Timeline for Why there is no orbiter for Uranus or Neptune?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2017 at 4:27 | vote | accept | Tom11 | ||
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://space.stackexchange.com/ with https://space.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 6, 2017 at 12:00 | comment | added | user | @MartinSchröder What makes time on the DSN so expensive? | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 11:39 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
expanded RTG section
|
| Apr 6, 2017 at 9:02 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added list of orbiters
|
| Apr 5, 2017 at 19:03 | comment | added | Martin Schröder | @DavidHammen: I'm surprised that Voyager is still so expensive (in manpower and that the DSN is so expensive). | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 15:59 | comment | added | David Hammen | @MartinSchröder - Re "Surely we are talking about single-digit millions." Probably a good deal more than that. The two Voyager satellites still receive multiple Deep Space Network contacts per week, each of which costs several thousands of dollars to tens of thousands of dollars. Then there are people. The most recent Voyager Space Flight Operations Schedule lists eleven JPL employees. I'd be shocked if a fully-loaded FTE JPL engineer costs less than $250K/yr. Plus there are researchers in other NASA centers and in universities who are supported by the Voyager budget. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 13:04 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 610 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2017 at 12:43 | comment | added | Michael Kohne | @MartinSchröder - the exact dollars aren't the point - the point is that the people don't only cost money (which you rightly point out is peanuts vs the initial hardware). The people ALSO cost the administration an on-going fight to justify their paychecks. Remember that the budget for the mission as a whole is NOT decided up front. The NASA admins have to go back year after year, decade after decade to get more funding for ongoing missions. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 12:12 | comment | added | Hobbes | Most of the Voyager science team has been let go by now. Cassini's is still at full strength. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 12:11 | comment | added | Martin Schröder | @MichaelKohne: And how much did Voyager 2 cost in 2016? Surely we are talking about single-digit millions. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 12:08 | comment | added | Martin Schröder | @Hobbes: [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassini_orbiter#Objectives](Wikipedia) has this: "The total cost of this scientific exploration mission is about USD 3.26 billion, including USD 1.4 billion for pre-launch development, USD 704 million for mission operations, USD 54 million for tracking and USD 422 million for the launch vehicle." - so yes, ops is more expensive than I thought, but only 30% of the whole cost. I doubt that letting Cassini cruise for say 5 more years would have cost that much. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 11:59 | comment | added | Graham | @Tim All of which could not have been achieved by going to closer planets. If you want a multi-billion dollar project funded, you need to be able to show what you're looking to investigate as a minimum, and also that there's a decent chance it'll give you new science to work on. Just "because it's there" is not good enough. As for telescopes, they're a relatively cheap win so it'd be silly not to use them. It's entirely bang for the buck. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 11:41 | comment | added | Michael Kohne | @MartinSchröder - but the personnel cost is ongoing through the life of the mission. The billions up front are spent relatively quickly to get the thing moving, but the people are an ongoing cost for many, many years. Voyager 2, for instance, was approved May 72, launched in Aug 77. It's STILL going, and NASA admin still has to keep fighting with politicians for money to support that mission along with everything else. | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 11:39 | comment | added | Hobbes | @MartinSchröder: Cassini operations cost is listed as $710 million, most of that will be personnel cost over 25+ years. That's not negligible. saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/about-the-mission/quick-facts | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 10:18 | comment | added | Tim | @CortAmmon that's not true in the slightest. NASA clearly don't know everything about Earth - never mind the 4 inner planets! And yet they still point telescopes out into space, and send orbiters to Jupiter, a flyby to Pluto and a lander to an asteroid! | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 8:01 | comment | added | Martin Schröder | Personnel cost is negligible compared to cost of launch and hardware. Fly-away-cost is easily in the lower billions, and you argue about some millions for personnel? | |
| Apr 5, 2017 at 4:30 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | As an addendum to the answer: NASA has a budget, and they strive to learn as much about our universe as possible on that budget. As long as there is more to be learned by going to a close planet, they won't waste money going to one that is further away. | |
| Apr 4, 2017 at 13:56 | comment | added | LocalFluff | At least the RTG constraint seems to be alleviated already. Production is ramping up to cover foreseen NASA demands for the outer planets and Mars rovers. | |
| Apr 4, 2017 at 13:15 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 587 characters in body
|
| Apr 4, 2017 at 13:06 | comment | added | gerrit | @Tom11 See also space.stackexchange.com/q/17/33 and other rtg questions. | |
| Apr 4, 2017 at 12:27 | history | edited | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added link
|
| Apr 4, 2017 at 11:29 | history | answered | Hobbes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |