L1 Lagrangian Point: SOHO & ACE Time + Human Mission Possibility

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter hhhmortal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian Point
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the journey time of the SOHO and ACE spacecraft to the L1 Lagrangian point, the feasibility of a human servicing mission to this location, and considerations regarding radiation exposure and spacecraft temperature during such missions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the travel time for SOHO and ACE to the L1 point and speculates on the duration of a human spaceflight servicing mission.
  • Another participant notes that recent spacecraft are not designed for human servicing and suggests that the costs associated with human serviceability can lead to the retirement of spacecraft if they malfunction.
  • It is mentioned that replacing spacecraft is generally cheaper than servicing them, and there are challenges in sending manned missions beyond the Moon.
  • One participant argues that while unmanned missions may be cheaper, there could be scenarios where sending astronauts might be more efficient than relying solely on robotics.
  • A question is raised regarding the radiation shielding of the space shuttle and the radiation dosage astronauts receive in orbit, indicating concerns about long-duration missions.
  • Another participant highlights that the feasibility of long missions depends on solar activity, specifically the solar cycle.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the viability and cost-effectiveness of human servicing missions compared to unmanned missions. There is no consensus on the feasibility of sending astronauts to the L1 point or the implications of radiation exposure for such missions.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the challenges of radiation exposure and spacecraft temperature, but specific assumptions and calculations regarding these factors are not fully explored. The discussion also lacks definitive information on the travel times of SOHO and ACE.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in space missions, human spaceflight, spacecraft design, and the implications of radiation in space may find this discussion relevant.

hhhmortal
Messages
175
Reaction score
0
Does anyone know how long SOHO and ACE took to get to the L1 lagrangian point. It is in average 1.496 million km away, I am wondering how fast a human space flight servicing mission would take. Also if it is possible to send it for a long mission seeing that the radiation dosage increases and temperature of spacecraft increases too.

Thanks.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Not sure how long it took, but I do know that none of the recent spacecraft are designed to be human serviceable and if they break then they will be retired. Having a spacecraft that uses or requires human serviceablity (i.e. Hubble) turned into something of a nightmare, which most people would rather avoid. It turns out that for the same cost of making something human serviceable you can build several non-serviceable spacecraft .
 
They are cheaper to replace than service. We can barely make it to the moon with manned craft.
 
Exactly what I thought. In essence sending a unmanned spacecraft will certainly be cheaper than a servicing mission, but does this mean we should never send Astronauts to space. The ACE is due for retirement on 2024. Could it ever be viable to go to the L1 point assuming the cost of launching into orbit is significantly reduced. I'd like to think that astronauts can do a more efficient job than just the robotics in an unmanned space craft.

Could anyone tell me what the space shuttle radiation shielding is? And how much dosage of radiation per sec or day do astronauts receive in orbit?
 
Thanks very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
9K