I'm new here so please forgive me if these questions had been answered before.

Mars gravity assist. we've sent many missions out to the outer planets, how come none of them used Mars for gravity assist? is it possible to employ one in the future? the last time I checked, Mars still sits between us and the outer planets.

Uranus and Neptune orbiters. I've looked around on the net and there seems to be many more mentions of a Neptune orbiter than one for Uranus. why is that?

Neptune orbiter. many of the pages I've read about the Neptune orbiter mission talk about using NEP and aerocapture. are those technologies really needed for this mission? Cassini uses a chemical rocket and will be able to break into orbit around Saturn. why can't we do the same at Neptune? is it because it would take too long to get there?

thanks for the help.

- clemmentine

__________________
======= WANTED: One Who Can Reverse The Time Arrow =======

The biggest difference between time and space
is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst

Remember, search engines are your friend.
Here's a neat explanation and animation on gravity assists.

Let gravity assist you...

2 and 3 I don't know about, but for gravity assisted maneuvers, the planets have to be in certain positions to be able to use them.

Rc

__________________
WAG - 1000 and counting
Rc2000's Godzilla Tribute

Rosetta will use a Mars gravity assist to aid in its rendezvous with a comet. I assume that Mars was just inconvenient for other missions.

Neptune is a livelier and more interesting planet than Uranus.

Cassini also cost about 3 billion dollars. NASA is not likely to be able to come up with that amount of money for any future robotic probes.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Clemmentine, I should not read and post before breakfast. 8-[ I just saw that you already had been looking and reading across the internet about what you're looking for, but couldn't find exactly the right thing. ops:

Rc

__________________
WAG - 1000 and counting
Rc2000's Godzilla Tribute

Indeed. From an Earth based telescope, Uranus appears to be a tiny blue-green orb with no visible features.

From the HST, Uranus appears to be a reasonably sized blue-green orb with no visible features.

When Voyager 2 flew by, it discovered that Uranus was in fact, in close up... a large blue-green orb with no visible features.

In terms of 'surface' detail, Uranus is the plain, boring member of the solar system. Still, maybe that's why I find it so intriguing. And besides, it's still got the unusual axial tilt, the rings, the odd moons (especially Miranda).

But it is true that Neptune is far more interesting in many ways.

Poor old Uranus. It's sat there watching while we send orbiters to Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn and then, just when it thinks 'oh it must be my turn next,' we talk about skipping it completely and popping further afield to Neptune...

__________________
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: They don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views." The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Face of Evil.

Actually, NASA just doesn't want to deal with all the jokes that will result from announcing that they're sending a probe to Uranus.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

WE ACTUALLY used gravity assit to launch one of our earlier probs to jupiter.
the probe went around venus, then around earh thenaround venus one more time before hurling towards its destnation if I remember correctly.

TOSEEK!!! GEZZZZZZZZZZ!!!

Well, at least it wouldn't be as bad as saying they're inserting a probe into Uranus and hope it radios back analysis of the samples taken. #-o
*bangs head against keyboard*

Oh, checked out your site and spent a long time in the Dr. Who Companions section. Most excellent! Brought back memories of the series. I used to watch the good Doctor all the time when it used to come on PBS.

Rc

__________________
WAG - 1000 and counting
Rc2000's Godzilla Tribute

That was the Cassini/Huygens probe illustrated in rc2000's link above. It was actually Venus-Venus-Earth. But it doesn't really answer the actual question, since OP was asking why not Mars, since it's between us and the outer reaches?

Glad you enjoyed it. It really needs to be updated and revamped, but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Btw, I met Janet Fielding ("Tegan") at a convention last weekend.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Timing. Mars just isn't in the right place to be used for gravity assist very often. If it were, I can't think of a reason to not use it. But there are more times when Venus is in a good position. Also, Venus-Venus-Earth gains you a LOT more delta-v than just going by Mars. I'd say probably 5x more.

The problem is not whether one orbit is between two others, but where the planet is in the orbit when you want to try to get elsewhere. Such timings happen a lot less often than one might think. At least, for the things we are trying to do now.

__________________
"What do you care what other people think?" -- Richard Feynman
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Feynman, at the conclusion of his Challenger report

One possible explanation for NASA not having used Mars' gravity to propel a probe to the outer planets is that Mars might not have been in the right alignment to do so. You see, some times Mars is on the opposite side of the Sun from Earth. For example, lets suppose that NASA wants to send a probe to Uranis while Earth and Uranis are on one side of the sun and Mars is on the other. Mars cannot be used for gravitational assist because it is on the opposite side of the Sun, it's in the opposite direction from Uranis in spite of the fact that its orbit is closer to the Sun than Jupiter's or Saturn's. Mars is simply not "on the way" to Uranis. For that mater, Jupiter and Saturn might not be on the way either! That's why NASA's launch windows are so critical... so that they CAN use gravity as means for propulsion.[/i]

thanks for all the responses.


Rc2000 wrote:
yes. search engines found me plans for a Neptune orbiter and also took me here. should have found this nice place years ago. I guess I've been living under a rock.


sorry, I wasn't being clear on the Mars gravity assist question. I was wondering why we haven't used or planned to use Mars gravity assist to get to Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. like ToSeek said, it could be that it's just not convenient for the other missions, and it probably is the case for the 6 missions we have already to the outer planets (Pioneer and Voyager were light enough to get to Jupiter directly, and Galileo and Cassini were too heavy to go to Mars). could we theoretically use it? or is it that Mars is too small to make a Mars gravity assist practical for a mission to the outer planets?

thanks parejkoj. I forgot that VVEGA gives you more delta-v than MGA. but wouldn't the flight time be greater for a VVEGA versus an MGA? let's take Cassini's trajectory to Jupiter (ignore the Jupiter-Saturn part for the moment). that's a VVEGA trajectory to Jupiter in a little over 3 years. what if Mars was in position for a gravity assist to Jupiter, how long would it take if we used that MGA to Jupiter instead?


Rc2000 wrote:
no problem. this board is far far more dynamic than all the other boards I have been on.


kenneth rodman wrote:
Pioneer 10 went to Jupiter directly.
Pioneer 11 and Voyager 1 went to Jupiter directly then used a JGA to get to Saturn.
Voyager 2 went to Jupiter directly, JGA to Saturn, SGA to Uranus, then UGA to Neptune. thus the 'Grand Tour'.
Galileo was tied to the Shuttle, but after Challenger, the Centaur upper stage was no longer allowed, so it took a VEEGA trajectory to orbit Jupiter.
Cassini went to orbit Saturn via a VVEJGA trajectory.


ToSeek wrote:
Jason Thompson wrote:
at least some of us think Neptune is more interesting. I was blown away in '89 when I first saw the beautiful blue orb that Neptune is. I agree that Neptune has more visual appeal than Uranus. remember that when Voyager 2 got to Uranus in '86, one of its poles is in the direction of the Sun, so one hemisphere is in constant sun light while the other is in constant darkness. I suppose that may be part of the reason why Voyager 2 saw a plain featureless Uranus. but..

spectacular Uranian storm patterns

note: I'm now having problems getting to Space Daily; you may need to get that out of Google's cache.


Jason Thompson wrote:
to me, because of its moons, the Uranus system as a whole is just as interesting as the Neptune system. Uranus has got 5 interesting moons to show while Neptune's only got Triton. in my mind, the Neptune system come out even with the Uranus system mainly because of Neptune's prettier face.


ToSeek wrote:
LOL! I bet that's the real reason why Uranus was passed over in favor of Neptune.

jokes aside, anybody know of reasons other than the ones in that Space Daily link?


a Neptune orbiter will not be cheap. I was just wondering if it will be reasonable without using new technologies like NEP and aerocapture. NEP is like SEP used on DS1, but it's nuclear instead of solar. it is supposed to get us out to Neptune faster than chemical rockets. and because it arrives at Neptune faster, it can't break into orbit with just regular rockets (hence the need for aerocapture). aerocapture is the use of atmospheric drag to slow a spacecraft down in order to enter orbit.

- clemmentine

__________________
======= WANTED: One Who Can Reverse The Time Arrow =======

The biggest difference between time and space
is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst

I have only this link to contribute to this discussion: a proposed Neptune orbiter:

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/out...1/pdf/4095.pdf

Sounds great to me. The Neptune system has always been my primary interest. Fascinating planet.

__________________
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

I think there are a handful of JPL/NASA employees who frequent this board, perhaps they can ask around and give us an idea.

Huge storms hit the planet Uranus

- clemmentine

__________________
======= WANTED: One Who Can Reverse The Time Arrow =======

The biggest difference between time and space
is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst