The New Horizons project faced the chopping block multiple times since it began, but lead scientist Alan Stern was able to convince NASA to continue the mission. Multiple bodies have been found recently in the Kuipier Belt, some of which are larger than Pluto. These discoveries have led to a heated debate regarding the classification of “planets,” with some scientists proposing the removal of Pluto from the official Planet list (see our coverage). This debate makes gathering additional information on Pluto more important.
New Horizons will launch on January 17, barring any delays, and the mission will continue traveling past Pluto after its flyby, hopefully discovering or visiting other objects on its way out of the solar system.
See The Globe and Mail for more info on this project.
Trips to the outer solar system are no small matter, as we have seen with Voyager 1 and 2. They require extensive planning and precise calculations to succeed. It is amazing to me that we can shoot off a piece of metal the size of a piano toward a ball of rock travelling at about 5 km/sec. The physics of it all make my head spin. Then there is the simple issue of how we find these little bits of rock floating in space. There are some amazing people out there–with a lot more patience than I can muster–who decipher the movements of small dots of light in the sky over the course of years. That's dedication!
I occurs to me that the debate over whether or not Pluto is a planet will most likely be over by the time the probe reaches it. We could be sending off a $700 million piece of equipment to study one of dozens of similar objects orbiting past Neptune. So, why are we only sending this probe to Pluto? Why not send it to other planets or orbiting bodies along the way? Are there no other planets close enough to the path to warrant an excursion? And why are we only conducting a flyby? I would think that sending a spacecraft 10 years and 4 billion miles away to study an object for a few days or even hours might not be the best approach.
We could get this mission to Pluto faster, too. If we were using solar sails, we could get New Horizons to Pluto in about 2.5 years. Of course, slowing the ship down from 56 miles per second to a decent orbital speed would take some doing.
USER COMMENTS 10 comment(s)
|hmm (9:14am EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
A general purpose standardised probe or exploration platform would make it a bit cheaper. Why reinvent the wheel every time we go to the store…
The hardened electronics exist.
The control hardware already exists.
every component for probes already exist in multiple forms through a multitude of manufacturers…
Standardise it all. It worked well for the PC market.
Standardise it all.
- by PhreakX
|Physics (9:32am EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
'It is amazing to me that we can shoot off a piece of metal the size of a piano toward a ball of rock travelling at about 5 km/sec. The physics of it all make my head spin.'
The physics is simple, it is known since Newton. With my PC, I can easily (and quickly) calculate a n-body problem for gravitationnal force. Just putting some more calculation time, or more horsepower, you can calculate with precision the trajectory of your probe. I am much more impress with the Voyager engeneer (or physicist) that did the calculation for Voyager trajectory with limited computing power (I guess part of there work was done by hand with slide rule).
As for solar sails, I have seen the concept in old book from the 60s, but this is still new technology. The design of New Horizons must have been started in the 1990s, in this case you do use known and bulletproof technology. - by Evil doer
|Re: PhreakX (9:41am EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
Ok, you can build your PC from scratch. But how large it is. Can you build a laptop (or iPod) from scratch, not really. If you need tight space (with some restriction for thermal dissipation), you do need components that are custom made (for space + weight reasons). - by Evil doer
|Re Evil doer (10:06am EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
Dude itís not me building these probes.
I donít care how they are built just standardize the components.
All AI control systems should be standard hardened Processors and peripherals…donít care who builds the chips. just make them standard.
Solar panels same.
Gyros and guidance systems the same.
Standardized components would make it a bit cheaper.
Standardized platform size and launch restraint system is already required for the Shuttle.
So its not such a stretch to standardize all or most components.
However some sensor arrays and such would be harder to standardize than the basic components of a space craft. But it is not an unattainable or unrealistic goal.
Space exploration for less thats just good for sience.
- by PhreakX
|On the chopping block (10:50am EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
Yes, let's kill anything that doesn't have political and/or public appeal. Instead of real science, let's just put 7 more human test dummies into the Space Shuttle and let 'em circle the earth a few times. The general public just can't seem to get enough of that.
- by JQP
|Re: JQP (11:04am EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
Boy, you are really on a crusade against the space shuttle program. - by PJQ
|Re: JQP (12:57pm EST Thu Dec 29 2005)
PJQ: Don't listen to this usual idiot “JQP”. He is the usual idiot who is anti-space shuttle, anti-European, anti-Asian, anti-Apple and anti-Linux. - by abc
|Anti-abc (5:05pm EST Mon Jan 02 2006)
Tard. - by Easy as 1-2-3
|nice but… (11:02am EST Tue Jan 03 2006)
This is interesting but why study Pluto? I'm an amateur astronomer and have an avid interest in astronomy but I still don't get spending this much on literally a rock at the edge of our solar system.
I say put the money into new launch vehicles, research for new propulsion systems and existing programs. - by voter
|vv (9:28pm EST Fri Jan 06 2006)
- by vv