Pluto Probe Launches

Artem S. Tashkinov writes "The US space agency, Nasa, has successfully launched its New Horizons mission to Pluto. The $700m probe will gather information on Pluto and its moons before - it is hoped - pressing on to explore other objects in the outer Solar System. Pluto is the only remaining planet that has never been visited by a spacecraft."

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

Gotta agree with you there. I can't stand people that are ignorant enough to protest anything with the word "nuclear" attached to it. Blind ignorance is all that is. They don't even have the most basic understanding of what they are protetsting. They're simply doing it because some hippy teacher during their education told them that they should.

Lemmings.

Re:The website that changed policy

[Leroy_Brown242]

This is the internet I try to hold onto.

People coming together for a common good.

I'd love to see more of that.

Re:Fastest too..

[Quadraginta]

Well, to be fair, Apollo had to slow down so it could stop at the Moon...

Re:The website that changed policy

[ichandarin]

Another big source of publicity was the planetary society, http://planetary.org./ [planetary.org.] They deserve a lot of the credit for getting this mission finished, finally. Their web site on the New Horizons mission also has some great info, at http://www.planetary.org/explore/topics/new_horizo ns/ [planetary.org]

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[pookemon]

Now I don't really care what it's powered by and what's on it. But will you and the parent poster apologize if one of these probes do explode on lift off?

I mean it's not like anything NASA does ever goes wrong?

I expect that if it ever does happen you'll either be very quiet, or you'll find someone else to take a cheap shot at.

Re:The website that changed policy

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the hugest load of bullshit I've ever seen on Slashdot. And that's saying a lot.

I have mod points, but I won't mod you down (yet), I want people to see that website. Geez.

Re:Kinda Slow

[Unholy_Kingfish]

This mission has been planned for a long time. Lots of R&D. On and off funding. The building of this probe started the better part of a decade ago. When you build space fairing vehicles you build them on CURRENT tech, not what might be around in a few years. Ion engines are new technology in its infancy that wouldn't have been available to the designers then.

Not to mention this is a flyby mission, not an orbiting mission like Cassini or the MESSENGER mission. You do not want to zoom by and get less data.

These space probes are in for the long haul, not just a quicky.

Relativity ;)

[burni]

I concur, and I see you did notice that in the news there is never or less mentioned a hard number refering to the "real" speed which the launchvehicle had?

Anytime they say
"as twice as fast than spaceshuttle"

you mentioned
"10 times faster than a bullet"

From my point of view this "relativism" isn´t good, it teaches especially
non technical people or even kids, not to refer to the hard facts first,
and using a relation to make this fact or high speed seizable in the second,
it also misses out things to mention which could cause huge errors

1.) "as twice as fast than space shuttle"
to escape the earth´s gravity field you need to accelerate to 11 km/s
the space shuttle simply does not exceed this value much, because the space shuttle is an orbiting vessel, not used for space exploration, and using a higher acceleration, puts higher physical stress to the astronauts,
that´s why it´s so _slow_

2.)
"10x faster than the average Joe Bullet"

there is no standard speed for a bullet, for example using my .22 rifle I can choose three different types of ammo

a.) slow speed
b.) normal
c.) high speed

for example the austrian army´s "steyr aug" had to be modified so
that the bullet is not too fast so usage of the weapon would not violate
international laws.

so which bullet did the speaker think of when he spoke of
"Joe C. Average Bullet" ?

.357 Magnum or one of the three bullets I use in my .22 ?

But you are right ;) this rocket was faster than superman, but actually
we are rotating arround the galactical inner core at a speed of 200 km/s
that´s why we lost superman ;)

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[Anonymous Coward]

Now look here, you nutter... The Plutonium RTG carries 7kg of plutonium. That's a hair over 15 lbs. Sure. It sounds like a lot of material. It's not. That material will fit in the volume occupied by a bit less than two baseballs, if you're the visual type. It's not so much now? Is it, Mr. Smarty-pants?

The fact is, it won't be vaporized in an explosion; it will be combusted and oxidized. The stuff burns like crazy. At those temperatures, it will readily react with the oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, etc available to it, becoming not so dense, and floating the fuck away. In other words, bye-bye Plutonium. Plus, in the superheated gasses that would result from such an incident, it's all going to go practically straight up and be dispersed in the higher parts of the stratosphere. The fireball is of greater concern! You know how a flue works for a natural gas appliance? It's the thing that keeps your idiot self from getting gassed, much to my and no doubt, some other's chagrin.

So, it gets carried into the jet stream. Big Fucking Deal. There is more radioactive material right around you and indeed even inside you that it's utter fucking stupidity to get all uppity about 7kg of Pu getting spread evenly over just a few square miles. At that density, the dosages delivered to any populace there will actually be less than the equivalent ionizing dose from... Get this... The average dosage of X-RAY radiation you, and almost every kid in the US receive at the dentist's office, per visit. That's right. Do the math and research yourself if you disbelieve... And yet, we don't see many soccer moms protesting dentists!

If you live near a coal power plant, you receive greater dosages of radiation. Hell, if you live near the OCEAN, you receive greater dosages of radiation. If you spend a couple hours outside in the sun, you receive greater dosages. If you've got a Radon problem in your basement, you receive much greater dosages. I'd also wager that you would receive more radiation breathing up all the car emissions in a small metropolitan than you'd get from a catastrophic failure of an RTG laden rocket. You want to stay safe from that evil radiation stuff? Too fucking bad, there's no way around it. Not even the infamous Dr. No could do a good enough job, and he's fictional, with seemingly unlimited funding.

Fallout indeed. Bollocks! The hysteria surrounding the RTG launches is fucking lunacy, and a waste of time and effort. Indeed, this post was probably an equal waste of time and effort, because someone lazy enough not to research the implications of an RTG before getting into a frenzy won't believe the science and the math, even if it was force fed down their throat. No, instead, you and your kin will think the scientists are lying to you, and acting in bad faith. Let me guess, you're probably a friend of Intelligent Design. You know what Intelligent Design would be: The Intelligent Designer coming down from above to smack some intelligence into his creations!

At least "stupid" people who accept the fact that they don't know everything realize that it's often better to leave the science in the hands of more pro-active people don't act like fucking stupid fags when something like this goes down.

Stop freaking out and being a stupid fag, you stupid fag!

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[pookemon]

Read the first post - what do those that protested against the launch of a Nuclear powered probe have to apologize for? They had a concern and they voiced it - they're in the "land of the free" with a right to "free speech". And what harm did they do?

Do you demand that the operators of coal-fired power plants apologize to the residents of the Black Forest in Germany, the NE United States/SE Canada, etc. for all the damage to arboreal forests caused by acid rain?

Sure, why not? And include all those that drive fossil fuel vehicles and USE the electricity supplied by those plants.

Some accidents happen.

Yes they do. What's your point?

If they had to abort that rocket, it would have been downrange from Cape Canaveral into the Atlantic Ocean. Sure, the COSMOS probe that crashed into Alberta in the 80's spewed some plutonium over some area of a range grazing area, but the world didn't come to a crashing halt now did it?

See that's just stupidity. Did the world come to an end when people started inhaling Asbestos? No. Did their world come crashing to an end? Eventually - in the majority of cases. However, I'm not claiming the world will end or that the use of nuclear material in the generation of power is bad. I am pointing out that people are far to quick to pick on people that are concerned for the environment, simply because one event was a success (which is the subject of the original post and it's reply).

How much more plutonium was induced into the biosphere by the open air detonations of fission weapons in the 50's and 60's (as well as fission-triggered fusion devices)? Again, we're all still here.

Well we should release more then shouldn't we?

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Luck? That's an insult to the engineers who designed those things, and you should apologise. They are professionals, and the reason there hasn't been an accidental release from a US spacecraft is that they were *designed* to survive these accidents. There's nothing magic here. Something that small can be built far far stronger than the minimum requirements. When you do that, to think you're going to have a major nuclear release from a probe like this one is just a bit like saying a stick of dynamite will crack the Earth in half. If you're claiming that the rules of physics are going to be broken, then it's up to you to prove it.

A lemming in this instance is someone who blindly repeats something without understanding it. Consider the carefully the walls of your house before casting stones.

Well, I guess that shuts me up! Oh wait, it doesn't. My walls obey the laws of physics. Do yours?

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[DerekLyons]

Luck? That's an insult to the engineers who designed those things, and you should apologise.

No, it's stone cold truth. Any other brand of engineer that designed something that failed as much as 2% of the time would be considered an utter failure. Imagine that high a failure rate in a nuclear power plant, or a nuclear submarine, or a high performance jet aircraft (like Concorde or Blackbird). You say space is hard? Well, these things are too.

They are professionals, and the reason there hasn't been an accidental release from a US spacecraft is that they were *designed* to survive these accidents.

They are designed to have a high probability of surviving - but they are not impregnable and the improbable does happen.

Something that small can be built far far stronger than the minimum requirements.

Because of the faulty way that launchers are engineered - nothing on it's payload is built above the minimum requirements. They can't afford to spend the weight.

When you do that, to think you're going to have a major nuclear release from a probe like this one is just a bit like saying a stick of dynamite will crack the Earth in half.

Try actually reading the EISs of these RTG's sometime - you'll find the probabilities of release very carefully spelled out, and they are not zero.

If you're claiming that the rules of physics are going to be broken, then it's up to you to prove it.

If I'd claimed that - you'd have a point. You are exactly the same kind of lemming as the grandparent post - you have no clue of the issues involved.

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[ThePuceGuardian]

Is affirming and tolerating the protester's right to make themselves heard more troublesome than becoming cavelier about putting plutonium atop giant explosive devices? It isn't a trivial concern - a total dispersal would have instantly spread 80% the average annual radiation dosage across a 65 mile radius. And cleanup would have run $241 million to $1.3 billion per square mile [cnn.com] - and recall what the early estimates for costs of the Iraq War were, at that. I'll be worried when people stop protesting, any time the government takes risks - even 1 in 350 risks - with its citizens's health. If it serves no other good purpose, this sort of activism reinforces the government's relationship and accountability to its citizens.

Re:Don't suppose the No Nukes freaks will apologiz

[mosb1000]

"no fewer than nine have resulted in the radioactive material being returned to earth."

And yet, no major ecological disaster has ensued. Perhaps the danger is overstated?

Re:Cool

[brxndxn]

Keep poking fun at the 'idiot Christians.' That way, we can put a useful political rift between everything scientific and Christian. Then, we'll have every ounce of future scientific progress protested.

Your point is somewhat funny - but only to those with an open mind to science and a closed mind to religion.

'You're stupid' doesn't win many arguments.

Mission to the 8th planet?

[adnonsense]

In many ways it's a pity this is not a Uranus Probe - the headlines would have been fantastic. However we've been there with Voyager 2 [wikipedia.org], so that'll probably have to wait until somone finds a way of mining the helium 3 [mines.edu] [PDF] in Uranus's atmosphere.

Seriously though: this mission is great stuff, this pixelized ball [nasa.gov] is the best picture we've got of Pluto, and it would have been a shame if we couldn't spare a few million dollars to improve it, and get some data on the Kuiper Belt [wikipedia.org] at the same time.

Re:Slingshot

[dtmos]

The slingshot technique works because Jupiter is also moving--it's in orbit around the Sun, at about 30,000 mph (48,000 km/hr). When the probe approaches Jupiter from behind, the probe is gravitationally attracted to something (Jupiter) traveling at 30,000 mph, so it speeds up. Relative to Jupiter, you're right, it's a zero-sum game (i.e., the probe does seem to speed up and then slow down again, relative to the planet) but the velocity of concern is the so-called heliocentric velocity, or the velocity relative to the Sun, and that is greatly increased.

Note that there is conservation of energy, of course; Jupiter also slows down in its orbit slightly in response to the energy it adds to the probe, but the amount is unmeasurable due to the mass ratio between Jupiter and the probe. The speedup is therefore considered "free."

Google [google.com] is your friend; see this page [ednet.ns.ca], this page [howstuffworks.com], this page [nasa.gov] for more information.

Regarding your second question, the probe doesn't slow down again, and does do a very fast flyby. However, we know so close to nothing about Pluto that we don't have to get very close to get new information--for example, the resolution of the New Horizons cameras will exceed that of the best Earth telescopes (including Hubble) for 150 days. (Of course, it will take 4-9 months, depending on which estimate you like, to transmit the data back to the earth at the probe's minimum data rate--which it likely will use at that distance--of 800 bits/s.)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion