Author Topic: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread  (Read 66087 times)

Offline Phillip Huggan

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« on: 08/31/2007 12:11 am »
The mission was to observe earth's complete albedo for two years.  Already built, but cancelled launch and operations.  Mission was renamed DSCOVER: Deep Space Climate Observatory.

It is a 3 tonne payload to be lifted to the Lagrange point L1.  Was scheduled to be lifted by a Shuttle Orbiter (initially aboard the ill-fated Columbia Mission).  My question is if anyone knows if another lift means is available, or if this thing is Shuttle or bust.  The Shuttle can lift up to 50 tonnes to orbit, but I don't know anything about lifting payloads to L1.  NASA has cut this mission, but if another lift vehicle exists I don't see why someone else can't resurrect it.  The scientific value of the mission is as essential now as it was in 1999.
Need an estimate of the Mission's lift cost and two year operating cost.  $200 million has already been spent to build the satellite observatory.  Is there an 8 or 9 figure mission cost still remaining?

Offline MKremer

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4034
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 1275
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #1 on: 08/31/2007 01:13 am »
My, guess - figure its previous total budget request, multiply by 2 (maybe even 2.5 for transition to an EELV launch), then wait 18-24 months after mission/budget approval for the actual launch.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37439
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21448
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #2 on: 08/31/2007 01:25 am »
The science is just as marginal now as it was in 1999.  A Delta II could launch it.  More than 150M to refurb, launch and operate.  Maybe even 200M

Offline CFE

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #3 on: 08/31/2007 02:08 am »
Launching Triana doesn't make much sense if you have to shell out hundreds of megabucks to put it on orbit.  It might make sense if it got a "free" ride on an EELV (ESPA ring) or the shuttle (using the excess payload capacity on a mission such as STS-107.)  Then again, I don't understand how Triana would have gotten from LEO to L1.  I don't suppose an IUS would have been used.
"Black Zones" never stopped NASA from flying the shuttle.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37439
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21448
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #4 on: 08/31/2007 02:18 am »
It was a STAR-37 or 48 on the IRIS cradle

Too big for ESPA ring

Offline CFE

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #5 on: 08/31/2007 02:55 am »
With ESPA ruled out, it's becoming increasingly harder to justify the mission.  Perhaps NASA will suggest flying it as a hitch-hiker on the first Ares V launch :)
"Black Zones" never stopped NASA from flying the shuttle.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37439
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21448
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #6 on: 08/31/2007 03:00 am »
Quote
CFE - 30/8/2007  10:55 PM

With ESPA ruled out, it's becoming increasingly harder to justify the mission.  Perhaps NASA will suggest flying it as a hitch-hiker on the first Ares V launch :)

First  Ares V isn't LEO.  Also that is more than 5 years aways

Offline MKremer

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4034
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 1275
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #7 on: 08/31/2007 03:16 am »
Quote
CFE - 30/8/2007  9:55 PM

With ESPA ruled out, it's becoming increasingly harder to justify the mission.  Perhaps NASA will suggest flying it as a hitch-hiker on the first Ares V launch :)

Would the possibility of an Ariane-V launch be in the cards, or are they restricted to U.S. gov't launchers?

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #8 on: 08/31/2007 03:22 am »
A Falcon 9 could launch it.
Why not use Ion drive to go to L2?

Offline MKremer

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4034
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 1275
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #9 on: 08/31/2007 03:58 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 30/8/2007  10:22 PM

a) A Falcon 9 could launch it.
b) Why not use Ion drive to go to L2?

a) you absolutely positive about that? (especially since they haven't demonstrated a launch to LEO yet!)

b) mass - big-time extra wattage needs (large solar panels); ion engine hardware; gas plumbing; gas valves; valve pyros and wiring; extra instrumentation and control computer (and backup) plus additional power controllers; temperature/valve/engine/gas volume/gas flow sensors and the necessary power and sensor wiring for all of them; gas tank and hardware; xenon gas mass itself; additional necessary wiring not described in the above

(what sounds simple, really isn't)

Offline CFE

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #10 on: 08/31/2007 06:35 am »
Quote
Jim - 30/8/2007  9:00 PM

Quote
CFE - 30/8/2007  10:55 PM

With ESPA ruled out, it's becoming increasingly harder to justify the mission.  Perhaps NASA will suggest flying it as a hitch-hiker on the first Ares V launch :)

First  Ares V isn't LEO.  Also that is more than 5 years aways

This is what we refer to as a "joke."  It doesn't merit a serious response.
"Black Zones" never stopped NASA from flying the shuttle.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #11 on: 08/31/2007 03:32 pm »
Quote
Phillip Huggan - 30/8/2007  5:11 PM

The mission was to observe earth's complete albedo for two years.  Already built, but cancelled launch and operations.  Mission was renamed DSCOVER: Deep Space Climate Observatory.

Ah! You mean GoreSat! Scientifically, it's sorta interesting, but not really a significant leap over the global albedo data available from the weather sat network. Eventually, someone will win a Explorer-class AO to pull it out of cold storage, probably switch out a few instruments, and fly it. But that might take a while (lots of higher-priority earth science to get funded first).

Simon ;)

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #12 on: 09/01/2007 02:35 am »
Quote
MKremer - 30/8/2007  11:58 PM

Quote
tnphysics - 30/8/2007  10:22 PM

a) A Falcon 9 could launch it.
b) Why not use Ion drive to go to L2?

a) you absolutely positive about that? (especially since they haven't demonstrated a launch to LEO yet!)

b) mass - big-time extra wattage needs (large solar panels); ion engine hardware; gas plumbing; gas valves; valve pyros and wiring; extra instrumentation and control computer (and backup) plus additional power controllers; temperature/valve/engine/gas volume/gas flow sensors and the necessary power and sensor wiring for all of them; gas tank and hardware; xenon gas mass itself; additional necessary wiring not described in the above

(what sounds simple, really isn't)

a) I meant that if the Falcon 9 was built, it could launch Triana

b) An ion drive is lighter than TLI and LOI propellant.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37439
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21448
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #13 on: 09/01/2007 02:44 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 31/8/2007  10:35 PM

a) I meant that if the Falcon 9 was built, it could launch Triana

b) An ion drive is lighter than TLI and LOI propellant.

a.  If and so what .  So could a Proton, Ariane, Long March

b,  Again, so what.  it isn't going to get Triana a launch vehicle

Offline CessnaDriver

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 615
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #14 on: 09/01/2007 05:54 am »
Politics created it, politics grounded it, only politics can save it.
And last I heard a million bucks a year to store it.

Donate it to a museum and be done with it.


Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15377
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8530
  • Likes Given: 1351
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #15 on: 09/01/2007 06:33 pm »
Quote
CessnaDriver - 1/9/2007  12:54 AM

Politics created it, politics grounded it, only politics can save it.
And last I heard a million bucks a year to store it.

Donate it to a museum and be done with it.


The next election will decide it.  Perhaps President H. Clinton will green-light the project and put Al Gore in charge of the thing somehow.  

 - Ed Kyle

Offline CessnaDriver

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 615
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #16 on: 09/01/2007 10:31 pm »

 Raving politics, never at rest—as this poor earth’s pale history runs,—  
What is it all but a trouble of ants in the gleam of a million million of suns? -Tennyson

Offline wingod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1305
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #17 on: 09/02/2007 03:14 am »
Quote
CessnaDriver - 1/9/2007  12:54 AM

Politics created it, politics grounded it, only politics can save it.
And last I heard a million bucks a year to store it.

Donate it to a museum and be done with it.


The thing that had to do more than anything with it dying is that the instruments on the spacecraft and the mission were never competed.  It was the Vice President's toy and the science community was not happy that a lot of money was spent on this (the original budget was $75M that bloated to $275M) with no peer review (it did get a post facto review but that just made the problem worse).


Offline CFE

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #18 on: 09/02/2007 04:28 am »
There are plenty of other satellites with far more value than Triana that have suffered similar fates.  Remember Teal Ruby?  I don't see anybody clamoring to fly Teal Ruby.  It didn't have friends in high places.
"Black Zones" never stopped NASA from flying the shuttle.

Offline meiza

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3067
  • Where Be Dragons
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #19 on: 09/02/2007 02:15 pm »
Are you sure that the mission has little scientific value? Do you know some climatologist's perhaps a bit more expert opinion?
Could it be actually useful, and has mostly experienced a political smear campaign? ("Goresat".)

I don't know, just saying, people are so quick to say "it's just a stunt".

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0