Author Topic: New Frontiers 4  (Read 91265 times)

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9731
  • UK
  • Liked: 1862
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #400 on: 05/02/2018 09:04 PM »
Quote
The proposed Venus In situ Composition Investigations (VICI) mission could help address many of these questions, according to Glaze, the mission’s principal investigator. Glaze told the audience at December’s American Geophysical Union meeting that the mission as currently envisioned—and subject to NASA’s approval—will send two landers on the same craft to our nearest neighbor (2). The landers will amass atmospheric data during their 45-minute drop to the surface and then glean detailed geological information once they touch down.

Lots more info on the link.

http://www.pnas.org/content/115/18/4525

Offline jbenton

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 218
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 214
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #401 on: 08/06/2018 08:36 PM »
I just read through this whole thread and I have a question for the CAESAR mission: what is the nature of the planetary alignment with 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko? Will this be our last chance in awhile to revisit Rosetta-Philae's comet - or at least revisit it under solar power?

Offline redliox

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1949
  • Arizona USA
  • Liked: 390
  • Likes Given: 64
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #402 on: 08/06/2018 11:21 PM »
I just read through this whole thread and I have a question for the CAESAR mission: what is the nature of the planetary alignment with 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko? Will this be our last chance in awhile to revisit Rosetta-Philae's comet - or at least revisit it under solar power?

67P (in short) has a period of about 6.5 years.  You may need gravity assists like Rosetta did but it is far from impossible to revisit via solar power.  Halley's Comet, on the other hand, had a period of about 76 years.  It will be more of a matter whether or not the comet keeps the scientific community's attention and opinion.  CAESAR chose it for a target because it's been mapped in detail and would be (relatively) safe to land on since we know what to expect.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline jbenton

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 218
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 214
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #403 on: 08/07/2018 12:15 AM »
I just read through this whole thread and I have a question for the CAESAR mission: what is the nature of the planetary alignment with 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko? Will this be our last chance in awhile to revisit Rosetta-Philae's comet - or at least revisit it under solar power?

67P (in short) has a period of about 6.5 years.  You may need gravity assists like Rosetta did but it is far from impossible to revisit via solar power.  Halley's Comet, on the other hand, had a period of about 76 years.  It will be more of a matter whether or not the comet keeps the scientific community's attention and opinion.  CAESAR chose it for a target because it's been mapped in detail and would be (relatively) safe to land on since we know what to expect.

Thanks.

How much will that well-mapped surface change as it gets heated up by the sun after several close-approaches?

Offline vjkane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 651
  • Liked: 126
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #404 on: 08/07/2018 02:22 AM »
How much will that well-mapped surface change as it gets heated up by the sun after several close-approaches?
The only science that CAESAR would do at the comet (all other science would be done on Earth on the returned samples) would be to map it for changes.

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1821
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 467
  • Likes Given: 1544
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #405 on: 09/28/2018 05:25 PM »
TSR article, dated September 24, by Van Kane!  (NSF's vjkane)

Thank you for the informative article!

A comet or Titan: The next New Frontiers mission
Quote
The two concepts contending to be selected as NASA’s next planetary mission have two things in common: Both would do compelling science, and both would not begin their scientific missions until the mid-2030s.

Otherwise the two missions could not be more different.

CAESAR or Dragonfly

Quote
The decision between these two excellent but fundamentally different missions will be made in mid-2019 by NASA’s associate administrator for science. His decision will determine whether the 2030s brings a flowering of science for comets or Titan.
« Last Edit: 09/28/2018 05:28 PM by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium!

Offline TakeOff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 395
  • Liked: 81
  • Likes Given: 111
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #406 on: 11/04/2018 06:41 PM »
Here's a great talk at Philosophical Society of Washington about CAESAR, by Professor James A. Weeks, describing how the technologies have already been successfully demonstrated. Quite impressive!

I wonder, since they will land hardware on Earth, could they put a memory chip in it to bring home terabytes of imagery and other data, in addition to what is radioed home?
« Last Edit: 11/04/2018 06:42 PM by TakeOff »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9731
  • UK
  • Liked: 1862
  • Likes Given: 183
New Frontiers 4
« Reply #407 on: 11/04/2018 07:24 PM »
And in the interests of balance here is a video about Dragonfly from the same organisation made by planetary scientist Zibi Turtle.

« Last Edit: 11/04/2018 07:25 PM by Star One »

Offline TheFallen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 158
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #408 on: 11/06/2018 04:08 AM »
How much will that well-mapped surface change as it gets heated up by the sun after several close-approaches?
The only science that CAESAR would do at the comet (all other science would be done on Earth on the returned samples) would be to map it for changes.

All the more reason why I hope Dragonfly gets selected next summer. A lot bolder with more exciting science potential...in situ, that is.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2018 04:11 AM by TheFallen »

Offline Don2

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #409 on: 11/08/2018 04:49 AM »
I suspect that NASA will go for CAESAR. The science community has wanted a comet sample return mission for decades. While Dragonfly is incredibly bold and clever, I'm not convinced it will fit inside a New Frontiers budget.

Offline TheFallen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 158
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #410 on: 11/08/2018 05:24 AM »
Yea. A lot of missions that I hoped NASA would approve over the past 13 years will remain fiction...at least for a while.

New Horizons 2... Argo (to Neptune)... The Titan Mare Explorer... And a lunar lander to the Moon's Aitken Basin in its South Pole.

Darn shortage of Plutonium-238 for those first three missions...
« Last Edit: 11/08/2018 05:25 AM by TheFallen »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9731
  • UK
  • Liked: 1862
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #411 on: 11/08/2018 01:26 PM »
I suspect that NASA will go for CAESAR. The science community has wanted a comet sample return mission for decades. While Dragonfly is incredibly bold and clever, I'm not convinced it will fit inside a New Frontiers budget.

I’d hope the people proposing Dragonfly know it’s budget sufficiently well to feel that it does.

Offline Don2

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #412 on: 11/08/2018 08:07 PM »
Nothing like Dragonfly has ever been built before, so there is no way to accurately estimate the costs. CAESAR is also quite ambitious, but it builds on the OSIRIS-REX design in a way will hopefully keep it affordable.

Offline ncb1397

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1144
  • Liked: 466
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #413 on: 11/08/2018 09:20 PM »
Nothing like Dragonfly has ever been built before

Huygens with rotor blades and a nuclear power source?

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11389
  • Liked: 2900
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #414 on: 11/09/2018 04:20 PM »
1-although it's common and easy to label the Americans as the problem here, that's not always true. Yeah, the United States did really screw over ESA by dropping out of ExoMars. That decision was made by OMB, not by NASA. But other countries are not completely blameless in these things. And as I am very fond of saying, it is complicated. Look at what happened with InSight, where it was the non-American instrument that screwed up, delaying the mission, and costing NASA a significant amount of money.

2-there is more to the China issue than can be publicly discussed. There's a back-story to this issue that is not public, and shouldn't be public. Without going into it, I'd just suggest reading my first point above. I used to think it made great sense to pursue greater space science cooperation with China, but I no longer do.

https://spacenews.com/foust-forward-the-challenges-to-chinese-space-cooperation/


Offline vjkane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 651
  • Liked: 126
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #415 on: 11/09/2018 06:11 PM »
Nothing like Dragonfly has ever been built before, so there is no way to accurately estimate the costs. CAESAR is also quite ambitious, but it builds on the OSIRIS-REX design in a way will hopefully keep it affordable.
When I wrote my piece on the two finalists, Squyres emphasized how different CAESAR is for OSIRIS-REx in its implementation.  If you look at the details, he's right.

Dragonfly likely builds on a lot of DoD projects that involve autonomous flight; the chassis as a reasonable resemblance to Curiosity, many of the subsystems likely have high heritage, etc.


Offline Don2

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #416 on: 11/10/2018 08:28 AM »

So this is hard to communicate, but I suggest not assuming, either now or after the selection, that you know "why" NASA makes the selection that they do. People tend to assume things like "They picked target X because they are interested in target X and not the other target." But the reality is that the actual selections of Discovery and New Frontiers missions tend to have to do primarily with the specific proposals and not larger strategic concerns....

So you are saying that the choice is driven by the quality of the engineering rather than by a decision that comets are more interesting than Titan. And that you know of at least one specific case where the public speculation was entirely incorrect. That's interesting to hear.

@ncb1397...A flying vehicle is very different from something that descends on a parachute and sits there. Some of the instruments will be similar, but apart from that I don't see much commonality.


Dragonfly likely builds on a lot of DoD projects that involve autonomous flight; the chassis as a reasonable resemblance to Curiosity, many of the subsystems likely have high heritage, etc.

There probably is some DoD project that uses the advances in machine vision to produce a helicopter that can land autonomously. There are still a lot of novel issues for Dragonfly. The Titan atmosphere is much colder than Earth and the gases in it are different from Earth. On Earth icing is a problem for aircraft. There might be an equivalent problem on Titan. The heat from the RTG could melt the ice that makes up the Titan surface. The comms link with Earth could be lost if a hill gets in the way. There are a lot of issues to think about.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9731
  • UK
  • Liked: 1862
  • Likes Given: 183
New Frontiers 4
« Reply #417 on: 11/10/2018 09:26 AM »

So this is hard to communicate, but I suggest not assuming, either now or after the selection, that you know "why" NASA makes the selection that they do. People tend to assume things like "They picked target X because they are interested in target X and not the other target." But the reality is that the actual selections of Discovery and New Frontiers missions tend to have to do primarily with the specific proposals and not larger strategic concerns....

So you are saying that the choice is driven by the quality of the engineering rather than by a decision that comets are more interesting than Titan. And that you know of at least one specific case where the public speculation was entirely incorrect. That's interesting to hear.

@ncb1397...A flying vehicle is very different from something that descends on a parachute and sits there. Some of the instruments will be similar, but apart from that I don't see much commonality.


Dragonfly likely builds on a lot of DoD projects that involve autonomous flight; the chassis as a reasonable resemblance to Curiosity, many of the subsystems likely have high heritage, etc.

There probably is some DoD project that uses the advances in machine vision to produce a helicopter that can land autonomously. There are still a lot of novel issues for Dragonfly. The Titan atmosphere is much colder than Earth and the gases in it are different from Earth. On Earth icing is a problem for aircraft. There might be an equivalent problem on Titan. The heat from the RTG could melt the ice that makes up the Titan surface. The comms link with Earth could be lost if a hill gets in the way. There are a lot of issues to think about.

You’re a bit behind the curve there as autonomous helicopters are actually quite well advanced with numerous projects from a variety of companies and nations. The reason it isn’t more widespread at least in the US is more cultural within the military than the technology itself.

This article contains a round up on some of them.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2018/2/20/autonomous-helicopters-seen-as-wave-of-the-future
« Last Edit: 11/10/2018 09:29 AM by Star One »

Offline Don2

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #418 on: 11/11/2018 08:44 AM »
You've mentioned 'strategic concerns' a few times. I'm not really clear on what you mean by that. Does that have to do with the decadal survey?

Offline ncb1397

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1144
  • Liked: 466
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: New Frontiers 4
« Reply #419 on: 11/11/2018 02:21 PM »
"Strategic concerns" seems to carry high weight, at least in the Obama/Bolden administration. All the missions selected - Lucy/Psyche/Osiris-Rex/Insight were Mars/Asteroids which were the administration's strategic priorities.
Previously, a wide net was cast, like Juno to Jupiter and New Horizons to Pluto which were the previous 2 New Frontiers selections. When New Horizons was selected, a new administrator came in a month later,Sean O'Keafe, and he looked like he was going to kill it. Just shows how much influence can come from the top - if not during the selection process, after the selection process retro-actively.

Lunar sample return may have lost out for New Frontiers 4 because the down select was done at almost the same time as SPD-1 signature and therefore wasn't influenced.
« Last Edit: 11/11/2018 02:28 PM by ncb1397 »

Tags: