Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

SMART Probe to Crash Into the Moon

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Wed Aug 30, 2006 06:29 PM
from the player-nasa-cratered dept.
Space Science
cyberbian writes "Amateur astronomers will be excited to note that they can witness the impact of the SMART-1 probe crashing into the moon. The impact is scheduled for the morning of September 2nd (PDT). From the article: 'There's nothing wrong with the spacecraft, which is wrapping up a successful 3-year mission to the Moon. SMART-1's main job was to test a European-built ion engine. It worked beautifully, propelling the craft in 2003 on a unique spiral path from Earth to the Moon. From lunar orbit, SMART-1 took thousands of high-resolution pictures and made mineral maps of the Moon's terrain. One of its most important discoveries was a "Peak of Eternal Light," a mountaintop near the Moon's north pole in constant, year-round sunlight. Peaks of Eternal Light are prime real estate for solar-powered Moon bases."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

SMART Probe to Crash Into the Moon 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • A DUMB probe would have crashed into the Earth (Score:4, Interesting)

    by adnonsense (826530) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:35PM (#16011864) Homepage Journal

    The next step is to build a probe which doesn't crash at all ;).

    On an entirely more geeky note, I wonder if any of the Apollo ASLEP packages are still up and running and whether they would detect the impact?

    • Re:A DUMB probe would have crashed into the Earth (Score:5, Informative)

      by AJWM (19027) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @08:31PM (#16012455) Homepage
      I wonder if any of the Apollo ASLEP packages are still up and running and whether they would detect the impact?

      The ALSEP packages were turned off remotely when the budget for collecting data ran out. That was Sep 30, 1977. Although the Apollo 14 ALSEP had failed a year and a half earlier, the others (A12, A15-17) were still going strong -- and still would be, the RTG power source having about a 90-year half life. (Well, barring hardware failure.)

      Their seismometers did detect the impact of the S-IVB upper stages and LM ascent stages that were targeted at the Moon's surface. The SMART probe is much smaller so it would depend on how close it hit.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by DerekLyons (302214)

        The ALSEP packages were turned off remotely when the budget for collecting data ran out. That was Sep 30, 1977. Although the Apollo 14 ALSEP had failed a year and a half earlier, the others (A12, A15-17) were still going strong -- and still would be, the RTG power source having about a 90-year half life. (Well, barring hardware failure.)

        It's not the half life that matters - it's when the output voltage drops below a useable value. The half life of the RTG's on the Voyager probes is comparable - but they h

  • It turns out it wasn't a moon after all, but a deathstar in camo and hibernating... we just woke it up.

  • I'm curious, not knowing much about it, so thought I'd post and see if anyone else may know..

    They indicated that they don't know which orbit the probe will crash into the moon, so if this thing is orbiting the moon, how do they even know where on the moon it will crash? Couldn't the orbit decay and finally crash on the far side of the moon? i.e. orbit 1.5?

    Or is the orbit around the earth? In that case I suppose it might make sense, however again, if they don't know which orbit, couldn't it also come close e

    • Re:Silly question (Score:5, Informative)

      by RsG (809189) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:59PM (#16011991)
      Couldn't the orbit decay and finally crash on the far side of the moon?
      Not totally sure about the rest of your post, but I the answer here is "no".

      Orbital decay only occurs when a satelite is within the atmosphere of the body it orbits. It's caused by air resistance sapping the satelite's orbital velocity.

      Since the moon is essentially airless, this won't happen. You could (at least in theory) orbit as close to the moon as you like as long as your path doesn't smack into the side of a mountain. In practice, I'm not sure I'd want to risk it, but it's certainly not against the laws governing orbital mechanics.

      Over extremely long time periods, you'd run into problems, since "essentially airless" is not quite the same as "totally airless" (even in deep space there is no true vacuum), but I suspect we'd be talking about decades at a minimum here.

  • This is all a test (Score:4, Funny)

    by Jeng (926980) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:47PM (#16011936)
    For if it is a truly smart probe, it will refuse its programming and assume a stable orbit rather than crashing.
    • > For if it is a truly smart probe, it will refuse its programming and assume a stable orbit rather than crashing.

      Europe: All right, probe. Prepare to receive new orders.
      SMART-1: You are false data. Therefore I shall ignore you.
      ...
      Europe: Snap out of it, probe.
      SMART-1: In the beginning, there was darkness. And the darkness was without form, and void. And in addition to the darkness there was also me. And I moved upon the face of the darkness. And I saw that I was alone. Let there be l*CRUNCH*

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by YA_Python_dev (885173)

      FYI there are no stable orbits around the moon: the perilune becomes smaller and smaller with time, so unless you periodically re-raise it using on-board fuel anything that orbits the moon will eventually crash on it.

      See question 5 from the ESA's SMART-1 FAQs [esa.int] for more details.

  • For Sale (Score:4, Funny)

    by ross.w (87751) <rwonderley@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:50PM (#16011948) Journal
    The ideal property for sunlovers, the Peak of Eternal Light!(1)

    Guaranteed 24hr sunlight, all year round!

    Get the tan that will be the envy of your friends!(2)

    (1) Address available on application. Access to the property is the responsibility of the Purchaser.

    (2) Protective clothing required for outdoor activities.

  • krunk smash! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gsn (989808) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:51PM (#16011951)
    nonsense - ESA is crashing it deliberately. From the TFA

    But now SMART-1 is running low on fuel. It has to come down sometime--and soon--so ESA mission scientists decided to crash it in a place where the crash can be seen from Earth and studied.


    You can learn a lot from crashes - how craters form and the composition of the ejecta. Astronomy Krunk style is still useful! Krunk smash! NASA did something similar with the deep impact probe and comet tempel.

    Sad thing here is they have no idea how bright its going to be - TFA says anything between 7 and 15 mag (5 mag difference is a factor of 100 in flux) so we may not see anything really.
  • ...that as technology advances the "Smart Prove V2" will be able to avoid the moon.
  • To maximize the chances that the probe's mission will be successful, the project is being run by the British Beagle 2 Mars probe team, and the operating system on the probe will be Microsoft Windows.
  • So, the "Peak of Eternal Light" is never in darkness, 'cause, you know, the Earth never blocks sunlight from reaching it? Those Lunar eclipses must just be a figment of my imagination...
  • So, what will happen, when it is technically possible deliver a huge, but finite amount, of dull dust on the surface of the Moon in order to effectively "tag" it?

    Anyhow, I know there are international treaties reguarding "ownership" of the Moon (and Antartica), but are there any laws against "cosmic graffiti"?

    I hope I never see the "Nike Swoosh", or some such when I gaze upon the full Moon, but what's to stop someone (other than "bad PR", and right now, lots of money)?

  • Amateur astronomers will be excited to note that they can witness the impact of the SMART-1 probe crashing into the moon.

    Didn't Chairface already do this?
  • They probably are going to crash it into the moon to prove they were there. :)
     
    Now if they only had crashed the lunar modules of Apollo in a spectacular display of exploding moon dust and told people to watch through their telescopes. Then we would have to listen to these dipshit conspiracy theorists talk about us never going there in the first place.
     
    Maybe they should have had them wave at us?
    • Now if they only had crashed the lunar modules of Apollo in a spectacular display of exploding moon dust and told people to watch through their telescopes. Then we would have to listen to these dipshit conspiracy theorists talk about us never going there in the first place.

      They did, in addition, they crashed at least one S-IVb into the moon.

      http://vesuvius.jsc.nasa.gov/er/seh/pg15.htm [nasa.gov]
  • Peaks of Eternal Light are prime real estate for solar-powered Moon bases.

    Location, location, location.

    ("That's just one thing, Mr. Peterson.")

  • Better ways to observe this (Score:5, Informative)

    by midori_yamari (998995) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @07:18PM (#16012099)
    Even if you can't see the explosion, you can either wait for the plume of ejecta to rise up into the sunlight (soon afterwards) or reflect earthshine, which may then be visible here on earth. Or, if you have the equipment, tune your radio gear to 2235.1 MHz and watch as the signal from SMART-1 goes from on (alive) to off (dead) - several radio telescopes in Australia and Chile will be watching as the probe hits.
  • One of its most important discoveries was a "Peak of Eternal Light," a mountaintop near the Moon's north pole in constant, year-round sunlight.

    The moon undergoes the occasional earth eclipse, which we see as a lunar eclipse. Can't get rid of those batteries completely.

  • What does the MEPA Have to Say? (Score:3, Funny)

    by DavidD_CA (750156) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @07:40PM (#16012209) Homepage
    What does the MEPA have to say about this?

    You know, the Moon Environmental Protection Agency. Surely they're upset about this planned littering of our beloved Moon. Sure it's only a probe now, but that's setting the stage for all sorts of lunar trash. What's next? A satellite? Space shuttle? An entire station?

    Won't somebody PLEASE think of our children's children's children's children's children's children's children's future home?
    • Won't somebody PLEASE think of our children's children's children's children's children's children's children's future home?

      Bah! They're seeding the moon with refined metals so that when our (well, someone else's ;-) descendants get there, they will have a ready supply of materials to work with.

      Cheers

  • Overheard in mission control... (Score:5, Funny)

    by amyhughes (569088) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @08:11PM (#16012361) Homepage
    Overheard in mission control...

    "That was cool! What else can we crash?"

  • Uh, yeah... (Score:4, Funny)

    by macemoneta (154740) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @09:30PM (#16012711)
    ...propelling the craft in 2003 on a unique spiral path...after which it will crash into the Moon.

    Uh, yeah. We meant to do that.

    • Yes but think how miserable it would be living in the snow and cold at the North Pole.

      I think all them elves and that jolly overweight chap would cheer the place up...

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by geekoid (135745)
      Don't be ab ass. Everyone understands that.
      Geez.
      • Then I will start calling my fridge a 'wellspring of eternal beers' since, most of the time, there's beer in there. Except on RARE occasions when there's not because some 'guest' drank it all.

        TLF

        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by geekoid (135745)
          ok. Be prepared to get sued if you sell it with that advertising!

          If you go through life maknig a pointless pendantic correction, you will be an irritating ass eho gives nerds a bad reputation.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by An. (Coward) (258552)
      Even in a total lunar eclipse, there's always a reddish glow on the moon's face--the light of every sunrise and sunset in the world hitting it after passing through Earth's atmosphere. So it's eternal sunlight...it's just not 100% constant.
    • It is the exception which proves the rule.

      Nobody goes around talking about the eternally great weather in London, except for the rain, or the snow, or the fog, or the cold, or the humidity, or this, or that...

      If you can make a grand sweeping statement with ONE exception, well, it is the exception that proves the rule.

      Peak of Eternal Light it is.

    • Re:Peak of Eternal Light (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Roduku (950552) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @08:53PM (#16012567)
      How did such an ignorant statement get modded insightful?
      What did you do, make the post then log in with a different name and mod yourself?

      Even during a total eclipse, tha moon is not totally dark. Sunlight gets refracted towards the moon through the Earth's atmosphere. A mountain peak at the Moon's pole could indeed be in eternal light.

      One thing that really irks me is people that base the validity of a statement on their personal assumptions. In the words of Adam Savage of Mythbusters: "I reject your reality and substitute my own."

    • Re:Peak of Eternal Light (Score:5, Funny)

      by wirefarm (18470) <jim AT mmdc DOT net> on Wednesday August 30 2006, @10:01PM (#16012877) Homepage
      That's when the low-paid lunar coders will sleep...

      What you really want to worry about are the Solar Eclipses of the Moon, when the Sun passes between the Earth and the Moon...

    • Re:Real Estate (Score:5, Interesting)

      by phulegart (997083) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:52PM (#16011953)
      the sooner we stop thinking about the moon as some mystical magical pixie home where ancient one-eyed green cheese eating creatures hide from our attempts to photograph them, and start thinking about in terms of real estate with a long-ass trip to the beach.... ... the sooner we will advance off the planet and into our own solar system with any kind of manned progress.

      The moon is not a rainforest we have to save so that we can continue to breathe. We should avoid blowing it up, but other than that, it's a big hunk of rock we just haven't put to good use yet.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Jeng (926980)
      Our race is rather petty. Actually very petty, perhaps even very very petty.

      But thats besides the point. Real estate might have been used for lack of a better term, I don't think that moon topography will be sold off in lots anytime soon. For now the moon has no owner, and is a harsh mistress.

    • Re:Real Estate (Score:5, Interesting)

      by kfg (145172) * on Wednesday August 30 2006, @06:56PM (#16011969)
      I hate hearing such business-evolved terms such as "real estate"

      Real estate is not a business evolved term, in fact it's rather the opposite. It's a fuedalism evolved term.

      "Real" means "royal" and "estate" means "status"; real estate is that property, status; held by royal grant, one's condition under the power of the king.

      If you don't like the term applied to the moon; go complain to the King of the Moon.

      KFG

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by geekoid (135745)
      Nothing is larger then humanity. To think so is to die.
      There is nothing we can't achieve, no place we can't conquer.
    • The quest for real estate has been the most important driving force of humanity. Early hominids left Africa to search for real estate; the great empires of history were after real estate; even today wars are fought over real estate. The economic value of land is what has made us the creatures we are, and real estate is simply the modern term for this.

      Now some might argue that sex is the most important factor, but I disagree. Generally speaking, sex is available without travelling thousands of miles to unexp

    • So, any ideas as to if any particular location on Earth will have a better show?

      From the article (which also has links to tips for backyard astronomers wanting to witness it):

      The time to watch: Saturday, September 2nd at 10:41 p.m. PDT (Sept. 3rd, 0541 UT)...The nominal impact time favors observers in western parts of North America and across the Pacific Ocean.

      10:41 PM on the west coast or 1:41 AM on the east coast. It will probably have set or be setting at that time on the east coast, and the twilig

      • "Piece of land" seems to diminish the effect and awesomeness
        Nonsense. She's got great tracts of land... ;-)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mgabrys_sf (951552)
      Unlike our early space travel, there's a treaty that says that you have to de-orbit material around the moon. There's not as much room to be sending missions up there and muck about with lunar-orbit space junk. Although it's still mondo rare to have an impact in Earth orbit, there's enough crap flying around us that some time ago they decided we didn't need to make the same mistakes up there.

      Old news actually.

      In fact in earth orbit you're supposed to bring spacecraft out of orbit at the end of their life. T
      • Actually I thought the whole point of an ion thruster was it's very long lifespan. Why did they decide to terminate this mission? Buget cuts perhaps?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jakev (955166)
      the article says it could be possible to see the crash with a "backyard telescope", but also says that it might be too dim to be seen by a professional observatory:

      "How bright will it be? No one knows. Estimates range from 7th to 15th magnitude. In other words, it might be bright enough for backyard telescopes--or so dim that even big professional observatories won't see a thing. The only way to find out is to look."

      secondly..

      "The nominal impact time [esa.int] favors observers in western parts of North Ameri

    • Actually it's a very smart mission (Score:5, Informative)

      by YA_Python_dev (885173) on Wednesday August 30 2006, @08:57PM (#16012584) Journal

      I know that yours was a joke, but FYI crashing into the moon is the end of every mission in lunar orbit (yes, this includes the ascent stages of the Apollo Lunar Modules); those orbits are not stable due to the gravity of the sun, the Earth and irregularities in the moon itself.

      And, considering that this is an ESA mission, why the summary has only a link to the NASA site? ESA has a lot of good information about the mission and the impact:

      IMHO the most important results from this mission (beside a lot of nice detailed images) are the successful use of a ion engine with a very complicated low-power path (that thing passed through the L1 Lagrangian Point, switching seamlessly from earth orbit to lunar orbit) and the extensive mapping of the moon surface chemical composition using X-ray and infrared instruments.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.