91–100 of 101 posts
Here's a non-paywall link about the photo if anyone wants it: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-13/juno-nasa-spacecraft-s...
I now see that the link has been edited/changed Carry on!
I understand JunoCam is a public outreach tool. But if it provides much worse resolution than Hubble from inside Jupiter's orbit, it's basically useless even for that. I don't know if the cam is the problem or the transmission bandwidth, one thing is clear, when serios science starts there will be much less bandwidth available to send sharp and cool photos. That's what you get from a solar powered probe. We waste bil…
>gotten in their minds that RTG power is evil and dangerous RTG usage is curbed due to NASA's low supply of plutonium-238. Until more is made it makes sense to design for solar powered systems. Also these are risky missions with high pricetags and erring on the side of caution using well known technologies isn't some big conspiracy. Its to avoid high-profile fails. We can try new and risky stuff in lower profile miss…
The fact is, it could be better, and it really should. It's just silly to use Solar panels in the outer Solar System. This mission was dominated by politics and not science. I think that is a very real issue. Look at Curiosity, I think it's very clear that Rover is a massive upgrade over the preceding solar powered missions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was camping under a clear sky with friends and asked, "has anyone seen another planet with their own eyes?" and explained I meant seen any detail through a telescope. Nobody had. I resolved start some amature astronomy then. Any suggestions on how to start?
The sidebar of https://www.reddit.com/r/astronomy has a bunch of useful articles on getting started. Just be warned that it's one of those hobbies that can get really expensive if you lack impulse control - "I need a new eyepiece! And a few more inches of aperture! And a better mount!" starts to pile up if you really enjoy it. :-D
However, you can do great things with a good pair of binoculars (and a steady hand). You can resolve planetary discs, pick out the moons of Jupiter, spot Neptune and Uranus if you're good (although I never have) and exploring the surface of the moon is endlessly fascinating. And if you're really desperate, you can look at birds through them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>gotten in their minds that RTG power is evil and dangerous RTG usage is curbed due to NASA's low supply of plutonium-238. Until more is made it makes sense to design for solar powered systems. Also these are risky missions with high pricetags and erring on the side of caution using well known technologies isn't some big conspiracy. Its to avoid high-profile fails. We can try new and risky stuff in lower profile miss…
Juno is the first use of solar panels for a probe going that far out. You're right that they want to err on the side of caution using well-known technology to minimize risk. But you're missing the fact that RTGs are that well-known risk-minimized technology. If solar panels saved weight, they would have been used on past missions like Galileo. Better solar panel technology will eventually shift the balance, but we're…
I wasn't aware solar was so heavy. Thanks for the info.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>gotten in their minds that RTG power is evil and dangerous RTG usage is curbed due to NASA's low supply of plutonium-238. Until more is made it makes sense to design for solar powered systems. Also these are risky missions with high pricetags and erring on the side of caution using well known technologies isn't some big conspiracy. Its to avoid high-profile fails. We can try new and risky stuff in lower profile miss…
bitrate it uses is good enough for the mission The fact is, it could be better, and it really should . It's just silly to use Solar panels in the outer Solar System. This mission was dominated by politics and not science. I think that is a very real issue. Look at Curiosity, I think it's very clear that Rover is a massive upgrade over the preceding solar powered missions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>SpaceX might launch a Mars lander during the 2018 low energy window. Is this budgeted? Is it on a launch docket? Is there a rocket ready for it? Is the lander completed? 2018 is right around the corner and frankly I'm getting sick of "Spacex might" comments. There's a big difference between "might" and "do." When you see a mission on the NASA roster, its ready to go and unless there's some serious technical issue, i…
> Is this budgeted? Yes. > Is it on a launch docket? Yes. > Is there a rocket ready for it? It's being built right now, the test is in December. > Is the lander completed? It's being built right now, the test is soon. > 2018 is right around the corner and frankly I'm getting sick of "Spacex might" comments. SpaceX has completed every single thing they have ever said they would do, except for things that remain in the…
SpaceX is impressive, but I think its fandom is out of control. Repeating marketing and PR pieces to me isn't convincing. I wish them the best of luck but a 2018 launch isn't happening. I'd be surprised if any of this happens before 2022-2025.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Juno is the first use of solar panels for a probe going that far out. You're right that they want to err on the side of caution using well-known technology to minimize risk. But you're missing the fact that RTGs are that well-known risk-minimized technology. If solar panels saved weight, they would have been used on past missions like Galileo. Better solar panel technology will eventually shift the balance, but we're…
I was referring to the new stirling engine RTG. According to wikipedia, NASA doesn't see it being used in a mission for another decade or two due to further testing and certification. I wasn't aware solar was so heavy. Thanks for the info.
Stirling RTGs sound very interesting but I'd be really worried about reliability. Definitely needs lots of work and testing to be confident in it!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is this budgeted? Yes. > Is it on a launch docket? Yes. > Is there a rocket ready for it? It's being built right now, the test is in December. > Is the lander completed? It's being built right now, the test is soon. > 2018 is right around the corner and frankly I'm getting sick of "Spacex might" comments. SpaceX has completed every single thing they have ever said they would do, except for things that remain in the…
So in other words no rocket and no lander, but will be in the air in 18 months? Pardon my skepticism, but I think you're buying into "Elon Musk Time" which promises x but comes out y or never. SpaceX is impressive, but I think its fandom is out of control. Repeating marketing and PR pieces to me isn't convincing. I wish them the best of luck but a 2018 launch isn't happening. I'd be surprised if any of this happens b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The probe is 2.7 million miles from Jupiter, headed further out (its orbit is highly eccentric). That's nearly 11 times the distance from the Earth to the Moon. At closest approach, Juno will be 2,200 miles from Jupiter, less than 1% of the distance between the Earth and Moon. Space exploration is expensive, and a very large part of that expense is mass. Putting a 2.7 million mile scope on a probe that's going to be…
Strictly speaking, the probe will be spending most of its time at distances like these. That's the nature of elliptical orbits. But it'll spend enough time up close to get some great pictures. And yes, photos weren't a priority at all. If it were just a matter of returning scientifically useful data, they wouldn't have included this camera at all. But NASA likes pretty pictures too, so they included one.