Slashdot Mirror


NASA Releases Details of Titan Submarine Concept

Zothecula writes: Now that NASA has got the hang of planetary rovers, the space agency is looking at sending submarines into space around the year 2040. At the recent 2015 NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts Symposium, NASA scientists and engineers presented a study of the Titan Submarine Phase I Conceptual Design (PDF), which outlines a possible mission to Saturn's largest moon, Titan, where the unmanned submersible would explore the seas of liquid hydrocarbons at the Titanian poles.

"At its heart, the submarine would use a 1 kW radiothermal Stirling generator. This would not only provide power to propel the craft, but it would also keep the electronics from freezing. Unfortunately, Titan is so cold that it's almost a cryogenic environment, so the waste heat from the generator would cause the liquids around it to boil and this would need be taken into account when designing the sub to minimize interference. However, NASA estimates that the boat could do about one meter per second (3.6 km/h, 2.2 mph)."

119 comments

  1. Yeah, so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use cryotrons for the electronics.

  2. 25 Years from now? by Nukenbar · · Score: 2

    At least they will all be fusion powered by then.

    1. Re:25 Years from now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or just send a 3D printer to Titan and send the files for the new technology as we invent it!

    2. Re:25 Years from now? by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You joke, but the ability to reconfigure spacecraft on the fly even on the smaller scale has proven itself valuable time and time again. I love how they came up with a trick after New Horizons was launched to nearly double its communication rate. It has two radio transmitters, one primary and one backup, and one dish. When they launched, it seemed obvious that only one could be used at a time - but en route someone figured out that if you have one transmit with right-handed polarization and the other with left-handed, they can both transmit at the same time, and then on Earth the two signals can be separated out. But since the spacecraft wasn't designed for enough power to use them at once (that was never supposed to be necessary), they needed to find a trick to get more power. And it's not easy, given that there's not a lot of things running when the probe is just drifting in deep space - what are you going to do, shut down your guidance computer? Well... yes, that's exactly what they came up with - when they've filled up their memory, they align the antenna, then spin up the spacecraft, shut down the guidance computer, transmit at double speed until the memory is free, then restart guidance and stop the spin so that they can resume data collection.

      While 3d printing and robotic arms for assembly is a stretch at present, the importance of having hardware flexibility is increasingly being demonstrated in space missions.

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    3. Re:25 Years from now? by mbone · · Score: 1

      Actually, this proposal envisions being powered by a Stirling engine powered by radioisotopes (considerably more efficient than a RTG), and NASA recently canceled its support for flight tests of Stirling engines powered by radioisotopes.

    4. Re:25 Years from now? by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      I find disabling power to the cargo hatch and setting the Frame Shift Drive and Interdictor modules to priority 2 solves most power issues. Especially when using Sheild cell banks and medium beam lasers.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    5. Re:25 Years from now? by plopez · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm.... is someone trying to get funding for their pet research perhaps?

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    6. Re:25 Years from now? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      And what would be wrong with that?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re:25 Years from now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah...I see you've been reading Peter Salisbury

    8. Re:25 Years from now? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Does that involve reversing the polarity at some point?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  3. Liquid hydrocarbons, you say? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

    If we are designing a submarine for use somewhere exotic and oil-rich wouldn't it make sense to save time by adding the weapons systems now? You know we'll end up needing them, and designing them in after the fact will be much more annoying and probably take longer.

    1. Re:Liquid hydrocarbons, you say? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      If we are designing a submarine for use somewhere exotic and oil-rich wouldn't it make sense to save time by adding the weapons systems now? You know we'll end up needing them, and designing them in after the fact will be much more annoying and probably take longer.

      I agree. Add some weapons now. Also, it should probably be designed like a marine creature to avoid suspicion from any possible alien marine life. You know what this means, right?

      Robotic Shark with frickin' lasers!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Liquid hydrocarbons, you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The next endeavor will be assigned to Captain Harlock and it will be to put a battleship in space (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitan_Harlock:_L'Arcadia_della_mia_giovinezza).

    3. Re:Liquid hydrocarbons, you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not exotic if there aren't lots of young women and men in tight, revealing clothing. As far as I know, very few places in the Middle East _or_ Titan meet that criteria.

      It's not a coincidence that erotic and exotic have a hamming distance of 1.

      Captcha: maleness

  4. Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably need to adapt it to melt/drill through the icy layer.

    1. Re:Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

      What you're describing is an incredibly challenging tasks. One needs several missions to get to better know Europa in general, and specific potential entry areas in particular, first. These missions are going to be expensive and have long lead times. And an actual boring / submersible mission is going to be extremely expensive.

      Titan has one main strike against its exploration, that it's so dang far away. But almost everything else about it is tailor-made for exploration. It's ideal for aerocapture. It's trivial to stay aloft, at an altitude of your choice, be it by hot air or lifting gas balloon, blimp (likewise), helicopter, fixed-wing aircraft, tilt-wing aircraft, etc. Low temperatures pose some difficulties but can be nice for electronics, and the rate of heat loss (even in a hot air balloon concept) is so low at such low temperatures that you don't need very big heat sources. The hydrocarbon seas are permanently exposed for whatever means of exploration (aerial, boat, submarine) you choose. Ascent requirements (sample return, for example) are surprisingly low versus a body of that size due to the ability to fly so high in the significant pressure / low gravity environment before needing to fire rockets. And so forth. And there's so darn much we don't know about Titan, perhaps even more than Europa. There's constant complex organic chemistry going on in the upper atmosphere of which we know almost nothing, and probably even some on the surface. There's probable liquid water under the surface and cryovolcanoes that erupt it to the surface. There's earthlike weathering processes done with/to completely different materials, and the entire gas cycle is a giant mystery right now. So yes, I'm pretty excited about whatever mission goes to Titan next.

      Too bad the next launch window to Saturn (2018, 4,13km/s delta-V, 8,2 years) is simply not going to happen. : There's not going to be such a low delta-V/time window for a long time - 2020 is 5,18 km/s / 11,0y; 2021 is 4,80km/s / 8,8y; 2024 is 4,81km/s / 10,4y; etc. So if we're lucky maybe we could get the 2021 window (though the increased delta-V reqs would significantly hurt the payload)... otherwise, there won't be a spacecraft getting to Saturn before the mid 2030s. :

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    2. Re:Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 1

      And speaking of liquid water under the surface, has anyone else noticed how almost every body in space that people point a camera at long enough seems to have evidence of "unexpectedly large" amounts of heat under its surface, esp. at surprisingly shallow depths? I really want to know what it is that people are overlooking because it keeps happening again and again, people expect to see dead rocks drifting through space and find out that they're still surprisingly alive with some process or another that means internal heat.

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    3. Re:Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we'll get really lucky and someone will come up with a flyable VASIMR, NERVA or similar that will allow the spacecraft to carry enough delta-v to use a trajectory with lower transit time than a pure Hohmann. Of course, since most of the delta-v cost is just getting the bloody thing into LEO to begin with, that may not help too much...

      Darn that rocket equation :/

    4. Re:Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There are still arguments over how thick the ice on Europa actually is, varying from estimates that it could be as thin as a couple hundred meters, to alternative models using ice that behaves ductile over long time periods that allow for the ice to be 100+ km thick.

    5. Re:Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hmm, just another thought which I haven't seen anywhere else. Orbital velocity through Titan's ionosphere would be about 1500 m/s, if my calculations are right. Exhaust velocity on ion engines ranges from tens of thousands to millions of meters per second. So a ram scoop to refill propellant is plausible, your drag should be well less than your ability to reboost with the propellant you acquire, even if efficiency is low; in practice you should be able to capture much faster than your burn rate. While all ion engines have certain elements which are "optimal" in terms of performance, you can generally use whatever ions you want without too dramatic of a sacrifice in terms of isp and thrust (so long as there's no corrosion problems or the like).

      So, for a sample return mission:

      1) A probe with detachable, flying lander (each RTG-powered) is boosted to LEO. As for the lander, I personally like the tilt-wing design, as it allows easy of landing and requires only a small RTG (it can fly in short hops, replenishing batteries on the ground while during surface science), but allows the high speed and range of travel of a fixed-wing plane.

      2) The probe begins a decade or more ion-propelled journey to Saturn, with only enough propellant to reach a stable orbit in Titan's upper atmosphere (and possibly some minor exploration of the Saturnian system en-route).

      3) The lander drops off, aerobrakes over the course of a few weeks, and then explores the planet for a year or so while the orbiter replenishes itself. A tilt-wing aircraft could probably explore all of the most interesting places on the planet in that timeframe and take numerous small samples). The lander only needs a small antenna, as the orbiter can act as a repeater to Earth.

      4) When exploration and propellant refill are done, the lander then flies back up through the atmosphere to as high and fast as it can, then activates a rocket stage (1500-2000 m/s delta-V) to re-rendezvous with the probe. The spent stage is ejected.

      5) The probe returns to Earth on ion power using its propellant from Titan (possibly with some minor exploration of the Saturnian system en-route). Upon return to Earth, the leftover propellant could itself be studied as a sample return in its own right (it could even be gathered into different tanks from different altitudes via an elliptical orbit if so desired).

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    6. Re: Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe that the heat is hypothesised as originating from tidal forces stemming from gravitational forces where moons are concerned.

    7. Re: Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I always thought that with cryogenic temperatures we could use superconductors and something along the lines of the Meisner effect (as long as a source of magnetic field lines exists) for propulsion.

    8. Re:Drop it on Europa by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      What you're describing is an incredibly challenging tasks. One needs several missions to get to better know Europa in general, and specific potential entry areas in particular, first. These missions are going to be expensive and have long lead times. And an actual boring / submersible mission is going to be extremely expensive.

      What!?! Next you'll be talking us that even with Apollo levels of funding and political commitment, it'll take us at least 30 years to put a person on Mars.

    9. Re:Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A future joint project between ESA and NASA already had to make a choice between sending a balloon to Titan or a probe to Europa, and they chose the latter. They still need to keep things open for ideas for projects after that though.

    10. Re:Drop it on Europa by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      I'm confused, and you seem to know something or another. why would the rate of heat loss be low? titan is extremely cold, and heat loss goes as the gradient of the temperature correct? Or are you saying there are obvious choices of gas which have very high levels of thermal expansion at those temperatures to make it that the temperature gradient isn't very large?

    11. Re: Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 1

      Except that it always seems to be in excess of what they calculate. It's just one "there's more heat than we expected' after the next... one kind of begins to wonder if they need to figure out why their expectations always seem to be wrong.

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    12. Re: Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean it is always more than expected? They don't even have how much heating it receives pinned down very well, as in there are order of magnitude difference in the estimates how much heating it would take to produce observed structure. They don't even know how thick the ice is, which would affect how insulating the surface is and how much water there is, etc. There is still discussion that Europa may not have liquid water, but just ductile ice that moves on long time scales (like rock in Earth's mantle) . The only big "excess" was when Voyager 2 showed the surface to look potentially active, when no one thought of trying to calculate the tidal heating very carefully before. Since then, calculations are giving high results than splitting the difference with what it looks like is going on. E.g. calculating the possibly heating from Rosby waves would mean it could be heated more than expected, and not only have a liquid ocean, but one with currents and convection.

    13. Re:Drop it on Europa by cyn1c77 · · Score: 2

      Too bad the next launch window to Saturn (2018, 4,13km/s delta-V, 8,2 years) is simply not going to happen. : There's not going to be such a low delta-V/time window for a long time - 2020 is 5,18 km/s / 11,0y; 2021 is 4,80km/s / 8,8y; 2024 is 4,81km/s / 10,4y; etc. So if we're lucky maybe we could get the 2021 window (though the increased delta-V reqs would significantly hurt the payload)... otherwise, there won't be a spacecraft getting to Saturn before the mid 2030s. :

      I think you're looking at launch windows waaaaaay to close to present.

      There is no way that NASA, at its current funding level, is going to design, build, and test a nuclear-powered submarine for an interplanetary mission in 3-5 years.

    14. Re: Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 2

      I'm not just talking about Europa. I'm talking Enceladus and half a dozen other moons that were thought to be most assuredly dead but turned out to have liquid water geysers, for example. I'm talking about the unexpected internal heat in our moon. I'm talking about Titan's apparent level of internal activity in excess of predictions. I'm talking about how Io's volcanoes are in the wrong spot based on what we know about how it should be heating. I'm talking about how there's even considered 50-50 odds right now that Ceres has geysers (guess we'll find out the answer to that later this year ;) ), and there's essentially zero tidal heating there. I'm talking the discovery of mega-storms on Uranus, whose fueling heat is still a mystery. I'm talking about not simply the fact that Jupiter and Saturn release more heat than they receive from the sun, but that counterintuitively Saturn's ratio of heat received to heat emitted is more extreme than that of much larger Jupiter. And on and on.

      About 3-4 times a year I hear some planetary scientist or another baffled about where the heat is coming from to explain something they're observing in some body or another. I never hear the opposite, never "why is this colder / less energetic than expected". Perhaps there's not one cause, there could be many. But clearly we're not very good at our expectations of how hot celestial bodies should be internally, for whatever reasons.

      Who wants to bet that this summer we're going to be hearing, for some reason or another, planetary scientists boggling over New Horizons data, asking "where is the heat coming from to explain X that we're seeing on Pluto? That shouldn't be there."

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    15. Re: Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A tenured scientist doesn't eat his hat.

    16. Re:Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 1

      Most of what I've read about heat loss on Titan pertains to hot air balloons, so I'll cover that first.

      Thermal radiation is proportional to the temperature to the fourth power. So essentially zero. Convective / conductive losses are proportional to the gas density, surface area, and to the absolute difference in temperature. Buoyancy is relative to the relative gas densities, meaning for a given amount of buoyancy in Titan, you're dealing with only a small absolute temperature difference compared to what's needed on Earth for the same amount of buoyancy. The low gravity means you can float higher (in thinner gas) as well, and means that you can use a much smaller envelope at any given height. So convective and conductive losses are dramatically reduced.

      All in all, heat loss for a balloon in Titan's atmosphere is extremely low.

      Now, a submersible is more challenging, of course, as you're surrounded by a much denser fluid capable of drawing away heat much faster (aka, like the difference on Earth between standing in freezing air vs. swimming in freezing water). But thermal radiation is still essentially irrelevant. The question for conduction / convection becomes what sort of heat profile one plans to design their craft to have. It should be noted that most hydrocarbons have significantly lower specific heats than water, and thus would not be expected to draw heat away as quickly in an equivalent scenario. Also, there's a fairly good chance that these liquids may be rather viscous, so convection will probably be greatly reduced (it all depends on the exact mixtures and temperatures).

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    17. Re:Drop it on Europa by Rei · · Score: 2

      Honestly, I can't think of a more compelling place outside of Earth that we have current, compelling evidence that there is life or lifelike processes ongoing than Titan.

      A long mystery on Titan has been, where is the methane coming from? We can see it being converted into the atmosphere into a wide range of organic compounds, various compounds of CHON (the building blocks of life, one might add), and the whole atmosphere should be converted in about 50 million years - yet here's this multi-billion-year-old Mercury-radius moon that still has an atmosphere thicker than Earth's. Some have been detected at over 10000 daltons, so we're talking about big, complex molecules - as well as a lot of bulk simpler organics like ethane and acetylene. A common theory before Cassini-Huygens was that there would be a deep, global ethane / acetylene ocean, with all of Titan's current methane constantly bubbling up from deep within the planet. But this turned out not to be true. So what the heck is happening to all of it?

      One theory that had been postulated was that life or lifelike processes on the surface in the hydrocarbon-"wet" sands and the seas are conducting their own cryogenic version of our gas cycle - that is, hydrogen plays the role of oxygen and methane the role of CO2, with various longer chain hydrocarbons, but especially ethylene and in particular acetylene, as the fuels. These are metastable on the surface of Titan. It's like if you set a bowl of sugar out, it's not just going to react with the oxygen in the air, even though that would put it into a lower energy state; you either have to heat it up significantly, expose it to an organic catalyst, or expose it to biological metabolic (catalytic) processes to react it with oxygen and extract the energy. Obviously, there are no widespread significant sources of great heat on Titan's surface. A cryogenic natural widespread acetylene catalyst would be very weird and a remarkable discovery in its own right. So if its breaking down, one would have to seriously consider biological processes as a possibility.

      After the theory was proposed, the Cassini-Huygens mission confirmed the paucity of acetylene in the lower atmosphere compared to the upper atmosphere. And then a computer model of the data suggested that 1/3 tonne per second of hydrogen is diffusing from the upper atmosphere to the lower atmosphere, aka - it's being consumed at the surface and regenerated photolytically in the upper atmosphere. Now, this latter research is just a model - we don't know yet if it's accurate. But it's yet more evidence that there might be something unusual on the surface catalytically breaking down organic compounds with hydrogen.

      We can also look at what we know about the chemistry that's going on. The longest chain compounds identified thusfar are PAHs - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Well, one of the major pre-"RNA World" hypotheses (that is, to say, how a RNA World abiogenesis scenario could come into being) is called PAH World. PAHs act as natural scaffoldings for RNA synthesis. Furthermore, laboratory recreations of Titan's atmosphere and the organic chemistry going on therein resulted in the synthesis of all five nucleotide bases as well as amino acids.

      Would I bet my car on there being life currently on the surface of Titan? No. But there's some very interesting activity that warrants explanation, and it'd be pretty hard to rule out life or lifelike processes. Certainly more evidence than we're seeing anywhere else. It would have to be very different than life as we know it, no question, and we may be talking about something more like a "hypercycle". But if it's true that there's some sort of catalytic cycle going on on the surface, what could one point to as a more likely cause on a world awash in complex organic molecules than a process based on complex organic molecules? And if you have an environment were you're constantly producing a wide range of organic molecules and these molecules are performing an energy-extractive activity, well, that sure sounds like a perfect setup for abiogenesis.

      But... there's a lot of big IFs, so time will tell.

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    18. Re:Drop it on Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... In video games it always works to brute enter by force and have beginners luck. Maybe less planning, less cost, more tries, get some luck and hope?

  5. "almost" a cryogenic environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Liquid methane (-161C) and ethane(-89C) is pretty close to liquid nitrogen (-196C), and LN2 is considered a cryogen, so I think this is splitting hairs a bit. Even the font of all knowledge wikipedia says cryogenics starts at -150C, and methane meets that criteria.
    (unless the original author was assuming that Titanic seas are methane/ethane azeotropes of some sort, but somehow, I don't think that's the case)

    It's unclear that waste heat from the sub would cause boiling, any more than waste heat from a conventional water sub causes the seawater to boil. A lot depends on what the temperature of the sea is. The freezing point of methane is -182C so there's not a big spread between freezing and melting.

    1. Re:"almost" a cryogenic environment by khallow · · Score: 1

      The freezing point of methane is -182C so there's not a big spread between freezing and melting.

      Apparently, methane with dissolved nitrogen has a wider spread between freezing and boiling, but I don't know how much it helps.

  6. Titan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that mean it's going to be Titanic?

    No thanks!

  7. not even in a distant future. by nimbius · · Score: 0

    Nasa:: we have an awesome plan for a submarine that would explore the seas of liquid hydrocarbons at the Titanian poles.
    Senator:: We already defeated communism we dont need anymore submarines.
    Nasa:: but you dont understand, this is space exploration! we've never been to titan and it's been established that there are three large polar seas on Titan consisting of methane and ethane in a composition similar to that of liquified natural gas.
    Congressman: so you want to do...fracking for gas? we already do that in my state.
    Tea Party Senator: this sounds satanic. Kraken Mare is probably some goat demon trying to sneak gay marriage into the fema concentration camps.
    NASA: no this is...this is interplanetary exploration....
    Senator: you already went to mars what else do you want? didnt Steven Segal start the reactor or something? and so thats how we have intenet?
    NASA: ok you know what? this just changed. its not a probe anymore its going to be a manned submarine.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:not even in a distant future. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Truly, you're a fucking moron.

    2. Re:not even in a distant future. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Liberal Senator: If this is a space mission, wouldn't this involve rockets? According to my latest Quinnipiac, 43% of my constituency now supports that trendy new anti-fire movement, and I'm up for reeleection next year. No thanks.

  8. I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How on earth can you get any data back from this thing? Can you transmit RF though a sea of super-cooled liquid Hydrocarbons?

    1. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      Just light some signal fires

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by TWX · · Score: 1

      Just a guess, but if you want one-way communication you jettison a few uplink modules throughout the mission and they relay data to the orbiting probe that delivered the sub. If you want bidirectional communication you either tow an antenna cable strung out behind, or you run a buoy line up to the surface.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by necro81 · · Score: 1

      Damn, I just knew those NASA engineers were forgetting something!

      Probably they would do it in a manner similar to how they do it with conventional submarines: occasionally surfacing and transmitting normally, or else releasing a buoy with communications capabilities.

    4. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by duranaki · · Score: 1
      It says in TFA. They specifically don't use an orbiting probe to reduce cost. The thing would transmit directly from the surface:

      Due to the large amount of data that needs to sent to Earth, the submarine needs a large dorsal fin that includes a planar phased-array antenna. While operating, the submarine would surface for 16 hours per day for Earth communications during which it would study its surroundings using a mast camera.

    5. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by Rei · · Score: 1

      If the properties of longer-chain hydrocarbons apply to that of supercooled liquid short-chain hydrocarbons, then it should be pretty transparent to RF. That said, if it was a problem, the solution is as simple as "surface".

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    6. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by necro81 · · Score: 2
      In the article, their plan is have a large dorsal fin (the thing that looks like a vertically-oriented solar array in the artist's concept) which would be a phased array for direct transmission to Earth. To quote:

      However, the direct transmission of worthwhile amounts of data over a billion miles to Earth requires a large antenna, implemented as a planar phased - array dorsal fin. (It was decided to simplify the mission to exclude a relay orbiter which would require significant propulsion and radioisotope power.) This antenna structure introduces a modest submerged drag penalty, as well as demanding judicious placement of large tanks for adequate buoyancy margin and surfaced stability.

    7. Re:I'm thinking there's a bigger problem... by mbone · · Score: 1

      Note : A Titan day is 15.94 Earth days

  9. No science fiction future here by BigSlowTarget · · Score: 1

    TIL: I will likely be dead before the planets of our solar system are widely investigated. The time necessary to plan and execute an interplanetary mission is daunting.

    1. Re:No science fiction future here by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 2

      The time is largely spent in political wrangling and procurement. Once people figure out how to make money with space flight (and that will happen), things will go much more quickly.

      Private companies are probably going to be reluctant to invest significantly in space flight until property rights have been worked out. No point in spending billions on mining an asteroid only to have people tell you that you don't own it, on top of an already very risky operation.

      The Asteroid Redirect Mission might be the most important upcoming mission. It will demonstrate that this sort of thing is feasible, which will lead companies to lobby and pressure politicians to create more of a legal framework for private space industry and mining.

    2. Re:No science fiction future here by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Not if we can get a few more private billionaires interested in the subject. After Anousheh Ansari will come the multitudes.

    3. Re: No science fiction future here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ownership will be easy: homesteading and corporations.

  10. NIAC != NASA by mbone · · Score: 1

    NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts is a way of giving relatively small amounts of money ($100,000) to outside researchers to begin to flesh out advanced ideas. One hundred K is not going to buy you a fully designed Titan submarine. So, this is a idea, but not much more, and may have little or even no resemblance to NASA thinking, NASA plans or anything that is actually done later.

  11. Consider Man's Footprint by pipingguy · · Score: 1

    We'll need an environmental impact study to analyze the potential negatives effect of this man-made exploration device on native species.

    1. Re:Consider Man's Footprint by trout007 · · Score: 2
      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    2. Re:Consider Man's Footprint by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

      What do you think the man mande exploration device's purpose is? To do the environmental study, discovery the needs of the native species.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  12. NUMA? by rHBa · · Score: 1

    Wrong FLA surely, sounds more like a job for the NUMA

  13. 1 kW radiothermal Stirling generator. by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

    At its heart, the submarine would use a 1 kW radiothermal Stirling generator.

    In other words, an impobability drive. Beware of the whales.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:1 kW radiothermal Stirling generator. by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      I must say, I kind of had the same reaction.

      Because it seems like every time someone mentions a Stirling generator it's to say "it's not a perpetual motion machine".

      I've never really been clear on what they're for or if people actually use them for real world stuff.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:1 kW radiothermal Stirling generator. by Megol · · Score: 3, Informative

      For the love of $DEITY how about doing a cursory search before ranting?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

      Yes it's used. Yes even for space applications. No it have nothing to do with perpetual motion machines...

  14. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And why, or especially how, would that happen?

  15. steam rocket by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 2

    Seems like you ought to be able to do better in terms of propulsion when you can easily vaporize the liquid you're immersed in.

    1. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If vaporizing water were more efficient than propellers, then we would be doing it on Earth. We're not.

    2. Re:steam rocket by necro81 · · Score: 1

      I wondered about this as well: if you can create a gaseous or mixed-phase layer around the sub, you ought to be able to move through the liquid with reduced drag. You can't do this on Earth with something the size of a manned submersible - the necessary thermal flux would be insane - but I'm sure someone could make a PhD thesis out of modeling, then experimenting, with this in cryogenic liquids.

    3. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ships on Earth don't need to operate at 100+ C, and so would have to heat water up just for such a purpose. In this case, parts of the sub will already need to be operating above the boiling point of the liquid. It would still be a big question of efficiency, as purposely jetting away vapor will increase the contact with fresh liquid, and increase heat loss rate.

    4. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Earth, parts of most ships and subs are above 100 C, namely inside of the diesel/nuclear engine. You failed to bring up a meaningful difference.

    5. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing fundamentally different about cryogenic liquids, they just work in a different temperature range. If your intuition tells you that the idea is shit in water, then it doesn't become a PhD thesis in liquid methane, it stays shit.

    6. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, supercavitating torpedoes do something like this - trouble is, they have trouble turning, and they use a fantastic amount of energy. Good for sprinting, but quite poor for other uses. Low drag is helpful if you need to go fast, but only then.

    7. Re:steam rocket by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the difference is that much of the ship on Titan would be operating at temperatures close to the phase transition, whereas on Earth only a tiny part of the ship is operating at such temperatures.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    8. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You failed to bring up a meaningful difference.

      If you can't see a meaningful difference between only the inside of an IC engine or reactor being above the boiling point of the liquid the ship is in, and discussing a situation where the exterior of the ship is expected to be above the boiling point of the liquid causing significant boiling on the outside of the ship, nothing that could be conveyed by a Slashdot comment would convey a "meaningful difference" to you.

    9. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing fundamentally different about cryogenic liquids, they just work in a different temperature range.

      Because an order magnitude difference in enthalpy of vaporization, heat capacity, and viscosity makes no fundamental difference, therefore efficiencies for everything are exactly the same in both?

    10. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're getting confused. What we know is that parts of the sub will need to be operating above the boiling point of the liquid. It doesn't necessarily follow that the exterior of the sub will be above the boiling point, as you seem to be thinking. Earth ships are proof of that. Whether the Titan sub causes boiling is uncertain, and will depend on its design, and properties of the liquid.

    11. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't necessarily follow that the exterior of the sub will be above the boiling point, as you seem to be thinking.

      Except for the report explicitly stating that generation of bubbles, even when the sub is not moving, may be be a problem for instrumentation and that the placement of the instrumentation would have to take that into account. The liquid is expected to have a vapour pressure much closer to ambient pressure compared to water on Earth, so cavitation and boiling is a potentially serious problem, even if specifically designing to avoid it (and still have a good cold dump for the Sterling engine).

    12. Re:steam rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We're not.

      You mean like steam jet marine engines that have been in and out of the news for the last 15 years? The advantages of them were supposed to be much higher reliability than impeller based jet engines and that ability to run off of waste heat from either a generator or another propulsion method, and extremely compact, simple construction (no moving parts). Last I heard issues were mainly with scaling it up, although people have built versions for RC sized boats. It certainly would be a lot easier if you were dealing with a liquid that was already much closer to boiling, required significantly less energy to boil, and a project that was emphasizing robustness and compactness... might be why it was considered for another Titan boat, TALISE.

  16. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by TWX · · Score: 1, Troll

    Simple. Declare war on Titan and justify it that Titan's hydrocarbon revenue will cover the cost of it!

    Plus it finally gets us away from falling victim to one of the classic blunders, "Never get involved in a land war in Asia."

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  17. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I'm sure the Democrats are supporting it too, not only so that their friends in the oil and gas companies can exploit it, but for the much more near term goal of supporting their friends in the defense industry and massive pork barrel spending around numerous sites that will be making the vastly overpriced components for this thing. But maybe they'll mandate sticking some solar cell to it too; that should work wonders on Titan!

  18. "Keep from freezing" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Materials freeze only because you chose the wrong ones. What they really mean is that they're too lazy to build the sub in a cold-room using Titan-temperature lubricants and electronics. They prefer to build a sub at room temperature using everyday tech and heat it on Titan.

    1. Re:"Keep from freezing" by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 2

      Ah yes, mercury as a structural material...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      One of my favorite hard sci-fi novels. Cheesy as all hell, and just a platform for Hogan to tilt at this favorite strawmen, but fun.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
  19. Message from Dave/HAL 9000/??? by Eggplant62 · · Score: 1

    All these worlds
    are yours except
    Europa
    attempt no
    landing there

  20. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes but physically, how would that happen? You'd need such an immense set of resources, in materials and energy, to get back so much less. I know that geeks think space is just like on TV, but it isn't.

    If energy and resources were cheap enough to do it, *why* would you do it? If energy and resources are too expensive to do it, *why* would you do it?

    Sorry, but this kind of space fetishism needs to stop. Or at least put a smiley so I know you're joking, because I can never tell with you guys.

  21. Titan's Crust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Doesn't Titan have a solid crust of ice like 1 or a few kilometers thick? A submersible rover is a super cool idea, but first you have to get it to the ocean. I'm confident they can figure out how to get something to Titan, but getting it through the ice to the ocean is something else entirely. A drill seems expensive from a weight and fuel standpoint, and an explosive would have to be nuclear in size to crack it and cause all sorts of problems.

    Or am I confused; are the oceans exposed?

    1. Re:Titan's Crust by Rei · · Score: 2

      They're talking about the exposed hydrocarbon seas. They're mainly confined to the poles. The largest, Kraken Mare, is larger than the Caspian Sea, though is only believed to be about a tenth as deep. There's still some question as to whether the surfaces freezes, and if so, whether it's for how long. For any frost to float it would have to contain nitrogen bubbles. Some very small waves are believed to have been observed.

      Exactly what makes them up, their source, how they behave, etc is all quite speculative right now. Wikipedia describes them thusly:

      The exact blend of hydrocarbons in the lakes is unknown. According to a computer model developed by Daniel Cordier of the University of Rennes,[23] three-quarters of an average polar lake is ethane, with 10 per cent methane, 7 per cent propane and smaller amounts of hydrogen cyanide, butane, nitrogen and argon. Benzene is expected to fall like snow and quickly dissolve into the lakes, although the lakes may become saturated just as the Dead Sea on Earth is packed with salt. The excess benzene would then build up in a mud-like sludge on the shores and on the lake floors before eventually being eroded by ethane rain, forming a complex cave-riddled landscape.[24] However, the chemical composition and physical properties of the lakes probably varies from one lake to another (Cassini observations in 2013 indicate Ligeia Mare is filled with almost pure liquid methane ... Temperatures close to the freezing point of methane (90.4 Kelvins) could lead to both floating and sinking ice - that is, a hydrocarbon ice crust above the liquid and blocks of hydrocarbon ice on the bottom of the lake bed. The ice is predicted to rise to the surface again at the onset of spring before melting. ... Cyclones driven by this evaporation and involving rain as well as gale-force winds of up 20 meters per second are expected to form over the large northern seas only (Kraken Mare, Ligeia Mare, Punga Mare) in northern summer during 2017, lasting up to ten days.

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
  22. The view is wrong. by dotancohen · · Score: 1

    On Titan the view of Saturn is edge-on to the rings as Titan is in the ring plane. So the rings of Saturn would not be visible in the sky.

    Seeing the artists get this wrong in the 2009 Star Trek movie is a bit forgiving, as they need to impress their audience. But on Gizmag?!? I would have expected better.

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  23. why Titan? send it to Europa by k6mfw · · Score: 1

    because I want to see the little fishies.

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
    1. Re:why Titan? send it to Europa by Rei · · Score: 1

      How do you know that Europa's subsurface water seas aren't sterile and that Titan's subsurface water seas don't have little fishies?

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
    2. Re:why Titan? send it to Europa by k6mfw · · Score: 2

      I don't know but I like to imagine it. Cynthia Phillips of SETI says when looking for life, go where the water is and there's a lot of water on Europa. When I first heard her say that, I always imagine a submarine that bores down into the ice and then goes cruising around taking pics and vids of aquatic life. Of course in real world it will take considerable effort to first land, then go through the ice, then submarine around [and a zillion other things that must be done to make it all work]. (etc. etc. etc). And there may not be any life at all.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    3. Re:why Titan? send it to Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There have been several proposals to explore Europa too, although at this point getting through the ice is a lot more difficult than just traveling further, especially considering there is still a lot of uncertainty how thick the ice is and how much water is below it.

    4. Re:why Titan? send it to Europa by Rei · · Score: 2

      go where the water is and there's a lot of water on Europa

      There's also a lot of water on Titan, so again, your point? Titan is one of two bodies in the solar system (the other being Europa) where there's a high degree of confidence that there's a global subsurface ocean deep enough to fully decouple the crust from the mantle / core. The subsurface tides on Titan are so strong that the whole mercury-sized moon buckles 10 meters depending on where it is in its orbit.

      So again, why the obsession with Europa and not Titan? Europa = subsurface ocean, fine. Titan = subsurface ocean, extensive organic chemistry, weather, an atmosphere that facilitates exploration, surface hydrocarbon seas, and tons more. Not to mention that its five times bigger.

      --
      "That girl is a witch!" "Yeah, but she's our witch. So cut her the hell down!"
  24. Release (the sub into) the Kraken by Akardam · · Score: 1

    I'm sure the name tickles those who obsessively play Kerbal Space Program... not that I do... or know people who do... (hides his drawings of SSTO designs).

    Cool concept. Let's hope it comes to fruition.

    Give me a ping, Vasili...

    1. Re:Release (the sub into) the Kraken by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1

      ...one ping only.

  25. Real question.... by Dareth · · Score: 1

    "The exact blend of hydrocarbons in the lakes is unknown. " - Real question is can you set it on fire?

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:Real question.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your answer is contained in the answer to this question: is there an oxidizer in that mix?

    2. Re:Real question.... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      How can that be a question?
      Do you know about an hydrocarbon that does not burn?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:Real question.... by jdschulteis · · Score: 1

      How can that be a question? Do you know about an hydrocarbon that does not burn?

      In Titan's atmosphere hydrocarbons will not burn.

    4. Re:Real question.... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Obviously not ... another no brainer ;)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  26. Get Al Gore to fund exploration. by Dareth · · Score: 0

    Get Al Gore to fund exploration. Then he can pay the "hydrocarbon tax" for the whole place.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  27. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by plopez · · Score: 1

    But there wouldn't be anyone to waterboard.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  28. What a waste by plopez · · Score: 1

    We could use that technology to explore the Earth's oceans and exploit, if needed, methane hydrates.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  29. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two words: Space elevator.

    Three words: Space elevator straw.

    Build a space elevator around Titan where the core is a hollow. Suck the methane out. I drink your milkshake! Use it to power space missions around the solar system. We'd also need a source of water, but presumably that's more abundant and can be sourced from asteroids--the very ones we'd be mining with our fleet of methane-powered autonomous asteroid mining robots.

    I'll leave it up to the brainiacs to figure out all the problems with capillary pressure, weight of the fluid, vaporization, etc, etc. I'm just the idea man.

  30. Sky Of Orange by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Sky Of Orange".
    And sea of polyethyline.
    "Sea of polyethyline".
    In our Titan
    "In our Titan".
    Submarine
    "Submarine"

  31. Boiling water? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    How should a 1kW thermal exhaust get the water boiling around a submarine in an 'infinite' big water reservoir is beyond me.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re:Boiling water? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "seas of methane and ethane"

    2. Re:Boiling water? by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      Imagine a red hot piece of iron from a blacksmith, and he puts it in a lake. Water boils around the iron, not the whole lake.

      Plus it's not water.

      Plus it's at a very, very low atmospheric pressure.

    3. Re:Boiling water? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I noticed later it is supposed to get into a hydrocarbon lake.

      Regarding your hot red iron ... the probe won't be that way :) thats the point.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Boiling water? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should we imagine that? Who cares what happens when the submarine enters the lake for the first time. The main question is about its steady state over the course of weeks. Its heat production is 1 kW, which isn't much if its spread over a large surface.

      (FYI, Titan's atmospheric pressure is higher than on Earth: 146.7 vs 101.3 kPa).

    5. Re:Boiling water? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why should we imagine that?

      Because the report summary mentions cavitation issues. You can only spread the waste heat (which is more than 1 kW, that is the electrical power) so much trying to balance insulation to keep instrumentation warm enough while have low enough thermal insulation to still have a good cold sink for the sterling engine.

    6. Re:Boiling water? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the probe won't be that way :) thats the point.

      Except for the warning that it might be that way and has to be designed accordingly...

    7. Re:Boiling water? by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      It's not water. It's mostly liquid methane.

  32. Re:Liquid Hydrocarbons by MorePower · · Score: 1

    Of course not! On Titan you would liquid-methane-board the native terrorists!

  33. The moon by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

    Is that on the list somewhere? Because I think dealing with people and the base hostile environment of space needs to be solved before we think about putting people in a sub pointed at another ocean.

    --
    Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    1. Re:The moon by youngone · · Score: 1

      No people will be put in this sub. It will be a drone.

    2. Re:The moon by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      I got that part. I was griping about the fact that we have recoiled from the thought of people being further away than tweeting distance.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
  34. Think of the Big Picture. by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    If by any chance there are 'living creatures' of some type,
    they will be remembering this as the "Great Death" (or something equivalent.)

    A 1000w heater (the sub) in a big ocean of methane better have a Lot of surface area, if they want to avoid boiling it. :)

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  35. Life? by youngone · · Score: 1

    The pdf says: "Measurement of the trace organic components of the sea, which perhaps may exhibit prebiotic chemical evolution, will be an important objective, and a benthic sampler would acquire and analyze sediment from the seabed." Why would the seas on Titan only exhibit prebiotic chemical evolution? Titan is about the same age as Earth, surely? Would love to know more about the possibilities of evolution of life in such an alien environment.

    1. Re:Life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anonymously because I don't know what I am talking about. Disclamer aside, the idea is that the all liviing organisms in this universe are composed of roughly the same group of chemicals and require certain range of temeratures to operate. This implies that only non-organic processes can take place in the extremely hostile environments. If I remember correctly they did expect to find some traces of life on Mars, but no luck so far.

  36. Re: Liquid Hydrocarbons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Super conductors need cold.

  37. Attack On Titan! by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    "...the waste heat from the generator would cause the liquids around it to boil..."

    Because there is nothing like studying marine life by boiling it... My only question is will they equip the submersible with a garlic butter sauce or not, because without it, I don't see it being a worthwhile endeavor.