Slashdot Mirror


Is Europa Too Prickly To Land On?

astroengine writes "A deadly bed of icy javelins — known as penitentes — could be awaiting any spacecraft that tries to land on some parts of the ice-covered world Europa, say researchers who have carefully modeled the ice processes at work on parts of the Jovian moon to detect features beyond the current low resolution images. If the prediction of long vertical blades of ice is correct, it will not only help engineers design a lander to tame or avoid the sabers, but also help explain a couple of nagging mysteries about the strange moon. 'This is a game changer,' said planetary scientist Don Blankenship of the University of Texas in Austin. Blankenship has been involved in NASA's planning process for sending a reconnaissance spacecraft and eventually a lander to Europa."

140 comments

  1. Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Funny

    What part of "Attempt no landing there" don't you people understand?

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by durrr · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well if it's a spiky ice hell, then no wonder they told them not to attempt landing as that would only end in tears.

    2. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by gstoddart · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What part of "Attempt no landing there" don't you people understand?

      What part of 'fiction' don't you understand? ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was it Europa that had the sharks with bird beaks?

    4. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by JWW · · Score: 2

      What part of humor don't you understand?

    5. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Mikkeles · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nuke the landing site from orbit! Next problem?

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    6. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 3, Funny

      What part of "Attempt no landing there" don't you people understand?

      No kidding. Jupiter has at least 66 other moons we can land on. But of course the only one we want to land on is the one that we're told not to. Of course "the prediction of long vertical blades of ice" in conjunction with the radiation and hazards of the trip itself make us want to go even more. It's kind of like telling a 3 year old "don't touch this".

    7. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      What part of humor don't you understand?

      Someone missed humor, but I'm not entirely convinced it was me.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The laughing. I've never understood the laughing part.

    9. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      actually earth had the "sharks" with birdlike beaks. Earth had a crap-load of weird-ass creatures in the long long ago.

    10. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it was you that missed it.

    11. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Penitentes are religious groups living in New Mexico who observe physical penance. Just sayin...

    12. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What part of humor don't you understand?

      Someone missed humor, but I'm not entirely convinced it was me.

      You not only missed it, you missed the miss.

      A meta WHOOOOSH!, if you will.

    13. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anyone considered that at its closets point Europa will be about 10x further away than Mars? A manned mission there better start with some kids stuffed into a spaceship so they can get home schooled in low gravity and landing on a moon that may or may not swallow them whole.

    14. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by xevioso · · Score: 1

      I think they are actually 5-sided people who live in tents all the time or something.

    15. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh god... you didn't tell me _what_ not to touch. Not clear enough; d*** caught in fan :(

    16. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      What part of "don't you understand" don't you understand? ;)

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    17. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well if it's a spiky ice hell, then no wonder they told them not to attempt landing as that would only end in tears.

      Yes, and the last thing you want in your suit is tears.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    18. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, let us make this incredibly crystal clear, the kind of clear that if applied on a glass door would have you walk right through it because it was invisible kind of clear. The missing was all on his part.

    19. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely you.

    20. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by dargaud · · Score: 1

      Nuke the landing site from orbit! Next problem?

      That would kind of screw up with the results of the isotopic analyses they are sure to want to run there...

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    21. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by necro81 · · Score: 1

      What, you mean you want to do science and discovery when you get there?

    22. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just making sure, tears like in fabric right? not sad emo tears?

    23. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by camperdave · · Score: 1

      just making sure, tears like in fabric right? not sad emo tears?

      Either one could be bad.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    24. Re:Arthur C Clarke strikes again! by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Watch out when you're giving me instructions, I might just start writing something like this:

      Can't land this!
      Can't land this!
      Can't land this!

      My, my, my spaceship don't brake so hard
      Makes me say "Oh, my Lord!"
      Thank you for launching me
      With no extra fuel at 300 feet.
      It'd feel good, if we got on down
      A super dope pilot from a Midwest town
      And I'm blessed with cool hands
      But this is a place, uh, you can't land!

      I told you, Control
      I can't land this!
      Yeah, so much for living, now you know
      I can't land this!

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  2. Obligatory by Lucas123 · · Score: 2

    "All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landing there. Use them together. Use them in peace."

    1. Re:Obligatory by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Is that the number 1 answer from David Letterman's Top Ten list: How to get humans to Europa?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Obligatory by hurfy · · Score: 1

      They checked the future and saw our bouncing ball lander for Mars and..........

      or maybe they just don't want to clean up the mess impaled humans make.

    3. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You posted the same minute as the other guy, He's funny and you're redundant. /. moderation issues 101

    4. Re:Obligatory by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      And unfortunately you posted AC so no-one with mod points is likely to see this and realise they unfairly modded this guy down and the other one up.

    5. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I moderated the guy back up but he's still at 0. wtf?

    6. Re:Obligatory by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 1

      Funny the way that works...

      Funny the way that works...

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    7. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh I see why, others are continuing to moderate down. Oh wells, I tried.

    8. Re:Obligatory by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      or maybe they just don't want to clean up the mess impaled humans make.

      On Europa?

      You could just whack them with a hammer and sweep up the dust!

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  3. Problem solved by schneidafunk · · Score: 2

    They solved breaking up ice years ago. Send the titanic.

    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Problem solved by skaralic · · Score: 1

      ...with 6000 and one hull!

    2. Re:Problem solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tried that, didn't work

  4. Oh easy solution. by durrr · · Score: 0

    Send a nuke as a landing zone herald.
    And pray to your diety of choice that 2001 wasn't made in correspondence with aliens.

    1. Re:Oh easy solution. by pspahn · · Score: 1

      I thought it was already well-known that 2001 (the movie kind) was made so that the US Gov't could practice filming the Apollo landings.

      Isn't that what pretty much all the following Kubrick films were trying to explain? Little Danny's Apollo sweater... The symbolism of Eyes Wide Shut...

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    2. Re:Oh easy solution. by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      No need for an actual nuke, any impactor would do the job.

      Which, in a dirty solar system, means there are already fresh craters available.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  5. Hey if Zeus managed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on guys, I was NOT the only one thinking that

  6. Clarke by confused+one · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there."

    1. Re:Clarke by confused+one · · Score: 0

      Darn. dkleinsc beat me to it.

    2. Re:Clarke by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      And for the sake of a single minute he gets modded to +5 Funny and you get down to 0 Redundant.

      No-one ever said the Slashdot moderation system was just.

    3. Re:Clarke by cusco · · Score: 2

      Well, as the third or forth mention of the same joke in the first couple of minutes I think that Redundant was rather just.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    4. Re:Clarke by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      And for the sake of a single minute he gets modded to +5 Funny and you get down to 0 Redundant.

      I'd have modded the first one redundant, because there's no "-1, too obvious, don't waste my fucking time." Nobody gets a +1 funny from me unless I at least grin, and if I think of the joke before you tell me that joke, it ain't funny.

      And BTW, everyone in this subthread is offtopic.

    5. Re:Clarke by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      Now, everything you say is perfectly reasonable (except that the "-1, too obvious" doesn't count for me since I haven't read whatever stupid story they're all referencing anyway. Still off-topic though, though "Redundant" is unfair.).

    6. Re:Clarke by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It isn't offtopic, it's a reference to 2001 (or maybe 2010) where we are warned to stay away from Europa. If you saw the movie it's obvious, if not it's offtopic.

  7. well the clmiches it by geekoid · · Score: 1

    NASA first priority needs to be a gravity repulse engine.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  8. Suncups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mountaineers are familiar with them. Left to evolve too long, you end up with foot-tall ridges and spires.

  9. Solved problem, much? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    Haven't we been using explosives to clear the landing one of tall brush, inconvenient locals, and anything else for at least decades now?

    Nothing says 'we come in peace' quite like blasting the site flat before touchdown!

    1. Re:Solved problem, much? by stewsters · · Score: 1

      That gets to be a bit more tricky.

      You need a large enough explosive to clear a landing area that you think you can hit. Considering the weight limitations of sending things that far, that most likely is a nuke. Then when the lander lands in a sea of radioactive water, does it freeze around it? Do you wait for the surface to freeze into a hard crust, or do you wait until it completely hardens?

      What of the life you are looking for? Perhaps its not able to survive a nuclear bomb? This means that you will need to travel beyond the edges of your refrozen sea looking for evidence, or dig down into it.

      By the time you have answered these questions, you might as well have just landed with a better lander.

    2. Re:Solved problem, much? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      No need for explosives. A large slug of metal maybe 200kg moving at high speed is all you need is all you need. Maybe even a large chunk of ice...

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:Solved problem, much? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      Which means there are likely already fresh craters. So all you really need is high resolution image of the Europan surface. Which is something that both planetary scientists and lander designers would probably like having anyway.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  10. Hmmm... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 4, Funny

    .

    I, for one, suggest a low altitude detonation of a low-yield thermo-nuclear device at any potential landing sites prior to the landing attempt.

    This should glass over the LZ and let any locals know that papa's coming home and he's pissed.

    .

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
    1. Re: Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless of course it is ice, in which case you've just made a nice warm bath.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by istartedi · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just what we need. Another Europan war.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re: Hmmm... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 1

      .

      Make that 3 days prior then.

      Plenty of time to refreeze and to lull the locals into thinking the danger has passed.

      .

      --
      "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
      GeneralEmergency
    4. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Gaia is, and, has always been at war with West Europa

    5. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better, yet, redirect an asteroid from Jupiter's small ring. Let it impact the site and vaporize as many spiky protrusions as possible. Then, when we land, we can also claim to be on a humanitarian (or a European) mission and were looking for survivors and offering our help. That way we score points for science and also look like saviors to the locals!

    6. Re:Hmmm... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      People who "solve" every space exploration problem with nukes simply watch or play too much something.

    7. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europan maidens might prove to be frigid company for the invading forces.

    8. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, to one up that, we could insert a self-replicating, cross-dimensional monolith into the Jovian orbit and try to ignite the star potential in it with energy-matter conversion processes scribbled quickly on a napkin at the NASA bar after some heavy Friday drinking.

    9. Re:Hmmm... by ubersoldat2k7 · · Score: 1

      I think it's time to change the "In God we trust" with "Nuke it!".

      Asteroid? Nukes! Japanese? Nukes! Penitentes? NUKE! Mutant whales? NUUUUKEEEEEE!!!

    10. Re:Hmmm... by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      I propose using some kind of contracting ring system to slow the landing decent. Are we trying to study what's there or blow up what's there?!??!?!

      Perhaps some kind of retractable hooks or spears? (webs would be AWESOME)... replace the wheels? Just have it haul itself around through the spires?

    11. Re:Hmmm... by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      If Europa had a solid surface that'd almost be advisable, but you're not going to have glass to land on. You'll have a thin crust of radioactive ice over a warm lake of radioactive water.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  11. Not so much *prickly* ... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 2

    as just mean spirited, bureaucratic and bad tempered. Why else would we have been warned against landing?

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Not so much *prickly* ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It says "icy javelins", not "soft peat".

    2. Re:Not so much *prickly* ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as just mean spirited, bureaucratic and bad tempered. Why else would we have been warned against landing?

      So, just like Newark or any other large American airport?

  12. Minos, Rhadamanthus, and Sarpedon by themushroom · · Score: 1

    Zeus handed her a line of bull to land her.

  13. Is this what passes for geekdom these days? by sirwired · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I now expect at least Samzenpus (if not every Slashdot editor) to turn in their geek card, in addition to the submitter being banned from all further Slashdot submissions. How on earth (or in space) do you make a reference to landing (or not) on Europa and NOT put in a Clarke reference? What kind of geek are these people?

    1. Re:Is this what passes for geekdom these days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The kind of geek that doesn't insist on repeating the same worn-out references ad nauseam?

    2. Re:Is this what passes for geekdom these days? by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      What kind of geek are these people?

      The kind that are bored with that damned joke?

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    3. Re:Is this what passes for geekdom these days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's how we celebrate originality.

    4. Re:Is this what passes for geekdom these days? by guyniraxn · · Score: 2

      News for Nerds, not Geeks. You can keep the sci-fi, I'll take the sci.

  14. BOOM!, problem solved. by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just drop a M-121 bomb on the LZ to clear things out before landing.
    Take that spacecommies!
    America, FUCK YEAH!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:BOOM!, problem solved. by Gilmoure · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wouldn't this particular comment fully reflect the opinions of the JCS? Just sorta seems to be their thing.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    2. Re:BOOM!, problem solved. by approachingZero+ · · Score: 1

      This isn't flamebate, it fuck'in comedy. You up tight jackwads need to lighten up.

      --
      'I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes, when it takes a man's life.' ~ Four Leaf Tayback
  15. This is ... by whathappenedtomonday · · Score: 1

    ... not completely unrelated and not exactly offtopic, but if we ever land there, I'd like the footage to resemble this: Europa Report.

    --
    I hope I didn't brain my damage.
    1. Re:This is ... by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      Definitely recommend this movie, if not only for the visuals.

  16. that is the only obstacle.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, as soon as we have figured out how to crush ice, we will be ready to land on Europa.

  17. No, just tricky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first idea I had was to hover for a bit and let the engine melt the ice. Aside from being a tricky maneuver, it consumers precious fuel. That's a lot of extra mass to carry. Mass is money. We have no experience with such long hover landings.

    My 2nd idea is to have the legs of the lander swivel under robotic control, and aim for the low spots. The legs would have to be longer than the longest spike, to avoid piercing the underside of the lander.

    You could also have a hard shell, with the landing package outside. Once you're settled in, you open a porthole in the lander, extend a probe that drills into the ice, and use that to dig a single, deep hole. If it's really just ice, this should be possible. Then you let the ice freeze your foundation into place. Instead of a tripod, you have a single beam with a motorized joint. The beam could straighten itself out then telescope above the field. Maybe it could even go up 10 or 20 meters.

    The mass penalty and difficulty of all this is not something I have any real ability to comment on. I think it'd be interesting to see them test some of these ideas in a place where you can get a ready supply of big icicles, like Antarctica. There would be wind there though. At least on Europa there's no almost no atmosphere and thus virtually no wind, right?

    1. Re:No, just tricky by mrbester · · Score: 1

      For your first idea, if only there was somewhere nearby that was made of combustible material that could be collected using some kind of scoop...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    2. Re:No, just tricky by cusco · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How about making the bottom of the craft an inverted cone? Then it can settle nicely in between the spikes.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    3. Re:No, just tricky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original AC here. That sounds like a pretty decent idea. Based on the Curiosity probe to Mars, it looks like we already have experience controlling multiple rockets for descent, so we wouldn't have to worry about having one big rocket at the bottom of a cone. We could have multiple rockets around the edge, with the cone sliding in between the spikes. Then the drill could come out of the pointy-end and set up the telescoping tower; but not before we got a close-up look at the spike forest. Maybe there will be little blue men living in it. OMG! Your big spikey cone from space killed Papa Smurf.

    4. Re:No, just tricky by cusco · · Score: 1

      OMG! Your big spikey cone from space killed Papa Smurf.

      We can only hope.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  18. Problem Solved... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    From what I read, these ice formations only form at the equator. So....

    Don't land at the equator. Problem solved..

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:Problem Solved... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

      High latitude landings are energetically more demanding. Eats into your payload allowance, which means fewer instruments, which makes it harder to justify your mission against another Mars mission (for example.)

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  19. Not only Europa by rundgong · · Score: 1

    I assume Europe is also hard to land on. That would explain why the aliens in Hollywood movies always land in New York or on the front lawn of the White House

    1. Re:Not only Europa by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the pizza is better in DC or NYC.

      Well, at least in NYC.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  20. I'm Not A Rocket Scientist by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And I don't want to tell them how to do their job, but has anyone considered making their space ship out of some sort of "metal"? And maybe put a thing on the bottom that shoots fire out of it?

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:I'm Not A Rocket Scientist by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      And maybe put a thing on the bottom that shoots fire out of it?

      Or maybe a snow cone machine. Better yet, make the thing on the bottom modular so the astronauts can decide whether they need a drink or a frozen treat.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    2. Re:I'm Not A Rocket Scientist by infinitelink · · Score: 1

      Does anyone actually know the composition of the surface, and how strong these things would be vs. how brittle that allows currently used in spacecraft would be at such low temperatures? Perhaps the metal would shatter?

      --
      Intelligent idiots are we. | Evil men do not understand justice.
    3. Re:I'm Not A Rocket Scientist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somehow I think that that thought must have struck them too, after all the summary even mentions taming the sabers. However, I also think that a rocket on the lander has many drawbacks. The weight is deducted from the science payload that could otherwise be carried and a rocket will probably "contaminate" the surface on a large area so pristine surface samples must be picked from further away. Wikipedia (which btw. claims that the surface is the smoothest in the solar system) says that it has a "tenuous" atmosphere and the atmosphere of course affects braking options. The weak gravity means that a parachute might be enough and a parachute is certainly lighter than a rocket. A perfect design would be a "landing gear" which not only protects the lander but also makes a nice hole under it so that samples can immediately be obtained from below the immediate surface. This discovery of course affects such designs decisively.

  21. Will it blend? by guruevi · · Score: 3, Funny

    I put ice javelins in my blender, add some fruit and there you go, a smoothie. So just mount some BlendTec blenders on the bottom of the spacecraft and see if it "will blend". Would be some nice advertisements.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:Will it blend? by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

      I like it... Blending space exploration with adverticeing. Could be a good source of financial support for science and exploration.

  22. salt by kencurry · · Score: 1

    You throw salt out, hover around a bit, then land. Problem solved. Also, if there is salt left over, use it for the margarita glasses - just be sure to bring fresh limes & decent tequila: obviously you won't need to bring the ice.

    --
    sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
    1. Re:salt by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Salt may not work if it's too cold there. However, what about a thick air-bag cocoon upon first landing? After a short survey of the area, squirt out chemicals that melt or soften the surrounding ice?

      The downside is that you corrupt the samples with your ice-melting chemicals. Thus, it may have to be a semi-rover or have a "scoop-and-pull" feature to find better sampling spots.

    2. Re:salt by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      You throw salt out, hover around a bit, then land. Problem solved.

      That only works above 0 degrees F (at least for pure water ice at about 15 PSI pressure). (Which is how 0F was originally defined, by the way.)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  23. Stupid NSA by cyber-vandal · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm not surprised Europa is a bit prickly at the moment.

    1. Re:Stupid NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uranus is even pricklier

    2. Re:Stupid NSA by kimvette · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised our politicians don't want to land on Uranus. They've been fucking every other anus for years.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  24. The Biggest Risk of them All... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

    Somehow the article neglected to mention the biggest risk of them all ... the local wildlife!

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  25. Super Keen on putting Trees on Mars by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

    Genetically modified or otherwise. Send seeds, grow teraforming. Obviously there's lots of radiation, but start with something that turns CO2 into C and O2.

    Something kind of pretty so people will want it as a background.

    Get ideas flowing about how to get it done!

    1. Re:Super Keen on putting Trees on Mars by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Protip: Plants are Carbon neutral.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Super Keen on putting Trees on Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Explain peat bogs. Only carbon neutral, when not dug up and used to make fire lighters, and low grade coal substitutes.

      Better (if more verbose) quip:

      Martian atmosphere is 90% co2, and at less than 1 bar pressure. After sequestering the dangerous carbon, what are you going to replace it with? Even if you vulcanize the whole damned surface to release the bound water vapor, the atmosphere still won't be anything like earth's, and you will have just radically reduced the solid mass portion of the planet to an even smaller fraction of 1 earth mass than it already was, and done so without fixing the reason the atmoshere blew off anyway.

      Fixing mars is hard. Fixing venus would probably be easier. It at least has apprioriate mass, and a luxuriously thick atmosphere, and theoretically would initiate tectonic activity once surface temperatures dropped sufficiently, creating the missing geomagnetic dynamo.

      (And it would be much cheaper too, and within reach of our current technological capacity. It would just take an infeasible amount of time. One atmospheric dispersion probe loaded with sulfur cycle photosynthetic extremeophiles, designed to produce aramid plastic membranes is all it would take. That and several million years.)

    3. Re:Super Keen on putting Trees on Mars by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's a bit depressing that someone with the reading age to read this site doesn't know enough about Mars to see the holes in that and has not bothered to go to the wikipedia page on the Mars atmosphere before making such a suggestion. There was an question by an eight year old on the "Naked Scientist" radio show about growing plants on Mars that showed far more insight (you can simulate Mars conditions in your freezer with the help of other stuff from the kitchen).
      The problem, as even used as a plot device by Edgar Burroughs in fiction over a century ago, is that whatever oxygen you put into the atmosphere on Mars is not going to stay there for very long. So forget brute force terraforming - something a bit more clever would be required if you want to keep the oxygen instead of throwing it away into deep space.

    4. Re:Super Keen on putting Trees on Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no way we're going to get Mars to "human livable" status, unless we progress to the point where we're restarting planetary dynamos, at which point you'd think we'd maybe be past little dinky rocks like Mars anyways. Doesn't mean terraforming has no merit though; if we can get some mass-harvestable algae or lichens or some such growing, we might be able to get foodstuffs/fertilizer and biofuel to aid colonists inside their domes.

    5. Re:Super Keen on putting Trees on Mars by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Actually "something a bit more clever" was meant to include sticking an airtight roof over whatever place you want the oxygen to be in. The pressure even at the lowest points on the Martian surface is far too low for any life that we currently know about.

  26. Lunar Lander by xrayspx · · Score: 1

    I've been training for this mission since I was 9. I'm ready, put me in coach, I've got this!

  27. DAMN NAZIS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stay out of Europa !! The hun will kill you and eat your babies alive !!

    1. Re:DAMN NAZIS !! by Pikewake · · Score: 1

      No Amerikaner pig-dog vill enter fortress Europa!
      signed: Ze Space Nazis

  28. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  29. Maybe... by Bovius · · Score: 1

    I think the top of Spain is pretty flat. You could probably land there if you can get nestled under that French overhang.

    Other than that, though, yeah, that's way too prickly. The next closest viable landing spot is over on that Brazilian ledge, and even then you'd need to make sure you get a firm perch so you don't slip off and fall to the Antarctic floor below.

  30. Eclipse 3.3 was pretty good by bmurray7 · · Score: 1

    My first thought after reading the headline was about the Java IDE, not the Jovian satellite.

  31. Against the Arachnids by steelfood · · Score: 1

    Can't wait to see TV news showing Neil Patrick Harris stick a probe into the mouth of a brain bug.

    --
    "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  32. mandatory by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Think Europa is prickly? Unless it's freshly shaven, how about Uranus? *badum tish* (gets his coat)

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:mandatory by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      Think Europa is prickly? Unless it's freshly shaven, how about Uranus?

      *badum tish* (gets his coat)

      Given the nature of the joke, would not dabum tush have been a better rimshot?

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
  33. Solve it the good old american way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Missiles. And if that is not enough, nukes.

  34. Let's think this through a minute by davidbrit2 · · Score: 1

    To everyone suggesting blasting the landing zone flat, have you considered what sort of scientific data we could recover from from a site that's been razed with Earth explosives? If this ice is enough to ruin a spacecraft, then anything capable of dealing with it on a scale needed for a safe landing is going to fling contaminating detritus for probably miles. So we could land, and... then what?

    1. Re:Let's think this through a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big problem with dropping a bomb or blasting a flat landing space is that you're going to create a temporary lake for a few hours or days, until it freezes back over. In the meantime, ignoring any radiation, you've set free the denizens of the under-surface liquid world. They'll climb out of their watery prison and await the new visitors with gaping maws. Oh, the horror. . . . . . .

    2. Re: Let's think this through a minute by davidbrit2 · · Score: 1

      Well that part just goes without saying, really.

    3. Re:Let's think this through a minute by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
      You land. Then jump out of the spacecraft, plant the stars and stripes and scream USA! USA! USA!

      What else would you do after nuking an innocent planet?

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    4. Re:Let's think this through a minute by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      you're going to create a temporary lake for a few hours or days, until it freezes back over.

      Unlikely. Even on Earth, within an atmosphere and only modestly cold ice, explosives don't melt ice. It's a sharp blast, not a slow heater. Debris carries away most of the energy, the rest dissipates as a shockwave through the ice, rather than focusing heat on the surface layers. You're not going to see much meltwater created, even with a nuke.

      Additionally, cracks in the impact zone and channels between the neighbouring penitentes would allow any liquid water to run off within seconds. And in a vacuum, any remaining liquid water will boil away quickly, the boiling lowering the temperature of what's left, causing it to quickly freeze.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  35. Rosie O'Donnell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is doubtful any nation, or nations, has the technology at this time to construct a launch vehicle powerful enough to lift a mass as great as Rosie O'Donnell into orbit.

     
    But that is the payoff. Once we have successfully engineered solutions adequate to meet the requirements needed to meet the goal of lifting the O'Donnell into space the conquest of space will be in reach.

     
    In space O'Donnell will only have mass, send her off on a collision course with Europa and (if the moon survives) the question of 'icy javelins' will be a moot point.

     
    The sphere will offer no resistance once the O'Donnell has had it's way with it.

  36. Re:Give them a break! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prometheus was indeed horrible, but I wouldn't exactly called it "horror in space".

  37. Zeus had no problem with it by darkHanzz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just saying...

  38. Is earth too prickly to land on? by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

    Recent observations have brought to light the fact that a large part of the planet earth is covered by tall sabers of what appears to be carbon based material called trees. "This is a game changer" said some asshole who gets paid to think this shit up.

    WTF!

    What do I have to do to get a fvcking job making up useless shit.

    --
    There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    1. Re:Is earth too prickly to land on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to college for a decade.

  39. Re:Give them a break! by cripkd · · Score: 1

    How about pretentious-pseudo-philosophic-claiming-to-not-only-reinterpret-mythology-but-also-to-have-it's-own-mythology-but-failing-in-making-any-sense-despite-the-5-pages-long-tutorials-out-there-that-pretend-to-make-sense-of-it-and-instruct-you-in-how-to-watch-it-action movie?

    --
    Curiously yours, crip.
  40. Re:well the clmiches (sic) it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    90% of /. posts, explained: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

    No, slashdot posts are an example of Sturgeon's Law.

    Your posts are an example of Dunning-Kruger.

  41. Go home irony, you're drunk. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that
    clinches
    NASA's
    repulsion/repulsor
    and the comma in the sig.

  42. Hmm thats a sticky problem by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    Some sort of RADAR device may be required for landers.

  43. Breaking the ice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey baby, I'd like to land my spaceship on your moon

  44. Re:Give them a break! by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

    What about it didn't make sense? It's entertainment for chrissake!

    --
    Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  45. Prickly by goozer321 · · Score: 1

    Sounds like my second wife - no fucking point landing on her either.

  46. Re: Give them a break! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So is Justin Bieber. Stop relativizing everything.