Sending space probes to other planets

AI Thread Summary
Space probes are designed with a focus on fail-tolerance rather than fail-proof systems, incorporating redundancy in critical areas while balancing weight and cost. Trajectory calculations are complex, beginning with fundamental principles like Kepler's laws, and require significant computational effort. NASA maintains communication with probes during missions to manage course corrections and address issues. Current funding priorities may shift focus away from scientific exploration towards manned missions, potentially jeopardizing valuable science projects. The discussion highlights the challenges and limitations in space probe design and mission planning.
rhia
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Hi,
How is a space probe planned to be fail-proof?
And how is the trajectory calculated?Is it easy to do or requires huge calculations?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
A good time to launch can easily be calculated with Keplers laws, I recommend you to look them up. When it comes to space probes, I have no clue. I guess the size of solar panels, weight of the material and types of communication are major issues though.
 
rhia said:
Hi,
How is a space probe planned to be fail-proof?
Fail-proof is not possible. Fail-tolerance is the goal. Engineers design for robustness, and try to include enough redundancy in critical systems to allow work-arounds in the event of failure. It is too costly to provide back-ups for every system on a probe, and some systems are too heavy and bulky to have back-ups, so these systems must be robust. Data pathways, chipsets, etc. are generally lighter and smaller and can be backed up. The design of any probe has to revolve around costs, payload weight, fuel requirements, etc, etc. If you design in too much redundancy, the weight of the probe increases, the amount fuel required to launch it increases, the amount fuel required to maneuver the probe increases. All these increase project costs and reduce the number of "nice to have" and "optional" sensors, experiments, etc that your friends and associates want to tack onto the probe.
 
We can forget about any new probe-based programs in the US. NASA recently got $16.2G, thanks to Bush and DeLay and their cohorts. Unfortunately, their new "mandate" is to put men back in space, with projects on the Moon and trips to Mars. This idiocy comes from the same dopes who killed the Breakthrough Propulsion Program. The BPP might have given us a chance to make interplanetary travel possible, if not practical. Without a breakthrough in propulsion, manned probes to Mars are a pipe-dream, but these people either don't understand it (ignorance) or wish to ignore it (dishonesty, greed). BTW, the Johnson Space Center is in DeLay's district.
 
Welcome new members, rhia & orange! :smile:

rhia said:
How is a space probe planned to be fail-proof?

Good response from turbo-1. Also note that NASA/JPL/etc. stay in contact with the space probe throughout the mission. They frequently need to send up instructions for course corrections, fixing glitches, etc. If you read about some of the past missions, you'll see many examples of this. Some of the fixes have been quite clever & dramatic.

And how is the trajectory calculated?Is it easy to do or requires huge calculations?

It's tough overall, but it starts with simple principles.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=29524
 
Here is a link to a news story that touches on the fringes of the new NASA budget. The problem is that the budget is ripe low-hanging fruit for people who have "projects" fitting NASA's new "mandate". We should expect to see science gutted for the sake of pork and political payback. The reality will be much more depressing than the story implies, and some really deserving science projects will be deferred or lost altogether.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1803&e=18&u=/washpost/a38092_2004dec5
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top