Space stuff thread

Wished it wasn't just a fly by it would have been real good to have an orbiter for a while.

Mind you one has to wonder at the maths involved in getting that sort of thing happening eh

Uh Oh!



A Guy

Ahhh...The fertile human mind; Good one Bill!

ICIT2LOL said:

Wished it wasn't just a fly by it would have been real good to have an orbiter for a while.

Mind you one has to wonder at the maths involved in getting that sort of thing happening eh

Unfortunately there are consequences for trying a Plutonian insertion:
1. You need a significantly larger craft carrying a powerful rocket and fuel to burn,
2. To slow the craft enough to be captured by Pluto (which has only 7% Earth's gravity), you need to spend 2 years slowing the craft down (assuming cruise speed of about 60,000kph)

In practical terms, that means the mission costs significantly more, and will take much longer than the 9.5 yrs. The really tricky thing about going into orbit around Plutor is the effect of Charon, Nix, Styx, Hydra and Kerberos on the craft. The mass of these, and their orbital paths, were not known well enough to predict the calculations required for the orbital insertion, and the gravitational influence on the craft.

Golden said:

ICIT2LOL said:

Wished it wasn't just a fly by it would have been real good to have an orbiter for a while.

Mind you one has to wonder at the maths involved in getting that sort of thing happening eh

Unfortunately there are consequences for trying a Plutonian insertion:
1. You need a significantly larger craft carrying a powerful rocket and fuel to burn,
2. To slow the craft enough to be captured by Pluto (which has only 7% Earth's gravity), you need to spend 2 years slowing the craft down (assuming cruise speed of about 60,000kph)

In practical terms, that means the mission costs significantly more, and will take much longer than the 9.5 yrs. The really tricky thing about going into orbit around Plutor is the effect of Charon, Nix, Styx, Hydra and Kerberos on the craft. The mass of these, and their orbital paths, were not known well enough to predict the calculations required for the orbital insertion, and the gravitational influence on the craft.

Thanks Colin I had no idea the gravitational pull of Pluto was so little and given that I see what you mean by the time and fuel status and also the implications of those other bodies. In my ignorance though I knew Pluto is small had not even taken into account for the specs you have given me (and I am guessing a few others).
I still think it is a shame that it was declassified as a planet purely on technicalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_planet as I think those large planets ie Jupiter being mainly gas are hardly what conjures up in this tiny mind of mine being known as a planet.

Golden said:

Unfortunately there are consequences for trying a Plutonian insertion:
1. You need a significantly larger craft carrying a powerful rocket and fuel to burn,
2. To slow the craft enough to be captured by Pluto (which has only 7% Earth's gravity), you need to spend 2 years slowing the craft down (assuming cruise speed of about 60,000kph)

In practical terms, that means the mission costs significantly more, and will take much longer than the 9.5 yrs. The really tricky thing about going into orbit around Plutor is the effect of Charon, Nix, Styx, Hydra and Kerberos on the craft. The mass of these, and their orbital paths, were not known well enough to predict the calculations required for the orbital insertion, and the gravitational influence on the craft.

I thought I was good at KSP.

NASA released this from DSCOVR recently

mmmmph!