Here's the latest that's up.
Awesome stuff. Although I did laugh at "All we need is the money". It seems scientists have the same problem as artists even unto this day. :)A week's analysis of the 350 photos and other data received from the Huygens descent probe confirmed many of the suppositions made about Titan and whetted scientists' appetite for a follow-on mission.
"We can now dream seriously of sending rovers to Titan," said Huygens project manager Jean-Pierre Lebreton of the European Space Agency (ESA). "All we need is the money."
It took NASA's Cassini satellite seven years to reach Saturn orbit, and then release Huygens. With no Huygens revisits currently scheduled, it will be at least a decade before Huygens' data is complemented by another descent probe or lander.
Meanwhile, the Cassini orbiter will be using Huygens data to help in measuring Titan from orbit. "Huygens has provided ground truth for Cassini," Lebreton said. As captivated as they were by what Huygens discovered in a 3.5-hour descent
and landing on Titan on Jan. 14, Huygens scientists cautioned against generalizing about what Huygens' [sic] surface looks like."We sent three spacecraft to Mars and they all went to the most boring places" before other satellites discovered the most interesting features of Mars, said Toby Owen of the Institute for Astronomy in Honolulu. Owen is a principle investigator for studying Huygens' atmospheric sensors. Huygens images, he said, "come from one single place in a very different world."
Huygens landed on a solid surface that post-mission analysis suggests resembles a sandy area covered by a thin crust, according to John C. Zarnecki, lead scientists for Huygens' Surface Science Package instruments.
Martin G. Tomasko of the University of Arizona at Tucson, principal investigator for Huygens' camera system, said the 350 images taken by Huygens and relayed by Cassini to Earth suggest it had rained liquid methane recently before Huygens 'arrival. The rain washes off the water-icemountain peaks of the hydrocarbon particles that settle on them, he added. Tomasko described the scenes showing lighter colors on the mountain tops and darker colors in the drainage areas as "an Earth-like process, if you like, but with very exotic materials."
Surface temperatures on Titan were measured at -179 degrees Celsius (94 degrees Kelvin or -290 degrees Fahrenheit), which is about what scientists had expected. Little sunlit penetrates the dense hydrocarbon atmosphere, a fact that was only partly offset by Huygens' 20-watt lamp, which enabled the probe to deliver relatively clear pictures even on the surface. Tomasko described the process as "taking pictures of an asphalt parking lot at dusk."
An Unkind Cut
Well, the White House obviously doesn't think much of the Hubble Telescope in the scheme of things:
WASHINGTON - The White House has eliminated funding for a mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope from its 2006 budget request and directed NASA to focus solely on de-orbiting the popular spacecraft at the end of its life, according to government and industry sources.
NASA is debating when and how to announce the change of plans. Sources told Space News that outgoing NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe likely will make the announcement Feb. 7 during the public presentation of the U.S. space agency's 2006 budget request.
That budget request, according to government and industry sources, will not include any money for Hubble servicing but will include some money for a mission to attach a propulsion module to Hubble needed to safely de-orbit the spacecraft with a controlled re-entry into the Pacific Ocean. NASA would not need to launch such a mission before the end of the decade to guide the massive telescope safely into the ocean.
Sources said O'Keefe received his marching orders on Hubble Jan. 13 during a meeting with White House officials to finalize the agency's 2006 budget request. With both robotic and shuttle-based servicing options expected to cost well in excess of $1 billion, sources said, NASA was told it simply could not afford to save Hubble given everything else NASA has on its agenda, including preparing the shuttle fleet to fly again.
NASA has not yet informed key congressional committees with jurisdiction over the space agency. But congressional sources told Space News they had been hearing since late last week that significant changes were afoot for Hubble.
These same sources, however, said they had not ruled out that the White House and NASA might be canceling the Hubble servicing mission as the opening gambit in the annual struggle that goes on every budget year, fully expecting that Congress will add money to the agency's budget over the course of the year to pay for a mission that has strong public support.
Regardless of NASA's intent, one Senate source predicted that the decision would go over like a lead balloon for many lawmakers. A House source concurred. It's going to really upset the Hubble crowd and that includes some members of Congress, the House source said.
In December, after the National Academy of Sciences issued a report calling on NASA to reinstate a space shuttle mission to refurbish Hubble, Congress followed up by directing NASA to spend $291 million this year preparing for some type of Hubble Servicing mission. NASA's initial operating plan for 2005, sent to Congress late last year for its review, only set aside $175 million of that amount for Hubble, with the rest of the money allocated to other agency priorities:
Recommended
Hubble Repair Mission Gets Measured Response from Congress
Report:
NASA Should Use Space Shuttle to Service Hubble
Experts
Calculate Risk of Uncontrolled Hubble Re-entry
Uh-huh. So let's not blame Bush for this for a moment, while it would be easy as hitting the side of the barn. The money simply ain't there for everything. Fair enough. One could argue the money would be there if it weren't for the war in Iraq, but let's just skip Bush and all that palaver for a moment.
NASA is saying, given the choice, it's the shuttle fleet and not Hubble; even though there are cheap options available to fix Hubble; a Canadian company has already won the tender; and the cost of said mission is less than a shuttle flight. Why can't they push one shuttle flight back into the next financial year and keep the Hubble Telescope?
What's the big rush to get the shuttle up at th cost of Hubble?
It's this kind of prioritisation for which NASA draws fire.
- Art Neuro
No comments:
Post a Comment