ESA Selects Next Generation Space Missions 46
davecl writes "The European Space Agency has announced the results of its Cosmic Visions 2015-2025 call for proposals. Fifty space science missions for the next decade were proposed, with just seven selected. They range from X-ray and far-infrared observatories to planet finders and a near-earth asteroid sample return mission. These seven, together with the LISA gravitational wave observatory, will go ahead for further study in the next few years, and then two will be chosen for launch in 2015-2017."
Too Many Acronyms (Score:1)
They are very ambitious missions (Score:5, Informative)
- Laplace. To study the Jovian system (three orbiters, one entirely dedicated to Europa!) in collaboration with NASA.
- Tandem. To study the Saturnian-Titanian-Enceladusian environment (orbiter+carrier with a balloon and 3 probes to Titan) in colaboration with NASA.
- Marco Polo. Sample return mission from an asteroid (à la Hayabusa) with orbiter+lander, sampler and return capsule; in collaboration with JAXA.
- Dune/SPACE. Two proposed missions to study dark matter and dark energy.
- Plato. Extrasolar planets detector, capable of detecting rocky planets.
- Spica. Infrared telescope with wide field of analysis, spectroscopy and coronograph; in collaboration with JAXA.
- XEUS. X-ray telescope to study extreme environments from L2 halo orbit, consisting on a mirror satellite and a detector satellite flying in formation.
- Cross-Scale. Proposed to employ 12 spacecraft, would make simultaneous measurements of plasma - the gas of charged particles surrounding Earth - on different scales at shocks, reconnection sites, and turbulent regions in near-Earth space.
[thanks to eeergo from NSF for the short list]At least one of the first two (Laplace or Tandem) will almost certainly be selected, the second one approved will probably be an astronomy mission (i.e. observation of objects outside of the solar system).
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surpris
Re: (Score:2)
My own horse in the race, SPICA, has the advantage of building on existing European technology, since the ESA contribution woulkd be a mirror similar to Herschel's. The instrument, that I'm associated with and that your friend is working on, would be finded separately by national funding agencies, as is always the way with ESA missions. It's already been defin
Re: (Score:2)
[also a very nifty paper on coronographs using binary masks very close to the focal plane, which in principle masked out the star enough that you could almost detect Jupiters in reasonably distant
Re: (Score:2)
Sad... (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Physicists can't resist this kind of question...
TEXT (Score:1, Redundant)
A dark energy mission
Two proposals have been received (DUNE, the dark universe investigator and SPACE, the new near-infrared all-sky cosmic explorer) addressing the study of dark matter and dark energy - a hot topic in astronomy. While they propose to use different techniques (DUNE is proposed as a a wide-field imager, while SPACE is proposed as a near-infrared all-sky surveyor), they address the same basic science goal. In the follow-up study phase a trade-off will be performed leading to t
Mars (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Europe is slow? - Re:Mars (Score:2, Interesting)
For one, they are relatively new at it. NASA's been doing lots of missions for a long time. Europe has only been lightly dabbling so far.
Second, is that they have more beurocracy because they want to make sure member countries get an equal share. It is sort of like the Osprey military project in the US where states all wanted a shake an
Re: (Score:2)
this is speculation but (Score:2)
I think that in Europe, space exploration is seen as science expenditure, and not military expenditure (since 'Europe' as an entity has no military). There's a lot more competition and public scrutiny regarding where the money goes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
While cool, personally I get more satisfaction out of seeing new worlds. I was totally psyched when the Titan Huygens lander mission started posting photos on the internet. This was a new, cloudy world never before seen from under the c
Re: (Score:1)
For Esa the Mars program is called Aurora, and the first coming mission is Exomars, planning to land in 10 years a relatively big rover (hundreds of kg) whose data relaying relies on US satellites. Later on, sample return is planned, in a clear collaboration still to be refined with Nasa which *possibly* would allocate precisi
Re: (Score:2)
No shortage of forward planning there, then.
Jovian System (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is an INCREDIBLY ignorant statement.
Any and all probes designed to go out past Mars or so are powered by nuclear sources. Sunlight gets extremely weak the further you go, and Jupiter is a LONG way out there and solar panels simply won't work. They WILL BE NUCLEAR, no matter who wants to
Re: (Score:2)
-l
Re: (Score:2)
There is no limit. It's just a trade-off of power vs. time. Use a 1W RTG and it'll simply take FOREVER to drill to any depth.
At 620W+, Cassini's 3 (man-sized) RTGs should have more than enough power to do the job in a reasonable time-frame. What's more, if NASA's Sterling tech works, you're able to make them SRGs instead, and get 2,500W+ from the same-size/weight package. That's easily
Drill? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
-l
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:2015-2025 Resources? (Score:5, Informative)
An Ariane 5 burns 25 tons of liquid hydrogen in 130 tons of liquid oxygen, and is assisted by about 480 tons of ammonium perchlorate and aluminium powder in the solid rocket boosters; the materials costs are trivial in comparison to the cost of the engineers who designed and assembled the machine. Liquid oxygen is significantly cheaper than milk (say 10 cents per kilogram), and 130 tons is much less than the daily consumption by even a modest steelworks; liquid hydrogen is cheaper than beer at about $4 per kilo.
Except for one thing.. (Score:1)
Incidentally the proposed NASA-JUNO Jupiter polar orbiter is also a first - a *solar* powered orbiter for Jupiter - something that was not supposed to be possible! This is thanks to reduc
Re: (Score:2)
they would probably be using RTGs (Radioisotope Thermal power Generators) - this will be a big cost, and also a big political step
It's a shame.. (Score:1)
I'm not sure what's lacking the most, the number of people available to work on these or the funding required. Probably mostly the latter.
A little additional background (Score:4, Informative)
1. In principle just two of these missions will proceed to flight in 2017-2018, following studies of all seven over the next couple of years. However, the important number is the 950Meuro budget envelope allocated for this round of Cosmic Vision: depending on how costs shape up during the study phase, we go for a different mix of missions. That number is the cost to ESA itself: you also need to factor in anticipated additional contributions (e.g. for payload) from ESA member states and third party countries (e.g. US, Japan, Russia, China).
2. One poster suggested that either Laplace or Tandem was most likely to fly in one slot, with an astronomy mission in the other: this is in no way decided, at this point. We sent Laplace and Tandem through at this stage as NASA is looking closely at the same basic missions; indeed, for either to fly would require strong (majority) NASA partnership, as ambitious outer solar systems missions cost more like $2G, rather than the ~600-650Meuro ESA might put in. Following discussions and a selection process in the US, one or other of Laplace or Tandem will go through to the full European study stage. Then, in order to proceed to flight, we will need to decide whether we prefer that mission over XEUS or LISA for the 2017-2018 slot: they are the other L(arge)-missions selected for study.
3. Dune and Space were similarly selected in the full knowledge that the US is planning a Dark Energy mission as well. Further talks with NASA on competition, collaboration, and complementarity in ths arena are very likely.
4. Keep in mind that this is just the first round of Cosmic Vision: we anticipate a second selection round in 3 years or so, at which point other missions may be selected, perhaps from those of the seven here not finally picked for flight in the first round, perhaps from the 43 others which did not make it this far (some were felt to be extremely interesting, but not ready technologically for 2017-2018), or perhaps something new altogether.
5. Finally, yes, we'd all like to have more money available to ESA to fund these and other exciting missions: we have plenty of interesting ideas. Europeans should think about writing to their parliamentary / governmental representatives about exactly this point. That said, it's not quite true to say, as someone did, that we're newbies in this game: ESA has been involved in a whole bunch of excellent astronomy and solar system missions already (Giotto, Rosetta, ISO, SOHO, XMM, Mars Express, HST, to name but a few), some alone, some in collaboration. There are more to come over the next few years as well (e.g. Herschel, Planck, Gaia, JWST), so watch this space (sorry).
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting that Plato was selected (instead?). Clearly from a ESA perspective it's more in line with current thinking; reuse either the Herschel or Gaia bus and build on Corot. I imagine that the French delegation were pushing hard too. But ESA has invested quite a lot of time on the Darwin concept and I would have though that it would have made it at to at least the study phase.
Was Darwin too far out on the
I propose a 5-year mission... (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_trek [wikipedia.org]