You can aerobrake with Jupiter to get you into a descent path for the moon using almost no fuel
You are understating the difficulty. Aerobraking will leave you in a highly elliptical orbit with a significant velocity difference to Eurpoa where it crosses the orbit of Europa. It might be possible to circularise that orbit with slingshots among the moons, but that would take years. Also there is a significant hazard from meteors going so close to Jupiter, and an extreme radiation hazard.
The problem is that a Eurpoa rover would need to be powered by an RTG, which means you have to send a vehicle about the size of curiosity. So thats 1000kg that you have to land. Maybe the descent stage would be another 1000kg to get you from low orbit to the surface. Then that 2 tonne package has to be powered into the gravitational fields of Jupiter and Eurpoa. You are talking about a lot of fuel. Galileo just barely went into an elliptical orbit. In energy terms that is a long way from a landing. My rough guess is that the total mass of the vehicle would be 10 tonnes in low earth orbit. Maybe more.
Maybe it could only be done with a proper fission reactor and ion drives.
Or maybe just cracks in the ice caused by tidal changes. Then water down below would sublimate. rise to the surface. and freeze. Maybe the vapour would carry some metals with it. Magnesium is a good construction material BTW.
To me, the fragmentation of Linux as a platform, the multiple incompatible distros
So he chooses to get his hardware and software from one vendor. Okay thats very neat and simple but he could get it from Canonical as well, or one of the BSD projects.
But waiting until after the election got the hostages released without violence, which could have killed some of them. And yes, I know that he tried to extract them, but I don't think you can criticise the long view in that case.
Yeah but Apollo 10 tested the lander, including the failure mode where they abort a landing and return the ascent stage to orbit. They also tested the lunar surface EVA while in lunar orbut. A flyby won't do any of that.
Yeah but its all metal bearings, etc. With the pressure suits on apollo it was grasping tools and rocks. The gripping surfaces of the pressure suit goves eroded badly.
But they will have less time for the long term consequences of radiation exposure to be an issue. I agree with your arguments about health though. The right people would need to be sent.
You still need all that gas, even though you could run at a lower pressure, so it might as well be stored where it gives you some extra radiation shielding and thermal inertia.
I envisage landing at the Hallas low point, for the highest temperatures and highest atmospheric pressure. The crew would dig or drill for water and use photovoltic power to extract oxygen from the water. They may also use oxygen and hydrogen in fuel cells for energy storage. They would land with two years of food, but they would have an inflatible habitat which could be used to grow some food as well.
One concern is the life of their pressure suits. Lunar fines are very abrasive and Apollo surface suits had a short working life. Martian fines may cause similar problems.
Landing and living on Mars might actually be safer than a cruise back to Earth and a 10g landing, after two years of microgravity. A better idea would be to send older people, land them on Mars and schedule resupply missions.
The high end of the smart phone market is occupied by Apple and Samsung. Thats where money is being made. I just bought a Huawei android phone for my son for 60 bucks. Screen resolution and storage are not fantastic but it is great value for money. My current LG phone competed with the Huawei. It is in the same market. Going upscale to compete with Samsung is unlikely to work for LG. Going down scale to compete with Huawei might be possible, but I wonder if they have the manufacturing muscle to pull it off.
Bottom line is the windows is a distraction right now.
Ye gods I hope that is an early estimate. That impact on mars would invalidate all the science done to date. It would be a new planet with no probes or rovers after an impact like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah but in energy terms a landing on Europa is much harder because there is no atmosphere.
You can aerobrake with Jupiter to get you into a descent path for the moon using almost no fuel
You are understating the difficulty. Aerobraking will leave you in a highly elliptical orbit with a significant velocity difference to Eurpoa where it crosses the orbit of Europa. It might be possible to circularise that orbit with slingshots among the moons, but that would take years. Also there is a significant hazard from meteors going so close to Jupiter, and an extreme radiation hazard.
It just occured to be that some parts of Europa are so flat that a vehicle in the form of a sled may be able to slide to a stop from orbital velocity.
The problem is that a Eurpoa rover would need to be powered by an RTG, which means you have to send a vehicle about the size of curiosity. So thats 1000kg that you have to land. Maybe the descent stage would be another 1000kg to get you from low orbit to the surface. Then that 2 tonne package has to be powered into the gravitational fields of Jupiter and Eurpoa. You are talking about a lot of fuel. Galileo just barely went into an elliptical orbit. In energy terms that is a long way from a landing. My rough guess is that the total mass of the vehicle would be 10 tonnes in low earth orbit. Maybe more.
Maybe it could only be done with a proper fission reactor and ion drives.
Or maybe just cracks in the ice caused by tidal changes. Then water down below would sublimate. rise to the surface. and freeze. Maybe the vapour would carry some metals with it. Magnesium is a good construction material BTW.
To me, the fragmentation of Linux as a platform, the multiple incompatible distros
So he chooses to get his hardware and software from one vendor. Okay thats very neat and simple but he could get it from Canonical as well, or one of the BSD projects.
But waiting until after the election got the hostages released without violence, which could have killed some of them. And yes, I know that he tried to extract them, but I don't think you can criticise the long view in that case.
Thats what I heard 20 years ago: people prefer ATMs to human tellers because the ATMs are friendlier.
Yeah but Apollo 10 tested the lander, including the failure mode where they abort a landing and return the ascent stage to orbit. They also tested the lunar surface EVA while in lunar orbut. A flyby won't do any of that.
The moon could be used to change the plane of the resulting solar orbit though.
the current crop of 7-inch tablets are going to be DOA — dead on arrival.' A year later Jobs was dead,
The Jobs was dead thing is not cool. It shouldn't be in the summary.
Problem is, that giant space goat which looks like it is going to hit Mars next year.
Yeah but its all metal bearings, etc. With the pressure suits on apollo it was grasping tools and rocks. The gripping surfaces of the pressure suit goves eroded badly.
old people are harder to keep alive
But they will have less time for the long term consequences of radiation exposure to be an issue. I agree with your arguments about health though. The right people would need to be sent.
You still need all that gas, even though you could run at a lower pressure, so it might as well be stored where it gives you some extra radiation shielding and thermal inertia.
I envisage landing at the Hallas low point, for the highest temperatures and highest atmospheric pressure. The crew would dig or drill for water and use photovoltic power to extract oxygen from the water. They may also use oxygen and hydrogen in fuel cells for energy storage. They would land with two years of food, but they would have an inflatible habitat which could be used to grow some food as well.
One concern is the life of their pressure suits. Lunar fines are very abrasive and Apollo surface suits had a short working life. Martian fines may cause similar problems.
Plenty more great views to share though. The crew of this vehicle will be the first to see the solar system from a totally different perspective.
You'd pretty much want the youngest you could get
Yeah but then you have to commit to keeping them alive for longer, in this scenario.
Landing and living on Mars might actually be safer than a cruise back to Earth and a 10g landing, after two years of microgravity. A better idea would be to send older people, land them on Mars and schedule resupply missions.
The high end of the smart phone market is occupied by Apple and Samsung. Thats where money is being made. I just bought a Huawei android phone for my son for 60 bucks. Screen resolution and storage are not fantastic but it is great value for money. My current LG phone competed with the Huawei. It is in the same market. Going upscale to compete with Samsung is unlikely to work for LG. Going down scale to compete with Huawei might be possible, but I wonder if they have the manufacturing muscle to pull it off.
Bottom line is the windows is a distraction right now.
I was thinking you would have a whole new planet to study. Mars is quite small. Consider a 150km asteroid on Earth.
Ye gods I hope that is an early estimate. That impact on mars would invalidate all the science done to date. It would be a new planet with no probes or rovers after an impact like that.
Articlew is just advertising.
Also what are all those lumps on the cases about? They make it look industrial but I think it is just for the look.
American made means "Not made in a developing country by near-slave-wage employees."
US mininum wages and the laws which provide exceptions to them look like near-slave-wage to me.
Gorillas in the Midst.