Russian Venus lander

[brandbll]

I did read the article. It said the probe lasted thermally longer than its transmission just cut out. I assume something cut it out between the lander. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="3">You wanna talk some jive? I'll talk some jive. I'll talk some jive like you've never heard!</font></p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

So little was known about Venus that it was quite reasonable to cover all eventualities, including a water landing. In no way can this be considered a "plot for a Sci-Fi parody or a Sci-Fi sitcom". Nobody imagined the temperatures and pressures that existed on Venus until the space missions arrived there (although there were indications of high temperatures from microwaves emissions).<br /><br />The early entry probes were designed primarily to report during descent. If they survived until landing, well and good, if not they returned useful data that could guide future designs. As was the case. Each entry probe lasted longer and penetrated deeper until they reached the surface. Once surface conditiosn were known the specialised heavy landers carrying a wide array of instruments could be built.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[vogon13]

Having a material on board that absorbs a great deal of heat as it changes from solid to liquid would increase the amount of heat the probe probe could absorb before the temperature got so high as to fry the electronics. How much heat storage you put in the descent sphere would effect the longevity.<br /><br />Increasing the amount of heating capacity the probe could withstand prior to inactivation is the gist of what I was getting at.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

More than that. You might need a really good transmitter and an orbital relay station. Remember how thick that atmosphere is. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[baktothemoon]

"Only Mars has what I would call an "army". Since Voyager 2 imaged Neptune, only one probe has gone to Jupiter, Saturn, and (now) Pluto."<br /><br />I disagree, any probe going to the outer solar system flies by Jupiter, so far Pioneer 10, Voyager 1 & 2, Galileo, Cassini, and soon New Horizons will have been to Jupiter. Saturn has been visited by Voyager, Pioneer, Cassini, and eventually New Horizons. The three planets that I mentioned have all had landers go to them fairly recently e.g. various Mars rovers, Galileo probe, Huygens. <br /><br />"As for Mercury, it does not have a lander, but look up "Messenger"."<br /><br />I know all about Messenger, it is a good probe, but after it I doubt there will be another probe for a long time and we still don't know what the surface is like close up. I believe we should try to get a lander on every planet or a body of the gas giants by 2030. I think that every mission to another body should be on a Cassini like design: an lander attached to an orbiter. That way we get the best of both worlds: a vehicle to explore the surface and an equally advanced imager and transmitter. I would like to see a program that almost cranks out Cassini like probes on an assembly line. There would be different modifications for different destinations such as a heat shield for the inner solar system and solar panels and for the outer solar system there would be insulation and RTG's. The lander would be customizible but work around a set platform. In the end the whole system would work around a common frame but each probe would have different features.<br /><br /><br />"As for Venus, the ESA is sending Venus Express."<br /><br />I know, but again, it's just another orbiter and we won't see another one for a while unless something changes.<br /><br />"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy<br />

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I disagree, any probe going to the outer solar system flies by Jupiter, so far Pioneer 10, Voyager 1 & 2, Galileo, Cassini, and soon New Horizons will have been to Jupiter.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Actually, one other probe has also been to Jupiter, although it is often forgotten. Ulysses flew by Jupiter, taking advantage of the giant planet's gravity to bend its heliocentric orbit into one which would take it high above the Sun's poles. It is the only probe to have ever observed the Sun's poles from this vantage point, and only Jupiter's gravity was sufficient to put in position to do so. I'm not sure how much science it actually did at Jupiter, though. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[brandbll]

"I believe we should try to get a lander on every planet or a body of the gas giants by 2030. I think that every mission to another should be on a Cassini like design: an lander attached to an orbiter. "<br /><br />I highly agree with this statement. Personally i would say this is more important than going to the moon. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="3">You wanna talk some jive? I'll talk some jive. I'll talk some jive like you've never heard!</font></p> </div>

 

[baktothemoon]

"Personally i would say this is more important than going to the moon."<br /><br />I think those are two seperate issues. Doing science at other worlds that are extremely difficult to get to with humans is just as important as exploring worlds that can be visited by humans relatively easily. Robotics should never take humans out of the equation entirely. They are our eyes and ears in places we can't go. But if we can go there ourselves, we should.<br /><br />"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy

 

[ace5]

Well said, Jon.<br />The early Venera probes were wonderful designs and the Soviet technicians wanted to be sure that every possibility about Venus surface would be overcome.<br />The first-genereation landers, like Venera 8, carried:<br /><br />4 Resistance Thermometers <br />3 Aneroid Barometers <br />A Capacitance Barometer <br />Pulse Modulation Radar Altimeter <br />2 Photometers <br />An Ammonia Analyzer <br />A Gamma-Ray Spectrometer <br /><br />I dont think it is a sitcom scenario.<br /><br />Later they changed the entire design by using the Proton booster for their heavier Veneras, from number 9 and so on.

 

[willpittenger]

That is why I did not count the flybys. There have been at most only one orbiter per outer planet. Besides, you will note that I stated I was counting probes <i>after</i> Voyager 2. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

True as well, good points on the satellites and better comm capabilities, willpittenger. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

This is probably what NASA/JPL scientists would also like to do and were building up to by first using flyby missions, now orbiters, with landers to logically follow. But the cost goes up with complexity and NASA will hit the cost barrier when such missions are proposed. But, by 2015 or so, when the missions could be proposed in order to reach their targets on 2030 or sometime soon after. Private enterprise may at least be able to provide a cost effective solution to get the probes to LEO and then out of Earth orbit. If such a scheme is available, probes could be more production line oriented as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[syndroma]

http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3512