Phobos-Grunt: The Mission Poster

<>. Mission Poster for the Russian Phobos-Grunt soil sample return spacecraft set to launch to Mars and its moon Phobos in November 2011. Phobos-Grunt consistes Credit: Roskosmos - Russian Federal Space Agency

[/caption]

Russia is marking the upcoming blastoff of their dauntingly complex Phobos-Grunt sample return mission to the Martian moon Phobos with the release of a quite cool looking mission poster – see above. Phobos-Grunt translates as Phobos-Soil and is due to liftoff on or about November 7, 2011 from the Baikonur Cosmodrome atop a Zenit rocket.

The holy grail of Mars exploration has long been a sample return mission. But with severe cutbacks to NASA’s budget that goal is realistically more than a decade away. That’s why Phobos- Grunt is so exciting from a scientific standpoint.

Phobos-Grunt Orbiter/Lander
Russia's Phobos-Grunt is designed to land on Mars' moon Phobos, collect soil samples and return them to Earth for study. The lander will also carry scientific instrumetns to study Phobos and its environment. It will travel to Mars together with Yinghuo-1, China's first mission to the Red Planet. Credit: NPO Lavochkin

Phobos-Grunt Robotic sampling arm. Credit: Roskosmos

If successful, this audacious probe will retrieve about 200 grams of soil from the diminutive moon Phobos and accomplish the round trip in three years time by August 2014. Scientists speculate that martian dust may coat portions of Phobos and could possibly be mixed in with any returned samples.

Included here are more photos and graphics of the Phobos-Grunt spacecraft which is equipped with two robotic arms and a sampling device to transfer regolith and rocks to the Earth return vehicle and an on board array of some 15 science instruments, including lasers, spectrometers, cameras and a microscope. Readers please feel free to help with Russian translations.

Phobos-Grunt Model
This is a full-scale mockup of Russia's Phobos-Grunt. The spacecraft will collect samples of soil on Mar's moon Phobos and to bring the samples back to Earth for detailed study. Credit: CNES

Phobos-Grunt is the first of Earth’s two missions launching to the Red Planet in 2011. NASA’s Curiosity Mars Science Laboratory is due to lift off on Nov. 25, 2011 from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Read Ken’s continuing features about Phobos-Grunt, Curiosity and Opportunity starting here:
Daring Russian Sample Return mission to Martian Moon Phobos aims for November Liftoff
Assembling Curiosity’s Rocket to Mars
Encapsulating Curiosity for Martian Flight Test
Dramatic New NASA Animation Depicts Next Mars Rover in Action
Opportunity spotted Exploring vast Endeavour Crater from Mars Orbit
Twin Towers 9/11 Tribute by Opportunity Mars Rover
NASA Robot arrives at ‘New’ Landing Site holding Clues to Ancient Water Flow on Mars
Opportunity Arrives at Huge Martian Crater with Superb Science and Scenic Outlook
Opportunity Snaps Gorgeous Vistas nearing the Foothills of Giant Endeavour Crater

Was the “First Photographed UFO” a Comet?

First photograph of a UFO sighting, taken 12 August 1883 by Jose Bonilla.
First photograph of a UFO sighting, taken 12 August 1883 by Jose Bonilla.

[/caption]

On August 12th, 1883, Mexican astronomer José Bonilla was preparing to study the Sun at the recently opened Zacatecas Observatory. However, the Sun’s surface was marred by numerous objects quickly travelling across its disk. Over the course of the day and the next, Bonilla exposed several wet plates to take images of the 447 objects he would observe. They weren’t released publicly until January 1st, 1886 when they were published in the magazine L’Astronomie. Since then, UFOlogists have crowed these photographs as the first photographic evidence of UFOs. The chief editor of L’Astronomie passed the observations off as migrating animals, but a new study proposes the observation was due to the breakup of a comet that nearly hit us.

The only piece of evidence the authors, led by Hector Manterola at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, use to suggest that this was a comet in the process of breaking up, was the descriptions of the objects as being “fuzzy” in nature and leaving dark trails behind them. Assuming this were the case, the authors consider how close the object would have been. Since astronomers at observatories in Mexico City, or Puebla had not reported the objects, this would imply that they did not cross the disc of the Sun from these locations due to parallax. As such, the maximum distance the object could have been is roughly 80,000 km, roughly 1/5th the distance to the moon.

But the team suggests the fragments may have passed even closer. By the time comets reach the inner solar system, they have a significant velocity of some tens of kilometers per second. In such a case, to transverse the disc of the Sun in the time reported by Bonilla (a third to a full second), the object would have been, at most, at a distance of ~8,000km.

At such distances, the overall size of the fragments would be in rough agreement of sizes of other fragmented comets such as 73P/Schwassmann-Wachmann 3, which gave off several fragments in 2006. Based on the number of fragments, estimated sizes, and density of an average comet, the authors estimate that the mass may be anywhere between 2 x 1012 and 8 x 1015 kg. While this is a very large range (three orders of magnitude), it roughly brackets the range of known comets, again making it plausible. The upper range of this mass estimate is on par with Mars’ moon Deimos, which is generally held to be similar in mass to the progenitor of the impact that killed the dinosaurs.

One oddity is that one would likely expect such a close breakup to result in a meteor storm. The timing of these events is just before the annual Perseid meteor shower, but reports for that year, such as this one, do not depict it as being exceptional, or having a different radiant than should be expected. Instead, it notes that 157 of the 186 meteors observed on the 11th were definitively Perseids, and that the “year’s display cannot be reckoned as a fine one by any means.” Meanwhile, the Leonid meteor shower (peaking in November), was exceptional that year, generating an estimated 1,000 meteors an hour, but again, no records seem to indicate an unusual origin.

In total, I find the characterization of Bonilla’s observation as a comet plausible, but generally unconvincing. However, if it were a fragmented comet, we’re very lucky it wasn’t any closer.

Pluto or Eris: Which is Bigger?

Hubble image of Pluto and some of its moons, Charon, Nix and Hydra. Image Credit: NASA, ESA, H. Weaver (JHU/APL), A. Stern (SwRI), and the HST Pluto Companion Search Team

[/caption]

The controversy between Pluto and Eris regarding their status as “largest dwarf planet” continues. During a joint meeting of the American Astronomical Society Division for Planetary Sciences and the European Planetary Science Congress last week in Nantes, France, new data was presented that may help settle the debate. The new findings regarding this size of Eris may be a surprise to some, and to others a confirmation of what was believed to be true.

How were astronomers able to make the new measurements of Eris, and what implications will these new measurements have on the Pluto / Eris debate?

Using a celestial alignment known as an occultation, Bruno Sicardy of the Paris Observatory (University of Pierre and Marie Curie, France) and his team were able calculate the diameter of Eris in 2010. The occultation was caused by Eris moving past a background star, which blocked the star’s light and cast a small shadow on Earth. When Sicardy and his team compared the shadow’s size at two different sites in Chile, the calculations provided a diameter of 2,326 kilometers for Eris. A previous study by Sicardy in 2009 placed Pluto’s diameter to be at least 2,338 kilometers.

However, the first estimates of Eris’ size that were made shortly after its discovery put the diameter at 3,000 km, plus or minus 400 km. But a later estimate from observations with the Hubble Space Telescope said Eris might be 2,400 km in diameter, plus or minus 100 km.

If Sicardy’s data calculations hold true, this places Pluto and Eris at nearly the exact same diameter. What has continued to not be up for debate, however, is that Eris is far more massive than Pluto. Given a nearly identical diameter for Eris and Pluto, Eris’s extra mass makes it the denser of the two dwarf planets. According to Sicardy and his team the increased density of Eris, “indicates that Eris is mainly composed of rocky material, with a relatively thin ice mantle.” Since Pluto’s density indicates it comprised of about equal parts ice and rock, Eris’s extra mass would appear to validate Sicardy’s assertion.

Eris and its moon, Dysnomia. Credit: NASA, ESA, and M. Brown (California Institute of Technology)

The Co-discoverer of Eris, and noted “Plutokiller” Mike Brown (Caltech) offers an interesting thought regarding the Pluto / Eris Debate:

“Scientifically, knowing which one is bigger will teach us…. absolutely nothing. The fact that they are nearly identical in size is scientifically interesting; which one is a few kilometers bigger than the other matters not one bit.” Brown also added, “But, still, I will admit to having a bit of an emotional attachment to Eris, so, deep down inside, I want to believe it will turn out to be a little bigger.

You can read a brief synopsis of Sicardy’s findings at: http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EPSC-DPS2011/EPSC-DPS2011-137-8.pdf

If you’d like to learn more about the Pluto / Eris debate, Brown has some great thoughts regarding the debate on his blog at: http://www.mikebrownsplanets.com/2010/11/how-big-is-pluto-anyway.html

Amateur Captures Coronal Mass Ejection

Full DisK H-Alpha Solar Image on October 13, 2011 - Credit: Joe Brimacombe

While you can’t exactly call Joe Brimacombe an amateur astrophotographer, he’s managed to capture an elusive solar event on film… a coronal mass ejection!

A huge, conical-shaped magnetic prominence had been lingering for days and calling attention to itself. On the morning of October 13, 2011 – it delivered.

According to SpaceWeather, much of the prominence fell back to the solar surface, but some of the structure did fly into space, producing a coronal mass ejection. SOHO coronagraphs of the CME show that it is propagating up and out of the plane of the solar system and chances are good that no planet will be hit by the expanding cloud.

But that’s professional instruments! Imagine the excitement between 0200 and 0345 UT at Coral Towers Observatory when Joe was using either a Takahashi Sky 90 or Astrophysics 130 telescope to capture the action! Both telescopes operate at a focal ratio of F/5 and he was using a Coronado Solar Filter and various Skynyx cameras.

Doing what space telescopes do!

Many thanks to Joe Brimacombe for sharing his work – and passion – with us!

Guest Post: NASA’s Sample Return Robot Challenge

Editor’s note: This guest post was written by Andy Tomaswick, an electrical engineer who follows space science and technology.

Imagine a rover on the Moon nimbly gliding around boulders and crevices until it finds something that looks interesting. It stops to pick up a sample and then rushes back to its home platform only to venture out again soon. Now imagine that it was doing all of this without any humans telling it to.

That’s the idea behind NASA’s new Sample Return Robot Challenge, part of its Centennial Challenge program. The space agency announced a potential $1.5 million prize for what it terms “an autonomous robotic system to locate and collect a set of specific sample types from a large planetary analog area and then return the samples to the starting zone.”


NASA recently released a set of rules that requires the participating robots to go big. Like 80,000 square meters big. That’s the amount of area of rough terrain, complete with trees and creeks, the autonomous bots will have to cover in order to find different samples spread randomly throughout.

Teams will collect those samples during two different levels of competition. Level one will require the participants to retrieve a randomly placed sample with a distinct packaging. The second level, and the one that pays the most cash prizes, requires the recovery of different types of samples, including ones specifically designed to test a team’s pattern recognition skills.

The competition is open to everyone and teams have until the end of the year to register. The event is expected to be held next year at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts. If one a team manages to win the prize, NASA’s dream of autonomous rovers won’t be too far off.

Source: NASA

Help Give the Very Large Array a New Name

The innermost antennae along the north arm of the Very Large Array, superimposed upon a false-color representation of a radio (red) and optical (blue) image of the radio galaxy 3C31. Image courtesy of NRAO/AUI

[/caption]

The iconic Very Large Array is almost as much pop culture as science instrument. It’s been part of movie plots, on album covers, in comic books and video games. But now, the VLA is being transformed from its original 1970s-vintage technology with state-of-the-art equipment. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory says that the upgrades will increase the VLA’s technical capabilities by factors of as much as 8,000 and greatly increasing the array’s scientific impact.

And so to befit the VLA’s new capabilities, NRAO has decided the array should have a new name. And they are looking for some help from the public.

The Very Large Array CREDIT: NRAO/AUI/NSF

There is a special website, namethearray.org, where you can submit a name suggestion. You may enter a free-form name, or a word or phrase to come as a prefix before “Very Large Array,” or both.

Entries will be accepted until 23:59 EST on December 1, 2011, and the new name will be announced at NRAO’s Town Hall at the American Astronomical Society’s meeting in Austin, Texas, on Tuesday, January 10, 2012.

“The VLA Expansion Project, begun in 2000, has increased the VLA’s technical capabilities by factors of as much as 8,000, and the new system allows scientists to do things they never could do before,” said Fred K.Y. Lo, Director of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory. “After more than three decades on the frontiers of science, the VLA now is poised for a new era as one of the world’s premier tools for meeting the challenges of 21st-Century astrophysics.”

Source: NRAO

A 3-D Look At Europe’s New Galileo Satellite Navigation System

The European Union and European Space Agency (ESA) will launch the first components next week of the €20 billion Galileo global navigation satellite system. This constellation of satellites will allow users to pinpoint their location anywhere on Earth. It will be a free, fully autonomous and interoperable worldwide satellite navigation system, broadcasting global navigation signals for high-performance services, which ESA says possesses the service integrity guarantees that GPS lacks for commercial and safety-critical services.

The first launch is scheduled for October 20, 2011. This 3-D video provides an overview of the system. Use red/blue 3D glasses to watch in 3D.

Missing Black Holes

Artists concept of a black hole.

[/caption]

As astronomers began working out how stars die, they expected that the mass of remnants, whether white dwarfs, neutron stars, or black holes, should be essentially continuous. In other words, there should be a smooth distribution of remnant masses from a fraction of a solar mass, up to nearly 100 times the mass of the sun. Yet observations have shown a distinct lack of objects at the borderline of neutron stars and black holes weighing 2-5 solar masses. So where have they all gone and what might this imply about the explosions that create such objects?

The gap was first noted in 1998 and was originally attributed to a lack of observations of black holes at the time. But in the past 13 years, the gap has held up.

In an attempt to explain this, a new study has been conducted by a team of astronomers led by Krzystof Belczynski at Warsaw University. Following the recent observations, the team assumed the paucity was not caused by a lack of observations or selection effect, but rather, there simply weren’t many objects in this mass range.

Instead, the team looked at the engines of supernovae that would create such objects. Stars less than ~20 solar masses are expected to explode into supernovae, leaving behind neutron stars, while ones greater than 40 solar masses should collapse directly into black holes with little to no fanfare. Stars between these ranges were expected to fill this gap of 2-5 solar mass remnants.

The new study proposes that the gap is created by a fickle switch in the supernova explosion process. In general, supernovae occur when the cores are filled with iron which can no longer create energy through fusion. When this happens, the pressure supporting the star’s mass disappears and the outer layers collapse onto the immensely dense core. This creates a shockwave which is reflected by the core and rushes outwards, slamming into more collapsing material and creates a stalemate, where the outwards pressure balances the infalling material. For the supernova to proceed, that outwards shockwave needs an extra boost.

While astronomers disagree on exactly what might cause this revitalization, some suggest that it is generated as the core, superheated to hundreds of billions of degrees, emits neutrinos. Under normal densities, these particles travel right past most matter, but in the superdense regions inside the supernova, many are captured, reheating the material and driving the shockwave back out to create the event we observe as a supernova.

Regardless of what causes it, the team suggests that this point is critical for the final mass of the object. If it explodes, much of the mass of the progenitor will be lost, pushing it towards a neutron star. If it fails to push outwards, the material collapses and enters the event horizon, piling on mass and driving the final mass upwards. It’s an all or nothing moment.

And moment is a good description of how fast this occurs. At most, astronomers suggest that this interplay between the outwards shock and the inwards collapse takes a single second. Other models place the timescale at a tenth of a second. The new study notes that the more quickly the decision takes place, the more pronounced the gap is in the resulting objects. As such, the fact that the gap exists may be taken as evidence for this being a split second decision.

America vs. Astronaut: The Case of the Lifted Lunar Camera

Apollo 14 astronaut Ed Mitchell on the Moon, February 5, 1971. Credit: NASA.

[/caption]

Imagine you’re an astronaut. You have what it takes to be selected to fly a mission to the Moon. You train, make the trip, and become one of literally a handful of humans ever to have walked on the lunar surface. And when you leave the desolate beauty of the Moon behind in your Landing Module, and are just about to re-enter the Lunar Orbiter and head for home, you see one of the cameras that you used on the surface. If you leave it where it is it’s going to be lost forever, crashing into the lunar surface with the rest of the lander. If you take it, you’ll be going against standard NASA operating procedure since you hadn’t filled out the proper paperwork beforehand for official mission items appropriated by astronauts. Leave a piece of history behind to be destroyed or salvage it as a souvenir… what do you do?

Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell decided to bring the camera back, and now, 40 years later, his decision is going to land him in court.

Last June, the U.S. government brought a case against the 81-year-old moonwalker after he offered the 16-millimeter Data Acquisition Camera (DAC) up for sale at New York’s Bonhams auction house as part of their May “Space History Sale”. While it was common for Apollo astronauts to be able to keep various pieces of equipment and space suits as mementos after their missions, certain paperwork had to be filled out beforehand… it’s just the NASA way.

The late Donald “Deke” Slayton, head of the astronaut corps in 1971, mentioned this during an interview with the Tuscon Daily Citizen in 1972.

“They give me a list of things they’re going to bring back,” Slayton said. “I give it to the program office and they bring ’em back.”

This Data Acquisition Camera (DAC) was one of two 16mm cameras on the Apollo 14 lunar module "Antares" when it landed on the moon on Feb, 5, 1971. Credit: Bonhams.

The DAC, it seems, was not on any lists handed in by Mitchell. Yet it was never intended to be on the ride back to Earth, either. Rather its destination was to be in the bottom of a crater made by the landing module when it crashed back onto the Moon.

Must have seemed a rather wasteful end for a historic – and valuable – piece of equipment. Were it to go to auction it could have fetched between $60,000 to $80,000.

“We had an agreement with NASA management, that small items that didn’t exceed our weight limitations, we could bring back.”

– Edgar Mitchell to WPTV

Regardless of its value – sentimental or otherwise – NASA’s lawyer claims that Mitchell was contacted several times about returning the camera but never responded. Mitchell’s attorney, on the other hand, argues that too many years have passed for NASA to now claim the camera as stolen property.

When it was brought before a Florida district court judge to have the case dismissed, however, the judge had no option but to side with the government.

“‘It is well settled that the United States is not bound by state statutes of limitation or subject to the defense of laches in enforcing its rights,'” quoted Judge Daniel Hurley of an appeals court ruling. “Defendant’s allegations that NASA intended the camera to be destroyed after the mission or that it routinely awarded used mission equipment to astronauts do not preclude as a matter of law Plaintiff’s contrary allegation that Defendant impermissibly converted the camera.”

Bottom line: the case goes in front of a jury in October 2012.

Read more about this on collectSPACE.com.

New Dark Matter Census – The Hubble Survey

This image of galaxy cluster MACS J1206.2-0847 is part of a broad survey with NASA's Hubble Space Telescope. Credit: NASA, ESA, M. Postman (STScI), and the CLASH Team

[/caption]

Way off in the constellation of Virgo, galaxy cluster MACS J1206.2-0847 -or MACS 1206 for short – is making news as the forerunner of a brand new Hubble Space Telescope survey. What’s new for the aging telescope? Now astronomers are able to assemble a highly detailed dark matter map… one that involves more galaxy clusters than ever before.

These “dark matter” maps are proving their worth by allowing astronomers to test some theories. In this case, it’s some unusual findings which suggest dark matter is more densely packed inside galaxy clusters than some models predict. If this holds true, it may point to evidence that galaxy clusters pulled together sooner than once predicted. The multiwavelength survey, called the Cluster Lensing And Supernova survey with Hubble (CLASH), takes an unprecedented look at the distribution of dark matter in 25 massive clusters of galaxies.

“The era when the first clusters formed is not precisely known, but is estimated to be at least 9 billion years ago and possibly as far back as 12 billion years ago.” says the Hubble team. “If most of the clusters in the CLASH survey are found to have excessively high accumulations of dark matter in their central cores, then it may yield new clues to the early stages in the origin of structure in the universe.”

To date, the CLASH team has finished their observations of six of the 25 clusters. Of these, MACS 1206 has a distance of about 4.5 billion light-years and was photographed with Hubble’s Advanced Camera for Surveys and the Wide Field Camera 3 in April 2011 through July 2011. What are the strange shapes? These “distortions” are where the light is bent by the extreme gravitation of dark matter.

“Lensing effects can also produce multiple images of the same distant object, as evident in this Hubble picture. In particular, the apparent numbers and shapes of distant galaxies far beyond a galaxy cluster become distorted as the light passes through, yielding a visible measurement of how much mass is in the intervening cluster and how it is distributed.” says the team. “The substantial lensing distortions seen are proof that the dominant component of clusters is dark matter. The distortions would be far weaker if the clusters’ gravity came only from the visible galaxies in the clusters.”

Original Story Source: Hubble News Release.