According to Space.com's article Juno Phones Home: Jupiter Probe Reconnects with Earth After 8th Flyby, Juno's recent close flyby of Jupiter and data collection happened while Jupiter was too close to the Sun as seen from Earth for the data to be reliably received by the Deep Space Network.

Here is a GIF made from some SOHO LASCO C3 images; you can see Jupiter disappear behind the central occultation disk that protects each SOHO imager from the Sun. (Incidentally, that's Comet 96P on the right; see the NASA Goddard feature Return of the Comet: 96P Spotted by ESA, NASA Satellites.)

enter image description here

Solar conjunctions of Jupiter — when Earth's and Jupiter's orbits take the planets on opposite sides of the sun — mean that a spacecraft orbiting Jupiter can't transmit to Earth without the charged particles the sun emits corrupting the probe's signal. The last solar conjunction of Jupiter was in August 2015, before Juno had arrived at Jupiter, and the next will be in November 2018, according to in-the-sky.org.

Of course the article is wrong, and the previous conjunction would have been in 2016.

I've plotted the angles below; it looks like about 1.5 degrees is too close, but 4 degrees is OK. Those correspond to a closest approach of the line-of sight to the surface of the Sun of 3 vs 10 million kilometers.

Question: Is this a simple plasma density effect? When the line-of-sight passes too close to the Sun the cut-off frequency drops below that used by the spacectraft for downlink? Is the density of the solar wind at this distance quantitatively high enough to become opaque at this frequency? Or is the problem more complicated, and perhaps also involves too much dispersion? Or perhaps a geometrical problem; it's too hard to point so close to the Sun without equipment damage, or even a radio interference problem; there is too much spillover of radio noise from the Sun and the weak spacecraft signal can not be separated well enough to allow for a high-bandwidth downlink?

note: I'm looking for some level of explanation, and not just an answer that says "Because of interference from the Sun." Thanks!

Plot of calculated positions and separation using the python package Skyfield. I'm not sure of the exact time of the beginning of successful downlink, so I've just added seven days to the time of flyby (estimated from JPL's Horizons.)

Tiny dots are spaced at 1 day intervals, medium-sized red dot on the left is the moment of flyby, large-sized green dot near the right is roughly the time of successful downlink.

enter image description here

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

from skyfield.api import Loader  # http://rhodesmill.org/skyfield/

degs = 180./np.pi

load = Loader('~/Documents/SkyData')
data = load('de421.bsp')
ts   = load.timescale()
sun, earth, jupiter = data['sun'], data['earth'], data['jupiter barycenter']

ddays = np.arange(0, 10, 0.1)  # ten days by 0.1 day steps

times = ts.utc(2017, 10, 24+ddays, 17, 44) # with respect to 17:44 UTC, October 24th, 2017

observations = [earth.at(times).observe(thing) for thing in sun, jupiter]
separation   = degs*observations[1].separation_from(observations[0]).radians

if True:
    fig = plt.figure()

    ax1 = fig.add_subplot(2, 1, 1)

    for obs in observations:
        RAdegs, Decdegs = [degs*thing.radians for thing in obs.radec()[:2]]
        ax1.plot(RAdegs, Decdegs)
        ax1.plot(RAdegs[::10],  Decdegs[::10],  '.k'                 )
        ax1.plot(RAdegs[:1],    Decdegs[:1],    'or', markersize =  8)
        ax1.plot(RAdegs[70:71], Decdegs[70:71], 'og', markersize = 12)

    ax1.set_xlim(208, 220)
    ax1.set_ylim(-16, -10)
    ax1.set_aspect(1.0) # https://stackoverflow.com/a/18576329/3904031
    ax1.set_xlabel('RA (degs)')
    ax1.set_ylabel('Dec (degs)')
    ax1.set_title('Sun and Jupiter observed from Earth geocenter, start 2017-10-24, 17:44 UTC')
    ax1.text(212, -11, 'Sun')
    ax1.text(212, -14, 'Jupiter')

    ax2  = fig.add_subplot(2, 1, 2)

    ax2.plot(ddays, separation)
    ax2.plot(ddays[:1],    separation[:1],    'or', markersize =  8)
    ax2.plot(ddays[70:71], separation[70:71], 'og', markersize = 12)
    ax2.set_xlim(-0.5, None)
    ax2.set_ylim(0, None)
    ax2.set_xlabel('days since flyby')
    ax2.set_ylabel('Jupiter/Sun separation (degs)')

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe someone can find a reference, but I always thought it was because: 1) the Sun is noisy at the frequency used in communications, so you cannot hear the signal above the noise, 2) it's not good to point a parabolic "reflector" at the Sun, otherwise you will burn up the receiver situated at the focus. $\endgroup$ – JohnHoltz Nov 7 '17 at 1:06
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnHoltz I believe (though haven't verified that) the dishes surface is not "shiny" or specular to visible or IR sunlight, so it won't concentrate or focus heat on the waveguides even when pointed directly at the Sun. You can see some photos of the DSN's 70 meter dish at Goldstone in this question. The optics of the dishes are pretty good, and generally can reject radio sources much much less than 1 degree away, looking for a reference for this. $\endgroup$ – uhoh Nov 7 '17 at 10:03
  • $\begingroup$ "The first solar radar echoes were detected by a research group at Stanford University in 1959." see. If radar signals are reflected, data transmission signals may be blocked if the Sun is between transmitter and receiver. $\endgroup$ – Uwe Dec 4 '17 at 10:43
  • $\begingroup$ @Uwe but the problem discussed here is when the line of sight passes near the Sun (of order 1 to 4 degrees) but not necessarily through the Sun. Of course I understand that the signals can not go directly through the sun! $\endgroup$ – uhoh Dec 4 '17 at 10:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You may be interested in the DSN Link Design Handbook, module 105. $\endgroup$ – TonioElGringo Mar 2 '18 at 13:37

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.