Live data from Hacker News

Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

physics-astronomy.com

31–40 of 58 posts

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#31

I wait and hope for someone with more planetary knowledge than I have to explain the lack of interest in Venus as a habitable planet and thus the center of NASA's attention ahead of Neptune, Uranus, and of course, Mars. Based on what I've read, which includes a paper from a NASA (or was it JPL?) engineer, Venus' surface is not very hospitabl, but at a certain altitude it looks like an oasis in the Solar System: Venus…

There is practically no advantage to living on Venus other than that you get gravity. The only local resources available are the atmosphere, and you need to create a floating habitat that is also an interplanetary spacecraft port. Frankly, that's actually pretty far outside our realm of technology at present.

Mars has many more advantages in comparison. For one you can build on the surface of the planet. There are many resources on Mars that can be exploited almost immediately and many others that can be exploited over a longer term: the atmosphere can be used to help produce rocket propellant, water can be used to aid in that as well. Things like iron/steel, glass, plastics, concrete, etc. can all be produced on Mars with a minimal industrial base within the first decade of colonization, with increasing quality and throughput over time. These things are important because they significantly advantage Martian colonies in terms of their ability to be partially self-sufficient and partially self-reliant in regards to expansion.

On Venus practically every ounce of material in the colony needs to be shipped from Earth, it's scarcely better than an orbital station. On Mars you can rely on local supplies for water, for propellant for the return trip, for fuel and oxidizer for ground machinery (mining vehicles) and emergency backup power. You can grow crops using Martian sunlight, Martian CO2, Martian water, Martian Nitrogen, and Martian soil. You can use solar energy for power and sunlight to grow crops as on Earth, the lower light levels are slightly misleading, Mars doesn't have routine cloud cover and has a thinner atmosphere so the average amount of watt-hours per area per day on Mars are very similar to what they are on Earth. You can use regolith for radiation shielding and in construction (building roads, for example). You can manufacture concrete, steel, glass, and plastics using local materials so that you can begin building things like habitats, industrial facilities, etc. using substantially locally produced materials while relying on Earth-produced components for only a subset of the mass of the things that get built, and an ever decreasing subset at that.

A Mars colony would be one that should grow in size and capabilities by leaps and bounds year over year as local industry and agriculture ramps up, as exploitation of local resources increases and improves, as techniques for making use of those local resources scale up and become increasingly sophisticated.

Venus just doesn't rate in comparison. Nobody has a design for how you'd build a floating habitat on Venus that would be reliable enough to trust for decades. One that could also serve as a spaceport for spaceships.

We have the technology to tackle Mars colonization now, it only requires following through on doing it. And Mars has the resources to make colonization a feasible concern that increases its ability to support a population, increases its level of technological sophistication, increases its industrial and agricultural base substantially every year, year after year, indefinitely. That's why Mars is such an attractive target. You can plant a civilization there in a way that you can't, with our level of technology, on the Moon or Venus.

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#32

I wait and hope for someone with more planetary knowledge than I have to explain the lack of interest in Venus as a habitable planet and thus the center of NASA's attention ahead of Neptune, Uranus, and of course, Mars. Based on what I've read, which includes a paper from a NASA (or was it JPL?) engineer, Venus' surface is not very hospitabl, but at a certain altitude it looks like an oasis in the Solar System: Venus…

There is practically no advantage to living on Venus other than that you get gravity. The only local resources available are the atmosphere, and you need to create a floating habitat that is also an interplanetary spacecraft port. Frankly, that's actually pretty far outside our realm of technology at present. Mars has many more advantages in comparison. For one you can build on the surface of the planet. There are ma…

>> and you need to create a floating habitat that is also an interplanetary spacecraft port. Frankly, that's actually pretty far outside our realm of technology at present.

You just pretty much described the ISS, but I get your point. That's in orbit around Earth. :P

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#33
post #7

Original Title: "NASA WANTS TO PROBE URANUS IN SEARCH OF GAS" All jokes aside, these missions are still pretty far off and article doesn't really go into depth of what this research can help accomplish for future generations. Thoughts?

Just curious, was the word pronounced the same way as today when they picked the planet's name? Or was it picked by non-English speaking people?

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is practically no advantage to living on Venus other than that you get gravity. The only local resources available are the atmosphere, and you need to create a floating habitat that is also an interplanetary spacecraft port. Frankly, that's actually pretty far outside our realm of technology at present. Mars has many more advantages in comparison. For one you can build on the surface of the planet. There are ma…

>> and you need to create a floating habitat that is also an interplanetary spacecraft port. Frankly, that's actually pretty far outside our realm of technology at present. You just pretty much described the ISS, but I get your point. That's in orbit around Earth. :P

The ISS isn't floating, it's in freefall. We've been doing rendezvous in freefall for half a century. Launching out of a deep gravity well at 0.9g means a rocket operating with a tremendous amount of thrust and a launch pad (or area) for the rocket to take off from. Making a precision landing through atmosphere from interplanetary cruise onto a floating platform is also very difficult. SpaceX has managed to achieve something similar but much less challenging and with much lower stakes and it requires a vessel that uses thousands of tonnes of concrete and steel.

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#35
post #33
post #7

Original Title: "NASA WANTS TO PROBE URANUS IN SEARCH OF GAS" All jokes aside, these missions are still pretty far off and article doesn't really go into depth of what this research can help accomplish for future generations. Thoughts?

Just curious, was the word pronounced the same way as today when they picked the planet's name? Or was it picked by non-English speaking people?

It sounds bad only in English and partly because of the foreign spelling. In Bulgarian it the name spells and reads “Uran”.

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#36

I wait and hope for someone with more planetary knowledge than I have to explain the lack of interest in Venus as a habitable planet and thus the center of NASA's attention ahead of Neptune, Uranus, and of course, Mars. Based on what I've read, which includes a paper from a NASA (or was it JPL?) engineer, Venus' surface is not very hospitabl, but at a certain altitude it looks like an oasis in the Solar System: Venus…

Outward Bound: Colonizing Venus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI-old7YI4I

Caution: don't click unless you have nothing else to do today.

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#37
post #7

Original Title: "NASA WANTS TO PROBE URANUS IN SEARCH OF GAS" All jokes aside, these missions are still pretty far off and article doesn't really go into depth of what this research can help accomplish for future generations. Thoughts?

The unexpected EDI quip when doing so in Mass Effect 2 was worth a chuckle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-CDNLYZ0zA#t=15s

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#38
post #33
post #7

Original Title: "NASA WANTS TO PROBE URANUS IN SEARCH OF GAS" All jokes aside, these missions are still pretty far off and article doesn't really go into depth of what this research can help accomplish for future generations. Thoughts?

Just curious, was the word pronounced the same way as today when they picked the planet's name? Or was it picked by non-English speaking people?

It's still spelled "Uh-RAH-nus". Nothing has changed.

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#39
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the US give up all of their launch capabilities to private companies? From a strategic point of view it’s not a good approach. I’m sure someone in Washington is making a similar case. I agree there should be a balence but NASA shouldn’t have to solely rely on the likes of Space X. Bloated defense contractors are a symptom of the problem, look at the scope creep of the F35. Is it the government contractors o…

I don't know that NASA has ever built a heavy launch system in-house without contractor help. What's missing is a few more start-ups like SpaceX to totally crowd out the likes of Boeing from the contractor feeding trough.

No they don’t build in house. Like I said it’s as much of a job creation program as it is a space one.

Re: Missions could see NASA spacecraft heading to Uranus and Neptune

#40
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an expert, but the wikipedia page alone doesn't paint that bright a picture. > Venus is shrouded by an opaque layer of highly reflective clouds of sulfuric acid. We know very little about it. Also, I'm sure you'll need to coat any probes/spacecraft to protect against the sulfuric acid. > The water has probably photodissociated, and the free hydrogen has been swept into interplanetary space by the solar wind b…

Solar wind is a negligible factor in the trajectories of large-payload rockets - it's more of a radiation hazard that any interplanetary crewed mission has to deal with.

It's not the solar wind I'm worried about re: uranus. The wind I'm concerned with portends very large payload rockets immanent arrival trajectories. It's definitely stinkier than any hazard any interplanetary crewed mission has had to deal with, hitherto.
Post reply on HN