I'm curious as to why the magnetometer turned out to be such a challenge.
The Administration also proposes to accelerate the development of Europa Clipper toward a launch in 2023 as opposed to the late 2020s. NASA had previously resisted efforts by former Congressman John Culberson to commit to such an aggressive development schedule because of the financial commitment required to be ready so quickly. In this budget NASA appears to have accepted the timeline in exchange for launching Europa Clipper on a commercial rocket instead of an unproven Space Launch System vehicle. NASA claims the switch to a commercial rocket would save as much as $700 million, even though it would add a few years to the journey. A less generous interpretation is that NASA is worried about SLS being available to launch Europa Clipper. Eric Berger at ArsTechnica has an excellent summary of the implications of the FY 2020 budget for the SLS, which has experienced ongoing delays and must serve first the needs of the human spaceflight program.
I couldn't find a separate line item for Europa Clipper in the NASA budget documents released yesterday. However, in The Planetary Society piece by Casey Dreier, dated March 11: Amidst Cuts to NASA, Mars Sample Return May Finally HappenQuoteThe Administration also proposes to accelerate the development of Europa Clipper toward a launch in 2023 as opposed to the late 2020s. NASA had previously resisted efforts by former Congressman John Culberson to commit to such an aggressive development schedule because of the financial commitment required to be ready so quickly. In this budget NASA appears to have accepted the timeline in exchange for launching Europa Clipper on a commercial rocket instead of an unproven Space Launch System vehicle. NASA claims the switch to a commercial rocket would save as much as $700 million, even though it would add a few years to the journey. A less generous interpretation is that NASA is worried about SLS being available to launch Europa Clipper. Eric Berger at ArsTechnica has an excellent summary of the implications of the FY 2020 budget for the SLS, which has experienced ongoing delays and must serve first the needs of the human spaceflight program.
It helps that JPL found a way to launch on the Falcon Heavy with a Star 48 booster that allows the mission to avoid the Venus flyby (or maybe it was two). If I remember presentations from a few years back, that makes the journey ~5 years vs ~7 with the Venus flybys vs ~2 for a direct launch via SLS.
LOREN GRUSH: Hi. Thank you for taking my question. I'm just curious what all the availablecommercial options for launching Europa Clipper would be without SLS and how each one ofthose would change the length of the mission.ANDREW HUNTER: The EELV Delta IV would be probably the prime candidate there.BRIAN DEWHURST: And with the transit time, it would be a lot longer, at least 4 or 5 years asopposed to 1 to 2. I'd have to double check those exact times, but that's the trade
From the budget telecon:QuoteLOREN GRUSH: Hi. Thank you for taking my question. I'm just curious what all the availablecommercial options for launching Europa Clipper would be without SLS and how each one ofthose would change the length of the mission.ANDREW HUNTER: The EELV Delta IV would be probably the prime candidate there.BRIAN DEWHURST: And with the transit time, it would be a lot longer, at least 4 or 5 years asopposed to 1 to 2. I'd have to double check those exact times, but that's the trade
Quote from: theinternetftw on 03/13/2019 07:37 amFrom the budget telecon:QuoteLOREN GRUSH: Hi. Thank you for taking my question. I'm just curious what all the availablecommercial options for launching Europa Clipper would be without SLS and how each one ofthose would change the length of the mission.ANDREW HUNTER: The EELV Delta IV would be probably the prime candidate there.BRIAN DEWHURST: And with the transit time, it would be a lot longer, at least 4 or 5 years asopposed to 1 to 2. I'd have to double check those exact times, but that's the tradeWhy no mention of FH with STAR 48 there?
I really like the science section, and i really appreciate your (Blackstar) contributions to it. Science missions do ride rockets though, and the choice of ride does effect missions.
You know, the tendency for every discussion in the SCIENCE section to turn into a launcher discussion leads me increasingly to believe that the science section of this group is rather pointless. Maybe it should just be eliminated?
I have almost never seen discussions of launch vehicles in the science section add to the discussion of the science mission, in part because they can stray into armchair mission architectures/fantasies.However, in this case, I think it's appropriate because 1) we all remember (or should remind ourselves) of what happened to the last planetary mission tied to an untried launch vehicle (Galileo) and 2) there are meaningful spacecraft design issues if the trajectory takes the craft to the orbit of Venus.