Galileo Nearing Its End 33
Anonymous Coward writes "Mission operations for the Galileo space probe, currently orbiting Jupiter, are scheduled to be shut down at the end of this month. Once a month thereafter scientists will check on the probe until September when the probe will be ordered to crash into Jupiter. The $1.5 billion mission met 70 percent of its science objectives and made a number of serendipitous discoveries along the way -- despite a range of problems."
Why crash? (Score:2)
Re:Why crash? (Score:2)
I doubt it has the fuel to escape Jupiter.
They want to crash it so that it won't contaminate one of the moons by accidentally crashing there, possibly releasing earthly microbes.
That possibility seems like a long shot to me. It also makes me a little sad to see a spacecraft crash, even intentionally, but that's just a sentimental spot I have.
On the other hand, maybe the Jovian atmosphere will finally open the high gain antenna, if only for a moment. ;-)
Re:Why crash? (Score:1)
Jupiter is a "gas giant".
I wonder if it will ever find a solid surface to "land" on, or just sink deeper and deeper into ever higher compressed gases.
Wasn't Voyager powered by a nuclear-powered thermopile generator? If so, what kind of chance is there that we may ignite Jupiter's compressed core (thermonuclearly speaking). If so, we may have another distant sun in a few months.
The answer to all your questions is... (Score:5, Informative)
And I quote
" Galileo could be allowed to simply remain in orbit, but scientists feared it might collide with Europa and contaminate that body with microbes from Earth, possibly damaging its environment. "
This is an entirely valid concern, think the andromeda strain only inverted.
Re:The answer to all your questions is... (Score:2)
It would seem to me that there are lower orbits the craft could be put into, where there would be no chance of a crash with the larger moons.
On the other hand, such an orbit would probably soon decay anyway.
Any speculation on whether the crash will yield any data that we didn't get from the probe sent into the atmosphere earlier?
Re:The answer to all your questions is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The answer to all your questions is... (Score:1)
Well, yes. But with Europa, there's some (perhaps miniscule) chance that there could actually be life there...
According to Nineplanets [nineplanets.org], Europa may be the only body besides Earth that has significan't quantities of water.
Re:The answer to all your questions is... (Score:1)
I've got to agree with you here. Mars seems like a more obvious choice as a destination though, given its proximity (and relative similarity) to earth. Difficult to observe our garden when it's so far away.
Re:The answer to all your questions is... (Score:1)
If we put stuff on those probes that can withstand an atmosphere of sulpheric acid and temperatures hot enough to boil lead I think we would probably be using them here for research already.
ST (Score:5, Funny)
Expensive. (Score:2)
Re:Expensive. (Score:4, Insightful)
Cheap.
$1.5B - three shuttle launches to put some ISS modules together. Of the three ISS crew members, 2.5 person-days are required to keep the thing up, leaving one guy able to spend four hours a day... doing very little science.
$1.5B - plunk a probe into Jupiter's atmosphere, find out what's below the cloud tops, make multiple passes by every moon, and get pictures/magnetometer data of everything around Jupiter and each of its moons. Prove the existence of liquid water beneath Europa, demonstrate a liquid/slush ocean on Callisto, observe volcanoes on Io, and if you're just after pretty pictures, keep in mind that had Galileo's high-gain antenna actually worked, we'd have gotten thousands of times as many pictures as we did.
Naw, scrap that science stuff. It's only good for a couple of years of billion-dollar pork while it's under construction, but once it's in the air, it's just a few million bucks worth of lousy scientists. Screw that. We need more shuttle/ISS flights, because they're the only things that can keep that gigadollar NASA contractor pork flowing for decades.
This sounds an awful lot like... (Score:4, Funny)
...the way my cars usually go. They run and run and run, and eventually start falling apart so fast that I just check on them once every so often, and eventually crash them into something just to finish the damn thing off.
Re:Only 70%? (Score:1)
Re:Only 70%? (Score:1)
Re:Only 70%? (Score:3, Insightful)
If Galileo has achieved 100% of it goals, it would be clear they hadn't planned a hard enough mission. Just like if too many students get 100%, the test isn't hard enough to tell you which students are better.
Re:Only 70%? (Score:2)
First, I'd like to ask the obvious question: How is this the government's fault, exactly? You sound as if you found some way to link this with GW Bush botching one of his speeches.
Second, I'd like to ask how blasting an unmanned probe billions of miles into space and having it send back useful information for 14 years despite severe damage to just about every part of it is anything remotely like making change at the corner drug store.
Maybe if you were blind, had no arms or legs, and could only access the cash register by holding a 10-foot pole in your teeth with a stick of chewing gum on the end, it might be a slightly better analogy... but you'ld still have more of an advantage that that probe.
=Smidge=
Re:Only 70%? (Score:2)
Cià,
Edo
Re:Only 70%? (Score:1)
Someones gonna get angry (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Someones gonna get angry (Score:1)
Re:Someones gonna get angry (Score:2)
i'm reminded of the words of jack handy:
Re:Neither (Score:2)
Galileo Nearing Its End (Score:1)
We want manned missions!!! (Score:1)
but will this cause Jupiter to go supernova? (Score:1, Funny)