US group proposes Neptune mission

[telfrow]

<i>Neptune and its largest moon, Triton, could be the targets of a major space mission in the decades ahead, if a group of US researchers gets its way. <br /><br />The team has put together a concept for a "mothership" and probes that would investigate the ice giant which orbits some 4.5bn km from the Sun. <br /><br />So far, only one spacecraft, Voyager 2, has visited Neptune - a flyby in 1989. <br /><br />A mission like the one being proposed could cost $3-4bn dollars and would probably need international partners. <br /><br />"It would also take up the careers of the mission team," said Bernie Bienstock, a robotic systems project manger with aerospace company Boeing. <br /><br />"It's probably like an 18-year mission but then there's all the lead time - another 10 years to do all the selling to Congress and Nasa, and do all the detailed engineering design. <br /><br />"You're looking at about 30 years from beginning to end." </i><br /><br />Full story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4515752.stm<br /><br />Photo caption: <i>The Neptune orbiter (top) would carry two probes that it would despatch to investigate the atmosphere of the planet (middle). The mothership would then manoeuvre into a position to drop a lander on the surface of Triton (bottom). </i><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[kdavis007]

The group should pay for it themselves...

 

[dobbins]

So much to do, so few funds available.<br /><br />NASA should concentrate it's funds on the inner solar system, there simply isn't enough money to do everything.<br /><br />

 

[chriscdc]

What else is nasa spending its money on. It spends 2/3rds of its budget on the shuttle+ISS so what is it spending all the rest on?<br /><br />Its just annoying to see how the martian rovers cost $800million each, so why haven't we send more of them to different parts of mars. Mass produce and then evolve the working designs.<br /><br />Do all these projects really rely that much on the thosands of studies that may just be worth something one day? Apollo showed that if you set a goal then you can engineer solutions in order to achieve it. If we had to rely on the study approach then we probably wouldn't have set foot on the moon yet.<br />But I suppose that the studies are a result of the first A in NASA. Nasa doesn't develop planes so why can't we let capitalism do the work in the R&D department?

 

[mlorrey]

Advisor to the Spanish Court: "We should focus our resources on the Canaries and Azores, as our treasury has been depleted by centuries of war liberating Spain from the Moors. The money would be better spent in Spain on Spaniards, improving our way of life."<br />Columbus: "But....."

 

[dobbins]

Gee did I miss the part about trading with Neptune's inhabitants? Trade was the reason for Columbus's planed trip to Asia.<br /><br />

 

[dobbins]

We would get a far better return on the investment with a multi-billion dollar Mars mission(s) than one to Neptune.<br /><br />

 

[lampblack]

<font color="yellow">We would get a far better return on the investment with a multi-billion dollar Mars mission(s) than one to Neptune. </font><br /><br />Who says they're mutually exclusive? Heck, over 30 years surely we could do both.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>

 

[dobbins]

Two Mars missions would be better than one Mars mission and one Neptune Mission.<br /><br />

 

[nacnud]

The spacecraft looks supperficialy like JIMO, things needed for such a craft include:<br /><li>Space based nulcear power<li>High ISP engines<br /><br />The rest of the tech is relatively off the self or has been done before. Both of those technologies are very useful for inner planetarty exploration as well, even if not striclty necissary for a first mission.<br /><br />Thinking long term devevloping these craft in the inturim between a manned return to the Moon and first Mars landing would give the technology levels needed to include them in follow on Mars mission. <br /><br /><br /></li></li>

 

[ve7rkt]

<font color="yellow">If we had to rely on the study approach then we probably wouldn't have set foot on the moon yet.</font><br /><br />Nobody woke up one day and said, "I'm going to build Apollo-Saturn and it's going to look exactly like this." They decided what they wanted to do, studied several VERY different ways to do it, chose a couple, refined them further, narrowed things down, developped more... until they got Apollo.<br /><br />Lunar landing was an idea that was studied and we went with it. A Neptune mission is an idea that has just begun study, and... well, we'll see.

 

[Philotas]

<font color="yellow">Two Mars missions would be better than one Mars mission and one Neptune Mission.</font><br /><br />Not in the $3-4 billion price class.<br /><br />It might also be better to allow missions to be built upon each other; the science from the first mission is used for, and improved with the next mission. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[grooble]

Like Pathfinder before the Rovers, leading to that new one in a few years.

 

[skyone]

Chrisdc"Its just annoying to see how the martian rovers cost $800million each, so why haven't we send more of them to different parts of mars. Mass produce and then evolve the working designs"<br /><br />Costs are $820 million for both rovers. Breaks down to $645 million for research and development, $100 million for delta launch vehicle and $75 million for mission operations.

 

[cuddlyrocket]

"Its just annoying to see how the martian rovers cost $800million each, so why haven't we send more of them to different parts of mars. Mass produce and then evolve the working designs."<br /><br />Then people will complain about spending money doing the same thing that's already been done.<br /><br />These are <i>science</i> missions. The scientists will want to answer questions that the rovers either couldn't answer or that have been thrown up by what they found. Either way, it's probably a new mission with new experiments etc.<br /><br />And the engineers will want to design something bigger, better and shinier, with all mod cons.

 

[kdavis007]

Had there been human on Mars, a lot more could have been found...

 

[nacnud]

Well you couldn't have put a human on mars for $820M, well not one that lasts over a martian year.

 

[ehs40]

it would be great if this group could could get this mission up not only to study neptune but the intrest that a private group not nasa is launching a mission (nasa would most likely have some part in it i.e. some funding in return for the science the probe would relay back) it would generate among people, also the private industry would give nasa some competion that the agency needs

 

[mattblack]

Although I think it'd be pretty neat and very interesting to revisit Neptune, I'd far rather that funding be allocated to these destinations in order of preference:<br /><br />1 -- Mars.<br />2 -- Europa.<br />3 -- Titan.<br /><br />Perhaps they could do a relatively cheap "Cassini-lite" with a simple orbiter that could decelerate into Neptune's orbit. Then, without too many propellant-draining fancy manuevers, train a set of basic but good cameras & sensors on Neptune and Triton. Even a minimal capability probe in a fixed orbit would give far better science than simply aiming Hubble at Neptune.<br /><br />Nonetheless, sadly, I'd not expect to see any more probes to Neptune or Uranus for at least another 15-to-20 years. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[najab]

You probably could put a human on Mars for ~$1B - you'd never get him <b>back</b> for that amount though.

 

[nacnud]

Exactly <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />