Score: 1

    Watch out for the pirates of Titan.

    1. Re:Arrr by iggie · · Score: 1

      Pirates?

      From TFA: "The scientists have a couple of seas in mind for their off-world maritime research vessel. Ligeia Mare and Kraken Mare are both about 500km across."

      Its the Kraken!
      Run for your lives, mateys!

    2. Re:Arrr by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Obviously all of the software for this mission would be written in R

  31. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

    Oh I'm in full agreement about the frivolous crap. I don't think government should be funding space missions either, but the amount spent on that is unquestionably a pittance compared to all the other stuff; that and the value we get from NASA make it a very low priority to concern my political self with. I just enjoy the knowledge they bring back from the stars.

  32. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by wizardforce · · Score: 1

    I was thinking of something along the line of giving people a choice to have some of what they pay in taxes go toward NASA or what not. Those who want to fund it can and those who don't could choose not to contribute.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  33. Why titan? by nloop · · Score: 1

    Sure, lakes of oil are cool, but ultimately not of any use. Based on how we think life starts, there probably is no life there. Europa on the other hand? Oxygenated oceans of water. Best chance for life of anywhere we know. Can we put this to a vote or something?

    1. Re:Why titan? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Titan is interesting because, in many ways, it is probably similar to primordial Earth, frozen in time. Even with low temperatures still the most similar place to our planet in the Solar System.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  34. What are we waiting for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Send a person up, you pansies!

    If they're suicidal or have a terminal disease all the better. Make a Wish.

  35. Re:Sailing the myriad Centauri seas? by Restil · · Score: 1

    gee... I have a whole cabinet full of P4's... real P4's and celery's. Maybe I should upgrade a bit... of course... they're all linux boxes, so it's all good.

    -Restil

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
  36. Titan is within budget, Europa probe fizz out by Yergle143 · · Score: 1

    I think the quick answer is that Europa is not as simple as it sounds. A lander has to bring fuel to slow down on Europa, not so
    Titan which has a handy handy thick atmosphere with which to slow the descent. Even if you landed on Europa you then
    have to start scraping at the ice to get at those red stripes (they're rust -- sorry). The Titanian-space boat proposed will
    be equipped with a mass spec and I guarantee, there are probably a whole lot of interesting organic molecules swimming
    in that methane solvent. I rate Europa high but we need something big, nuclear powered, and coupled with a means to either drill
    or melt its way down.

    Plus Jupiter's radiation is a b----!

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/03/010329075139.htm

    1. Re:Titan is within budget, Europa probe fizz out by tetrahedrassface · · Score: 1

      (they're rust -- sorry)

      Actually you don't know that, and any 'rust' on Europa stands an equal or better chance of harboring life than a liquid methane pool on the surface of a frigid celestial body......

  37. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If we can be the first ones out there, we can be the first ones to claim and profit off of the resources.

    Let's see how them Chinese feel when they have to come to Uncle Sam for their Dark Matter to power their Junk Spaceships.

  38. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Those who want to fund it can and those who don't could choose not to contribute.

    Almost like it doesn't need to be a government agency...

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  39. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This sounds like a really fun idea to sail around on another planet, but anyone that has ever been in a boat knows this is a dumb idea. Haven't you ever had a small boat get stuck on a sandbar or rock? The wikipedia page says it would only be propelled by the wind. If the wind only blows one way, it might travel straight to the shoreline and get stuck there. The shoreline could easily be craggy so there would be no traveling along the shoreline. Even if you had some method of propulsion, it might not be powerful enough to overcome the wind or free itself from an obstacle. If your main goal is to study the liquid, then it is ok, but don't expect to see much of anything else on the planet.

    What is really needed is to do the mission using "multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles" (MIRVs). Drop different probes all over the place to study different things. Some could study the liquid, some could be rovers, etc. Have China, Russia, Japan, the EU, etc. each design and sponsor some probes -- that way the cost is not all on the U.S. The sponsor nation would then be in charge of carrying out the science of each probe. Send one group of probes and orbiter, then another group 6 months later. That will provide some redundancy in case of equipment failure.

  40. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? No by FlyMysticalDJ · · Score: 0

    The wikipedia page says it would only be propelled by the wind. If the wind only blows one way, it might travel straight to the shoreline and get stuck there.

    I mean, I'm no expert on sailing or physics or Titan, and I didn't RTFA... But we have sail boats on earth, and last time I checked... they can steer. Like a lot. And it doesn't require a change in wind direction.

  41. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? No by asaz989 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Have you ever been in a boat? If the wind only blows one way, you tack against it (if you want to go close to directly opposite wind direction - slow but it does work) or just set your sails right to get propelled whichever way you want to go roughly perpendicular to wind direction. Or you can always run with the wind if you'd actually like to go wherever the wind blows. Really, sailing on the seas of Titan with a constant wind direction would be damned easy. If there are storms, on the other hand... but (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) I don't think we've seen any big ones in our studies of the atmosphere.

  42. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is fucking retarded. Why don't fund the DAFHA (digg and fill holes agency) instead of NASA if you really think that?

  43. Carrier spacecraft by amightywind · · Score: 1

    Mod the parent down. It is pretty obvious that a Titan lander would have to have a carrier spacecraft for navigation, communications, targeting etc. All soft landers the US has ever launched have had them. To target a landing precisely such a carrier spacecraft would have to be in orbit about Saturn and approach Titan from the trailing side. It is not hard to imagine the spacecraft orbiting Titan. Furthermore, the fact Huygen's carrier signal was readily detected by radio telescopes on earth when the transmitter wasn't even designed for the task suggests that this is a non-issue.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:Carrier spacecraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you high, or just an imbecile? did you even read the article or the post you're responding to?

  44. don't just sail it, mine it by corbettw · · Score: 1

    I'm sure we're a few generations away from it, but I can't wait until we can send robotic mining craft to Titan and mine the lakes and seas for raw materials to make plastics. By the time it's feasible to do this, I assume we'll have found some other source to answer our energy needs (and if we don't, we surely won't have the energy to do it anyway). But if we do run out of oil here, we'll have to get the raw materials to make plastics from somewhere. Titan seems as good a choice for that purpose as any.

    --
    God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    1. Re:don't just sail it, mine it by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > But if we do run out of oil here, we'll have to get the raw materials to
      > make plastics from somewhere. Titan seems as good a choice for that purpose
      > as any.

      Much cheaper to simply use water, air, and any handy source of carbon.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  45. NIST's SLIM program would be a better use by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    3D printers are just an example, and also BTW they can be cost effective in short run productions, which more and more manufacturing is, essentially printing on demand to reduce inventory costs. Any institution like NASA than can make plans decades ahead should be able to see how that will continue to improve. Also, there are a variety of other flexible manufacturing techniques and ways that costs are falling on that. Not all the loss of manufacturing employment in the USA is offshoring -- some is genuinely because of improved production efficiency, which will only continue. Tools continue to get better and more flexible, so the huge capital costs you refer to are less and less of an issue. Decades ago a computer cost millions of dollars and had less power than an electronic greeting card you can buy in the store for a couple dollars. Are you saying other industries simply will not follow, given all we know now and that we have the internet to continue to improve things? Especially with nanotech picking up?

    As far as energy and materials, as long as we do nearly 100% green energy like from solar panels and nearly 100% recycling, the volume does not matter that much; and if it is not nearly 100% sustainable, then we will bury ourselves in waste and pollution eventually anyway. Here is a government program at NIST already in that direction -- I'd suggest giving them US$400 million rather than spend it right now on another cruise to nowhere.
        "Sustainable and Lifecycle Information-based Manufacturing"
        http://www.mel.nist.gov/programs/slim.htm
    """
    The United States needs to prepare for a future where products are 100% recyclable, manufacturing itself has a zero net impact on the environment, and complete disassembly and disposal of a product at its end of life is routine. To document and monitor these changes, US industry will require key resources and methods that will enable it to measure sustainability along several dimensions (such as carbon foot print, energy accounting and recyclability of materials) allowing accurate assessment of status and progress. These resources and methods require identification of dimensions, associated measurements and classification of information relevant to sustainable product design and manufacturing. Such a base of information is critical to product designers and manufacturing engineers so that they can incorporate sustainability in their efforts. Hence, the primary challenge is to develop requirements, formal models, and validation methods for sustainability-based and lifecycle information-based manufacturing that support interoperability among tools and standards for design, analysis, simulation, and lifecycle assessment and information management.
    """

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re:NIST's SLIM program would be a better use by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      In the far far far future, yes.

      Anytime in the next 200-300 years, no.

      Manufacturing will never have a net zero impact because that would imply that goods could be produced with no expenditure of energy. There will ALWAYS be an energy cost in manufacturing.

      The 3D printers are very good for short run productions, but they are significantly more expensive when one gets into runs of even 100's of pieces if the parts are large enough. Time is also a cost because of labor, not just materials and energy. Another problem with the 3D printers however is that they only deal with plastics usually...

      There do exist 3D laser sintering machines which are capable of creating 3D metallic parts, however the power requirements of those machines are enormous, let alone the fact that only a few dozen exist in the USA and the machines cost on the order of $500,000+ each. The other problem is that those 3D sintering machines still require finishing operations which have to performed generally with carbide tooling... There is not much you can do to negate the cost of that carbide tooling... You can make it cheaper by making even more tools, but by it's very nature it is hard to recycle which means resources will always be scarce.

      In fact, the only way to solve resource problems is to move into space and acquire natural resources from Asteroids.

      As it is now, nanotech is just a pipe dream. Yes we have real world examples in the form of biology, but when it comes to dealing with metals, you're in an entirely different league. I don't believe nanotech will become practical for the manufacturing of macroscale parts anytime within the next 200 years.

    2. Re:NIST's SLIM program would be a better use by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      I should add, I don't think anyone necessarily disagrees with the premise of your idea. In the future it will happen and it will be wonderful, but as far as the practicality of it goes, it's simply not practical now.

      Also, many would disagree with you that we are sending a probe to a useless rock. There exist significant deposits of hydrocarbons on Titan and those could prove immeasurably useful to Earth in the future. Not to mention that there is a possibility for life to exist on the planet.

    3. Re:NIST's SLIM program would be a better use by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      The only significant value of resources in space is to use them in space (and maybe to send back information through their use). To use resources in space, we need to better understand manufacturing. Hydrocarbons being imported back to Earth? Solar panels are a lot easier, as are windmills and lots of other things. Even a large amount of energy use can have a minimal impact on the Earth with the right renewables. The biosphere captures and uses many times more energy than our industry and has for millions of years. Check out this, by the way:
          "Jay Leno's 3D Printer Replaces Rusty Old Parts"
          http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/jay_leno_garage/4320759.html
      Also:
      "3d Printing multiple materials with Objet "
      http://www.feedingedge.co.uk/blog/2009/06/26/3d-printing-multiple-materials-with-objet/

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    4. Re:NIST's SLIM program would be a better use by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      How do solar panels replace hydrocarbons? The fact of the matter is that as it currently stands, the hydrocarbon reserves we are using(oil) have taken billions of years to form. Once they are used up, they will be gone and we will need a new source because we can't wait billions of years to have new reserves.

      Also why would you say that the only significant value of resources in space is to use them in space? Getting resources from space back down to Earth is a trivial matter as gravity does all the work for you... It wouldn't be very different from the cargo containers currently manufactured and used for international shipping. In fact the containers themselves could be made in space out of a material such as steel that can be recycled on Earth.

      Secondly, while it's nice that Jay Leno did some 3D printing for prototyping a part, at the end of the day he still had to run the part through a CNC machine and cut the flange nut out of metal. There is no way you are going to use a plastic nut on a vehicle on a stress bearing member, plastic is extremely weak compared to metal.

      Again, I'm fully aware of the capabilities of these 3D printers, we have 2 of them at work and we use rapid prototyping machines on a daily basis for part testing/verification before manufacture.

    5. Re:NIST's SLIM program would be a better use by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      Solar panels replace hydrocarbons the same way fossil oil replaced whale oil for heating and lighting -- things change. You can produce as much electricity as you want with solar panels (or other renewable energy sources), and use some of that energy to make new panels.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#Energy_payback_time_and_energy_returned_on_energy_invested
      "Thin film technologies now have energy pay-back times in the range of 1-1.5 years (S.Europe).[70] With lifetimes of such systems of at least 30 years[citation needed], the EROEI is in the range of 10 to 30. They thus generate enough energy over their lifetimes to reproduce themselves many times (6-31 reproductions, the EROEI is a bit lower) depending on what type of material, balance of system (or BOS), and the geographic location of the system.[75]"

      Also, by the way, some people think "fossil" oil is self-renewing (though even then, it is too polluting to use IMHO).
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
      "The abiogenic hypothesis argues that petroleum was formed from deep carbon deposits, perhaps dating to the formation of the Earth. The presence of methane on Saturn's moon Titan is cited as evidence supporting the formation of hydrocarbons without biology. Supporters of the abiogenic hypothesis suggest that a great deal more petroleum exists on Earth than commonly thought, and that petroleum may originate from carbon-bearing fluids that migrate upward from the mantle."

      If you plot the exponential growth rate of renewable energy for the past few decades, within two to three decades, the world will be running mostly on renewables. And there is no sign of that exponential growth rate slowing, even with the recession/depression. Peak Oil is a non-issue in that sense -- even if our society will change, and should change, in various ways, because the true cost of fossil fuels between defense and pollution and corruption is enormous.
      http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-gas-crude/461
      It takes more electricity to make a gallon of gasoline than it would take for an electric car to go the same distance, so if we switched to electric cars, our electricity use would go down (and we would not need the oil at all).
      http://www.evnut.com/gasoline_oil.htm
      Taxes would even go *down* if the US government gave luxury safe electric cars away to everyone:
      http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/09eb7f4c973349f2?hl=en
      "This essay explain why luxury safer electric (or plug-in hybrid) cars should be free-to-the-user at the point of sale in the USA, and why this will reduce US taxes overall. Essentially, unsafe gasoline-powered automobiles in the USA pose a high cost on society (accidents, injuries, pollution, defense), and the costs of making better cars would pay for themselves and then some. This essay is an example of using post-scarcity ideology to understand the scarcity-oriented ideological assumptions in our society and how those outdated scarcity assumptions are costing our society in terms of creating and maintaining artificial scarcity. "

      With energy and agriculture, you can grow feedstocks for industry on land or in the ocean to make plastics. Consider:
      http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/why-is-hemp-really-illegal/question-554401/
      Is this true from the link? "Henry Ford's first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the CAR ITSELF WAS CONTRUCTED FROM HEMP! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fie

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  46. Re:Sailing the myriad seas? No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The thing you are forgetting is that there will not be intelligent, problem-solving humans to steer the boat. They will be robotically controlled with about a 20 hour time lag or have some type of AI to control them. At least with the Mars rovers, they stay in one place while we take days to figure out a new command sequence to send to them. With a boat you can have constant movement of boat, liquid, and wind. By the time you come up with a plan your boat will be stuck.

  47. Lander? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't it be called a floater?

  48. Re:Can't wait to fund this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because DAFHA doesn't require cutting edge science and engineering and thus doesn't increase our competitiveness?

  49. Europa ice driller (Re:Odds of finding alien life? by rgarbacz · · Score: 1

    I would say we should hurry-up with this Europa ice driller, because soon we will not have any testing places on Earth.