• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NASA may add a lander to Europa mission, to give us a better chance at finding life

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gutshot

Member
CEbqGKsVIAEZ7It.jpg


Ever since the Galileo spacecraft began exploring Jupiter and its moons 20 years ago scientists have been fascinated by Europa.

Now, finally, we may be getting close to seeing a mission to Jupiter’s most interesting moon, which has vast subsurface oceans that harbor more water than exists on Earth.

On Wednesday and Thursday I had the privilege to sit in on meetings about the Europa mission at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, near Los Angeles. U.S. Rep. John Culberson, who oversees NASA’s budget in the House, thought I might enjoy the discussions, and he invited me along.

Culberson, if you didn’t know, is a huge fan of planetary science, and has a particular affinity for Europa. The overall purpose of the meeting was to update Culberson on the status of JPL’s plans for the Europa mission, and possible options for a lander.

NASA is in the beginning stages of planning an orbital mission to Europa, called the “Europa Clipper” because it will fly down to within about 25 kilometers of the moon’s surface and then, in an elliptical orbit fly back out to escape the harsh radiation environment near Europa for most of the time.

This mission will cost about $2 billion and launch as early as 2022 on an SLS rocket.

However NASA asked JPL’s scientists and engineers to look at the possibility of attaching a lander to the Clipper, which Culberson has encouraged. The top scientists discussed their preliminary results with him this week.

They found that a “hard” lander could crash into the surface of Europa at about 20 mph, and do some good science. It would weigh about 100 kg and add approximately $700 million to the Clipper mission.

A “soft” lander, hitting at less than 5 mph, could carry a 300-kg payload that would do more science. It could sample the surface, do mass spectroscopy, and carry instruments such as a microscope and imaging camera. It would have the best chance of assessing whether life might exist in the oceans beneath the ice.

The scientists also presented less expensive alternatives that carried less capable payloads.

For Culberson it was an easy decision. He wants to know if there’s life in the oceans. His response after the briefing: “Why would you go all the way there and not answer the most important question?”

He supported the soft lander. He went so far as to say, “I will not sign a bill unless it has money for a lander.”

Idle words? Probably not. As chairman of the House appropriations subcommittee with oversight over NASA’s budget, Culberson writes the authorization bill for NASA’s budget. Key Senators are also likely to support the project.

So what happens next? Firouz Naderi, the director of solar system exploration at JPL, said his team needed about a half a year to do extensive engineering to make sure the lander could in fact be added to the Clipper mission, and for $1 billion or less. NASA must make a decision on whether to include the lander by January or February of 2016, because next year it will begin locking down the final design of the mission.

In summary: A lander is possible, according to the whiz kids at JPL. It would do a lot of science and might even find life. Its cost is acceptable to key Congressional leaders.

This could happen, folks.
Click to expand...

Source: http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2015/0...ay-and-congress-appears-likely-to-support-it/
 
R

RiverBed

Banned
The lure of liquid oceans is too great. We really need to see it. Liquid salt water. I've never seen it anywhere else but our home.

About looking for life, I read two ideas:

1- Study the cracks on the surface since some material from the liquid area will seep out. This is a cheaper way.

2- Drill through the surface till you get to the liquid water. This is more expensive but gets better results.

A suggestion to do the drill is to have a nuclear heated head that would melt its way as it sinks. Contaminating the surrounding is an issue, but there might not be another way around it.

Either way, I dream of Europa. It's human nature to be captivated by the thought of liquid water. Now image it on another planet...


There may be a mission to Titan on paper as well. It has oceans and lakes of liquid methane. I doubt there might be life there, but I think Europa should take priority since we are talking about liquid water here. Europa is closer so it would be cheaper, I assume. Titan should be a close second in priority. Anything else could wait if we need funding and development.
 
M

Morts

Member
Absolutely they should do a soft Lander. I've been fascinated by Europa for a long time. Ideally we'd be able to drill through the ice and drop a little RC submarine in there.
Or send Dexter's brother.
 
G

gutshot

Member
backflip10019 said:
Why not?

About how long would it take for a craft like that to get to Europa?
Click to expand...

About 4 years and 9 months.

Byakuya769 said:
Bah. Need something to melt the ice and release a submersible drone.
Click to expand...

That mission would be much more expensive than this one and as a result not worth doing until we learn more about Europa and its surface. But if this mission is a success and scientists feel confident that there may be life under the ice, a mission with a submersible would likely be launched in the 2030s.
 
M

MrChocolate

Member
RiverBed said:
The lure of liquid oceans is too great. We really need to see it. Liquid salt water. I've never seen it anywhere else but our home.

About looking for life, I read two ideas:

1- Study the cracks on the surface since some material from the liquid area will seep out. This is a cheaper way.

2- Drill through the surface till you get to the liquid water. This is more expensive but gets better results.

A suggestion to do the drill is to have a nuclear heated head that would melt its way as it sinks. Contaminating the surrounding is an issue, but there might not be another way around it.

Either way, I dream of Europa. It's human nature to be captivated by the thought of liquid water. Now image it on another planet...
Click to expand...

And this is how the "Intergalactic War I" starts.
 
B

Byakuya769

Member
gutshot said:
About 4 years and 9 months.



That mission would be much more expensive than this one and as a result not worth doing until we learn more about Europa and its surface. But if this mission is a success and scientists feel confident that there may be life under the ice, a mission with a submersible would likely be launched in the 2030s.
Click to expand...

You're right on cost, but this is far more worth doing than going to the moon or even Mars. Our closest shot at finding extra-planetary life and we're half-stepping.
 
P

Prez

Member
backflip10019 said:
Why not?

About how long would it take for a craft like that to get to Europa?
Click to expand...

New Horizons took about 13 months to reach Jupiter but Juno, which launched in 2011, takes 5 years. I don't know why the difference is so big but it's partly because Juno has to slow down while New Horizons was a flyby.

If anything comes of NASA's EM drive and if it's fully functional by 2022, I can imagine the travel time will be reduced to less than a year.
 
MilkyJoe

MilkyJoe

Member
Here's how it will go down

1) Set probe on the Surface
2) Drill
3) Find life
4) Government intervenes
5) Tell everyone you found nothing

cat_tin_foil_pirate_hat.jpg
 
B

BigDes

Member
Prez said:
New Horizons took about 13 months to reach Jupiter but Juno, which launched in 2011, takes 5 years. I don't know why the difference is so big but it's partly because Juno has to slow down and stop while New Horizons was a flyby.
Click to expand...

Deceleration periods

New Horizon didn't have to slow down.
 
C

ChaosXVI

Member
This is definitely worth the cost, hell I'd contribute myself if I had some extra cash. Who knows what could possibly lurk beneath the surface of Europa. The heat from the core of the moon combined with such isolation due to the ice shell should yield SOMETHING living under the ice...whether microscopic goop or alien sea-monsters we need to know.
 
E

Ebolarama

Banned
If Arthur C Clarke was correct [SPACE ODDYSEY SPOILER],
then anything we send there will be violating the proclamation set forth by the ancient Monolith that forbids humanity to meddle in the evolutionary development of Europan life.

On a serious note, I truly hope this happens. I am getting so excited by all advances we're making in the field of space exploration. It was starting to look like our interest had died (to be honest, I think Western culture is more concerned with the new royal baby than with the fact that last week was the first time a probe impacted Mercury, or than in 2 months we will have our first relatively close-up pictures of Pluto, or that the spacecraft Dawn is currently mapping out Ceres from orbit). So many cool things happening and they are only noticed by the few informed.
 
G

gutshot

Member
Byakuya769 said:
You're right on cost, but this is far more worth doing than going to the moon or even Mars. Our closest shot at finding extra-planetary life and we're half-stepping.
Click to expand...

I think there is room for both Mars and Europa missions in our country's space program.

And I don't think they are half-stepping it. To successfully launch a submersible drone that can melt its way to the ocean we need to learn a lot more about the surface of Europa than we currently know. It would really suck to spend $10+ billion on a submersible mission only to get there and find out the ice is a lot thicker than we thought and the drone will never be able to make it to the ocean. This mission is a necessary stepping stone to that future mission.
 
C

cirrhosis

Member
I hope it has a nuclear-powered drill submersible. I can't imagine how anything will get through miles and miles of ice without an on-site base to replace drill heads too.

In other words, not in my life time. Better to skip the lander.

Surprise me, NASA.
 
P

Parch

Member
gutshot said:
I think there is room for both Mars and Europa missions in our country's space program.
Click to expand...
Until there's improved funding then they have to spend wisely. How much more is there to learn on Mars? Been there, done that. Europa should be top priority IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

[The Verge] Sending a probe to Uranus labeled as top priority by space science community
News Science
9
2K
dr_octagon replied
NASA Calls For Space Toilet That Can Handle “500g of Diarrhea”
32
3K
Foamy replied
Scientists Believe These Photos Show Mushrooms on Mars—and Proof of Life [Popular Mechanics]
35
4K
Tams replied
NASA Perseverance Rover heads to Mars -- Houston, we have a helicopter
2 3
114
8K
The Hamburglar replied
  • Locked
How The Last of Us became 'the greatest story' ever told in video games
Opinion Analysis 2 3 4 5
203
18K
Elysium44 replied
Top Bottom