Timeline for Why did Voyager 2 receive a gravitational slowdown (as opposed to a slingshot) at Neptune?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 8:54 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jul 26, 2015 at 18:44 | comment | added | 1337joe | @EchoLogic my answer was more minimally correct (answer + quoted reference) than great, I'm glad this more complete answer is getting attention now | |
| Jul 26, 2015 at 17:36 | comment | added | David Richerby | @joojaa That's a good point. But it's still amazing that we were able to exploit those lucky conditions so accurately and could do so again if presented with the opportunity. | |
| Jul 26, 2015 at 17:23 | comment | added | joojaa | @DavidRicherby we can not, not anymore anyway. Theres no such condition. Its just a special fluke that the planets happened to be this aligned at early space age. | |
| Jul 26, 2015 at 11:28 | comment | added | David Richerby | It blows my mind that we can launch three-quarters of a ton of metal into space by essentially setting off a gigantic explosion under it and say, "In the next twelve years and five days, that thing will zing by three different planets and then reach a fourth planet, 4.5 billion km away and miss it by about the distance from Boston to Los Angeles." And then do it. | |
| Jul 26, 2015 at 10:23 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
improved wording
|
| Jul 25, 2015 at 22:07 | vote | accept | marked-down | ||
| Jul 25, 2015 at 22:07 | comment | added | marked-down | 1337joe's answer is great, but it was really the specifics of the mission I was interested in, and you've delivered. Thanks! | |
| Jul 25, 2015 at 18:42 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 6 characters in body
|
| Jul 25, 2015 at 18:34 | history | answered | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |