Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Space Exploration
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-June-2004, 08:41 AM
Tranquility Tranquility is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,193
Send a message via MSN to Tranquility
Default Europa

Why have we still not attempted landings on Europa? Was it too expensive to add another probe to the Galileo mission to land on Europa? There is Cassini, and the proposed new Neptune mission, and the Kuiper mission for Pluto and the Kuiper belt (I think). I personally think the possibility of life on Europa is reason enough to at least attempt a landing or sending a probe there. Or is there some viable reason why we havent tried doing this so far?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-June-2004, 10:08 AM
Chip's Avatar
Chip Chip is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 38.582 N / -121.49 W
Posts: 2,073
Default Re: Europa

Europa is a very difficult and treacherous moon on which to successfully land a probe. Though superbly photographed and studied, the nature and dynamics of the icy surface up close is still not understood well enough to risk even a robot lander. The idea that there might be an ocean under the surface is intriguing but not fully proven, and we don't really know how deep under the ice it would be, if it exists.

Acquiring enough knowledge to put together a worthwhile exploration would require more than one mission. Therefore, a sophisticated craft that could land and then drill or melt down through the frozen surface into the ocean would be too costly for a first attempt, even if we knew what to expect. We don't know enough right now about Europa to prevent numerous difficulties should they arise. A series of Europa missions would be required to gain enough knowledge, not unlike the ways we have been approaching Mars for the last 20+ years. Eventually, rovers and landers on Europa's surface would be most exciting and answer questions we haven't even thought of today.

Maybe a young person reading this will one day be the one who greatly contributes to the exploration of this strange and mysterious world.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-June-2004, 03:16 PM
Tranquility Tranquility is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,193
Send a message via MSN to Tranquility
Default

Thanks a lot for the explanation Chip, I was really baffled there #-o .

Anyway I wonder if people share the perspective that its perhaps more rewarding and interesting to send missions to Europa than perhaps to Neptune or Pluto?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-June-2004, 03:39 PM
ToSeek's Avatar
ToSeek ToSeek is online now
Vulcan Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greenbelt, MD
Posts: 24,329
Default

Now is the time to send a mission to Pluto because it's just past perihelion and therefore has an atmosphere that can be analyzed. Europa can wait a little longer, though I agree it should be a high priority. However, I understand that it's one of the hardest places in the solar system to get a probe to.
__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-June-2004, 04:56 PM
bobjohnston bobjohnston is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 182
Default

NASA has proposed as a next mission to Europa an orbiter. Being in orbit around Europa, it could study Europa thoroughly, using radar as well as visible imagery. This might characterize the surface well enough for a lander, plus pin down just how thick the ice is--or better yet, identify thinner spots more interesting to examine. Chip is right: you need good imagery from an orbiter before doing a landing, since landers need really gentle terrain. (Imagine landing a probe at a random spot in the Rocky Mountains!) We pick out gentle places on Mars for landings, but some lost probes might have been lost to landings on rougher-than-expected terrain.

Europa has no atmosphere to slow down a lander, so it must carry all the fuel it needs to slow to a soft landing. Including such a package with Galileo would have been prohibitive. Even just getting into orbit around Europa will take work; one possibility considered for a Europa orbiter would be nuclear propulsion, which would help tremendously.

Europa is challenging in part because: slowing down on arrival at Jupiter takes alot of energy; entering orbit around Europa and maintaining orbit (or, conversely, making a soft landing on Europa) takes alot of energy as well; Europa is deep in Jupiter's radiation belts, so the probe must be very well shielded since it will live there (note that Galileo orbited Jupiter such that most of the time it was much further out than Europa, in part to extend its lifetime).
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-June-2004, 12:17 AM
AK's Avatar
AK AK is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 383
Send a message via ICQ to AK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobjohnston
Europa has no atmosphere
Technically, you're wrong about that, though it's thin enough that it would have a negligible effect on a lander. :wink:
__________________
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-June-2004, 02:16 AM
Manchurian Taikonaut's Avatar
Manchurian Taikonaut Manchurian Taikonaut is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sol's pale blue dot
Posts: 1,635
Default

try these threads, we had some talk about these ideas not too long agao

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kucharek
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jimo/



Harald

PS: Uh, the science package is the stuff near the engines, the reactor is at the tip...
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hall
I just turned on the TV and caught the end of some Discovery channel program that had this very thing. I missed almost all of the details, but they showed a computer animation of a spacecraft landing on the surface and then lowering a lozenge-shaped probe on a cable. The probe slowly melts through the ice (taking several months), and when it reaches open water, opens up to release a tiny remote-controlled submarine. I assume the cable and probe doubles as a radio relay. The narration said this comes from actual NASA research designs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kucharek
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jimo/



Ohhhh, please, three engine banks, the high gain more into the middle of the fuselage and the instrument section spherical.

Harald

PS: Uh, the science package is the stuff near the engines, the reactor is at the tip...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanoda
It's nice to imagine, but that's not really a compelling reason. Titan's ice caps consist of frozen methane.

Other bodies with ice include Mars (water and carbon dioxide), the Jovian moons Ganymede and Europa, and all the other major Saturnian(?) moons.

Personally, I think life has a better chance with liquid water - in this solar system, the options are Europa, Ganymede, and potentially Mars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lpetrich
This may belong in "Against the Mainstream" because it's rather speculative, but it's still an interesting CETI problem.

Europa is heated by its other moons forcing it to have a somewhat eccentric orbit, and thus, variable Jovian tides, though this heating is not as strong as Io's. It is enough to enable its surface to be re-created very recently by geological standards, as the paucity of craters on its surface indicates.

This heating implies that there may be hot springs at the bottom of its ocean, and maybe prebiotic chemistry and even life. The primary producers would likely be methanogen-like microbes; there may be others that live off of these.

However, there may not be free oxygen, meaning that metabolism of consumed prey would be limited to fermentation, which is relatively inefficient. This may preclude the appearance of macroscopic animal life, such as tube worms and plankton-eating filter feeders.

This makes sentient life unlikely, but it is nonetheless intriguing to speculate about "Europan dolphins", as I decide to call them. Though "Europan octopuses" might be a reasonable alternative for a sentient inhabitant to be.

They would be blind, since there is almost certainly no light in Europa's ocean, but they would have well-developed hearing and would use echolocation (sonar) rather intensively. And they would also be very talkative.

Contacting them would be a serious challenge,since they would likely prefer to live in the lower depths of Europa's ocean, where the hot springs are. This means that one would have to send a submarine *very* far down. For safety's sake, it is best that they be robot subs, at least initially.

Let's imagine approaching a pod of Europan dolphins; they would not be able to see the sub's headlights, but they would hear its odd sounds and its odd sonar signature. The dolphins would look white, because there would be no adaptive value in being pigmented.

One serious communication problem is the lack of a clear "Rosetta Stone" such as pictures; however, one could create a Braille equivalent of pictures on a flat surface by putting small rocks on it or by dragging a robot arm on it if it is sediment. A Europan dolphin may still find it difficult to understand, but a Europan octopus may have more success, because it could feel the Braille picture with its tentacles.
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...=271482#271482

http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...=271484#271484
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-June-2004, 03:47 AM
bobjohnston bobjohnston is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 182
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobjohnston
Europa has no atmosphere
Technically, you're wrong about that, though it's thin enough that it would have a negligible effect on a lander. :wink:
Yeah, right, technically our Moon has an atmosphere too. In fact, briefly after the Apollo landings the Moon's atmosphere weighed several times as much as before the landings. Luckily the solar wind blew it away before the enviros found out.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 06:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today