Time To Build A Venus Rover

The planet Venus, as imaged by the Magellan 10 mission. Credit: NASA/JPL
The planet Venus, as imaged by the Magellan 10 mission. The planet's inhospitable surface makes exploration extremely difficult. Credit: NASA/JPL

Venus is often described as being hell itself, because of its crushing pressure, acidic atmosphere, and extremely high temperatures. Dealing with any one of these is a significant challenge when it comes to exploring Venus. Dealing with all three is extremely daunting, as the Soviet Union discovered with their Venera landers.

Actually, dealing with the sulphuric rain is not too difficult, but the heat and the pressure on the surface of Venus are huge hurdles to exploring the planet. NASA has been working on the Venus problem, trying to develop electronics that can survive long enough to do useful science. And it looks like they’re making huge progress.

Scientists at the NASA Glenn Research Centre have demonstrated electronic circuitry that should help open up the surface of Venus to exploration.

The first color pictures taken of the surface of Venus by the Venera-13 space probe. Credit: NASA
The first color pictures taken of the surface of Venus by the Venera-13 space probe. The Venera 13 probe lasted only 127 minutes before succumbing to Venus’s extreme surface environment. Credit: NASA

“With further technology development, such electronics could drastically improve Venus lander designs and mission concepts, enabling the first long-duration missions to the surface of Venus,” said Phil Neudeck, lead electronics engineer for this work.

With our current technology, landers can only withstand surface conditions on Venus for a few hours. You can’t do much science in a few hours, especially when weighed against the mission cost. So increasing the survivability of a Venus lander is crucial.

With a temperature of 460 degrees Celsius (860 degrees Fahrenheit), Venus is almost twice as hot as most ovens. It’s hot enough to melt lead, in fact. Not only that, but the surface pressure on Venus is about 90 times greater than Earth’s, because the atmosphere is so dense.

To protect the electronics on previous Venus landers, they have been contained inside special vessels designed to withstand the pressure and temperature. But these vessels add a lot of mass to the mission, and make sending landers to Venus a very expensive proposition. So NASA’s work on robust electronics is super important when it comes to exploring Venus.

The team at the Glenn Research Centre has developed silicon carbide semiconductor integrated circuits (Si C IC) that are extremely robust. Two of the circuits were tested inside a special chamber designed to precisely reproduce the conditions on Venus. This chamber is called the Glenn Extreme Environments Rig (GEER.)

The GEER (Glenn Extreme Environments Rig) facility can recreate the conditions of any body in our Solar System. (No, not the Sun, obviously.) Image: NASA/Glenn Research Centre
The GEER (Glenn Extreme Environments Rig) facility can recreate the conditions of any body in our Solar System. (No, not the Sun, obviously.) Image: NASA/Glenn Research Centre

GEER is a special chamber that can recreate the conditions on any body in our Solar System. It’s an 800 Litre (28 cubic foot) chamber that can simulate temperatures up to 500° C (932° F), and pressures from near-vacuum to over 90 times the surface pressure of Earth. GEER can also simulate exotic atmospheres with its precision gas-mixing capabilities. It can mix very specific quantities of gases down to parts per million accuracy. For these tests, that means the unit had to reproduce an accurate recipe of CO2, N2, SO2, HF, HCl, CO, OCS, H2S, and H2O, down to very tiny quantities. And the tests were a success.

“We demonstrated vastly longer electrical operation with chips directly exposed — no cooling and no protective chip packaging — to a high-fidelity physical and chemical reproduction of Venus’ surface atmosphere,” Neudeck said. “And both integrated circuits still worked after the end of the test.”

In fact, the two circuits not only functioned after the test was completed, but they withstood Venus-like conditions for 521 hours. That’s more than 100 times longer than previous demonstrations of electronics designed for Venus missions.

A before (top) and after (bottom) image of the electronics after being tested in Venus atmospheric conditions. Image: NASA
A before (top) and after (bottom) image of the electronics after being tested in Venus atmospheric conditions. Image: NASA

The circuits themselves were originally designed to operate in the extremely high temperatures inside aircraft engines. “This work not only enables the potential for new science in extended Venus surface and other planetary exploration, but it also has potentially significant impact for a range of Earth relevant applications, such as in aircraft engines to enable new capabilities, improve operations, and reduce emissions,” said Gary Hunter, principle investigator for Venus surface electronics development.”

The chips themselves were very simple. They weren’t prototypes of any specific electronics that would be equipped on a Venus lander. What these tests showed is that the new Silicon Carbide Integrated Circuits (Si C IC) can withstand the conditions on Venus.

A host of other challenges remains when it comes to the overall success of a Venus lander. All of the equipment that has to operate there, like sensors, drills, and atmospheric samplers, still has to survive the thermal expansion from exposure to extremely high temperature. Robust new designs will be required in many cases. But this successful test of electronics that can survive without bulky, heavy, protective enclosures is definitely a leap forward.

If you’re interested in what a Venus lander might look like, check out the Venus Sail Rover concept.

Watch the Curiosity Rover Roll Across Mars’ Surface

The Mars rover Curiosity on the road to Hematite Ridge. Credit: NASA/JPl-Caltech/MSSS/Seán Doran.

We all love the ‘selfies’ the Curiosity rover takes of itself sitting on Mars. We love them because it’s so amazing to see a human-made object on another world, and these images give us hope that one day we might have pictures of ourselves standing on the surface of the Red Planet.

But wouldn’t it be great if we see Curiosity ‘in action’ on Mars, and be like a fly on a rock, watching the rover roll past us?

Thanks to creative artist Seán Doran, we can do just that. Take a look at this absolutely amazing video Seán created, using real images of the Mars landscape from Curiosity and the HiRISE camera on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, with a GCI Curiosity roving around.

Naukluft Traverse 1080

Please note that Curiosity doesn’t actually move this fast, as in the video it is going about 8 kph, whereas in reality, the rover travels at a top speed of about .16 kph. But still, this is just fantastic!

“As much as I enjoy looking at the images from Mars, it is difficult to get a real sense of the scene as there is no obvious Earthly scale cue,” Seán told Universe Today via email. “No trees, plants, buildings or humans. So, I decided to put Curiosity into her own photographs to help us relate to them.”

Seán has provided a glimpse at how to do this, and says there are two ways of achieving these results.

One, is the easy way:

Create a photomosaic of a scene where tracks are present.

https://flic.kr/p/FnJqxE

Render a 3D model of Curiosity to the same relative angle of the tracks and composite this into the image.

https://flic.kr/p/GfSDzm

Or, there’s the hard way, a process which allows Seán to ‘drive’ Curiosity across the field of view of any photomosaic the rover has taken, whether there are tracks or not. This process involves using the what are called Digital Terrain Model (DTM) data from HiRISE, which provide elevation and terrain information (more info about DTMs in our recent article here) and by mapping with a virtual camera.

Here is an example:

https://flic.kr/p/JefsHi

You can see Doran’s work on this model in Sketchfab, which he has been putting together for several months.

But to make everything realistic, your virtual rover needs to be the right size and even the right weight.

“It is critical to accurately determine the size of Curiosity in the virtual scene and this is done by comparing images of the rover taken by HiRISE and making sure they match,” Seán said. “By matching the viewpoint and the field of view it is possible to derive an accurate scale for Curiosity at any point in the scene.”

So by using this view from HiRISE of Curiosity sitting on the Naukluft Plateau:

HiRISE image of the Curiosity rover on the surface of Mars, on the Naukluft Plateau. Credit: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona

And then using Curiosity’s image of the same location, he can put a true-to-size rover in the image:

A true-to-size CGI rover inserted in the view of the Naukluft Plateau. Credit: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona/Seán Doran.

Then he ‘builds’ the route and terrain to make it even more realistic.

“Before I drive Curiosity I need to build a rocky collision course so she can physically interact with the environment,” he said. “This really helps to sell the final shot.”

Simulated terrain and rover on the Naukluft Plateau. Credit: Seán Doran.

Then Seán builds a ‘car rig’ for Curiosity and drives her across the scene, in line with the actual route taken. Seán says good choices for doing this are using MadCar and DriveMaster for 3DS Max.

Simulated Curiosity rover on the Martian terrain, created using MadCar & DriveMaster for 3DS Max. Credit: Seán Doran.

Then he takes a look at the big picture, taking the HiRISE image of the area and using the DTM files to create elevation and texture, and adds the route the rover will take so he knows where to ‘drive’ the rover:

Full extent of Naukluft Plateau built with HiRISE elevation and texture data, with the route superimposed. Credit: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona/Seán Doran.

Then comes the time-consuming part, where once he has a good animation, he needs to render out each shot, plus he matches the Sun position so the virtual shadows cast will match those in the photomosaic. (Wow!)

Simulated rover and terrain with position of the Sun. Credit: Seán Doran.

“I render separate passes for the background photomosaic and the foreground Curiosity,” Seán explained. “The HiRISE physics model is rendered with a Shadow Matte material which only catches shadows, this enables the rover to be easily blended in the final stage of the build.”

Then, everything is brought together in Adobe After Effects, where further image processing is used to blend both render elements together.

Simulated rover inserted in the scene with Adobe After Effects. Credit: Seán Doran.

We thank Seán Doran not only for completing this intricate process we can all enjoy, but for sharing the details!

“There is nothing trivial about building these assets, they are made out of fascination with the material and desire to communicate the excitement of being ‘present’ on another planet,” Seán said. “But I think it a great way to help people engage with such an exciting mission.”

More views from the video:

https://flic.kr/p/PUAbxN

https://flic.kr/p/Q1isdt

You can see many more images of Curiosity from Doran’s Flickr account, and his Sketchfab account has a lot of VR-ready content to explore.

Doran’s Gigapan account has extremely high resolution images of Gale Crater built using HiRISE data.

And to see his latest work and follow what he is currently working on, follow Seán Doran on Twitter: @_TheSeaning

Weekly Space Hangout – February 10, 2017: Weekend Eclipse, Occultation and Comet 45P!

Host: Fraser Cain (@fcain)

Guests:

Paul M. Sutter (pmsutter.com / @PaulMattSutter)
Morgan Rehnberg (MorganRehnberg.com / @MorganRehnberg)
Dave Dickinson (www.astroguyz.com / @astroguyz)

Their stories this week:

Comet 45P Flies Past Earth

A new “kind” of black hole

A Penumbral Lunar Eclipse

The Moon Occults Regulus

Mars didn’t have enough CO2 to sustain liquid water

ISS is getting a commercial airlock

We use a tool called Trello to submit and vote on stories we would like to see covered each week, and then Fraser will be selecting the stories from there. Here is the link to the Trello WSH page (http://bit.ly/WSHVote), which you can see without logging in. If you’d like to vote, just create a login and help us decide what to cover!

If you would like to join the Weekly Space Hangout Crew, visit their site here and sign up. They’re a great team who can help you join our online discussions!

If you would like to sign up for the AstronomyCast Solar Eclipse Escape, where you can meet Fraser and Pamela, plus WSH Crew and other fans, visit our site linked above and sign up!

We record the Weekly Space Hangout every Friday at 12:00 pm Pacific / 3:00 pm Eastern. You can watch us live on Universe Today, or the Universe Today YouTube page<

This Is The Highest Resolution Image Of Europa We Have … For Now

Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
This is the highest resolution image taken by Galileo at Europa — Jupiter’s 4th largest moon — until our next mission to the planet. It was obtained at an original image scale of 19 feet (6 meters) per pixel. The gray line down the middle resulted from missing data that was not transmitted by Galileo. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

In the movie 2010: The Year We Make Contact, the sequel to Stanley’s Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, black Monoliths multiply, converge and transform Jupiter into a new star. We next hear astronaut David Bowman’s disembodied voice with this message: “All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there.” The newborn sun warms Europa, transforming the icy landscape into a primeval jungle. At the end, a single Monolith appears in the swamp, waiting once again to direct the evolution of intelligent life forms.

Europa’s cracked, icy surface imaged by NASA’s Galileo spacecraft in 1998. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SETI Institute

Stay away from Europa? No way. It’s just too fascinating a place with its jigsaw-puzzle ice sheets, crisscross valleys, miles of ice on top and a warm, salty ocean below. The movie was prescient — if you’re going to search for life elsewhere in the solar system, Europa’s one of the best candidates.

While we’ve sent spacecraft to photograph and study the icy moon during orbital flybys, no lander has yet to touch the surface. That may change soon. In early 2016, in response to a congressional directive, NASA’s Planetary Science Division began a pre-Phase A study to assess the science value and engineering design of a future Europa lander mission. In June 2016, NASA convened a 21-member team of scientists for the Science Definition Team (SDT). The team put together set of science objectives and measurements for the mission concept and submitted the report to NASA on Feb. 7.

This artist’s rendering illustrates a conceptual design for a potential future mission to land a robotic probe on the surface of Jupiter’s moon Europa. The lander is shown with a sampling arm extended, having previously excavated a small area on the surface. The circular dish on top is a combo high-gain antenna and camera mast, with stereo imaging cameras mounted on the back of the antenna. Three vertical shapes located around the top center of the lander are attachment points for cables that would lower the rover from a sky crane, the planned landing system for this mission concept. Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech

The report lists three science goals for the mission. The primary goal is to search for evidence of life on Europa. The other goals are to determine the habitability of Europa by directly analyzing material from the surface, and to characterize the surface and subsurface to support future robotic exploration of Europa and its ocean.

This image from NASA’s Galileo spacecraft show the intricate detail of Europa’s icy surface. The red staining occurs in areas where briny waters from below — possibly mixed with sulfur — reach the surface. Radiation from Jupiter bombards the material, causing it to redden. Gravitational flexing of the moon as it orbits Jupiter fractures the icy crust into a chaotic landscape of snaking valleys and ice sheets. It also warms the ocean beneath the crust, potentially making it habitable. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

The evidence is quite strong that Europa, with a diameter of 1,945 miles — slightly smaller than Earth’s moon —  has a global saltwater ocean beneath its icy crust. This ocean has at least twice as much water as Earth’s oceans. Two things make Europa’s ocean unique and give the moon a greater chance of supporting microbial life compared to say, Ganymede and Enceladus, which also hold water reservoirs beneath their crusts.

Astronomers hypothesize that chloride salts bubble up from the icy moon’s global liquid ocean and reach the frozen surface where they are bombarded with sulfur from volcanoes on Jupiter’s innermost large moon Io. Molecular signs of life may be transported where they could be detected by a spacecraft.  In this illustration, we see Europa (foreground), Jupiter (right) and Io (middle). Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

One: the ocean is relatively close to the surface, just 10-15 miles below the moon’s icy shell. Radiation from Jupiter (high-speed electrons and protons) bombards ice, sulfur and salts on the surface to create compounds that could trickle down into warmer regions and used by living things for growth and metabolism.

Broken plates and blocks of water ice now frozen in place in Europa’s crust suggest they floated freely for a time. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Two: While recent discoveries have shown that many bodies in the solar system either have subsurface oceans now, or may have in the past, Europa is one of only two places where the ocean appears to be in contact with a rocky seafloor (the other being Saturn’s moon Enceladus). This rare circumstance makes Europa one of the highest priority targets in the search for present-day life beyond Earth.

On Earth, chemical interactions between life and lifeless rock in deep oceans and within the outer crust provide the energy needed to power and sustain microbial life. For all we know, deep sea volcanoes belch essential elements into the salty waters spawned by the constant flexing and heating of the moon as it orbits Jupiter every 85 hours.

 

This mosaic of images includes the most detailed view of the surface of Jupiter’s moon Europa obtained by NASA’s Galileo mission. This observation was taken with the sun relatively high in the sky, so most of the brightness variations are due to color differences in the surface material rather than shadows. Ridge tops, brightened by frost, contrast with darker valleys, perhaps due to small temperature variations allow frost to accumulate in slightly colder, higher-elevation locations. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

The SDT was tasked with developing a life-detection strategy, a first for a NASA mission since the Mars Viking mission era more than four decades ago. The report makes recommendations on the number and type of science instruments that would be required to confirm if signs of life are present in samples collected from the icy moon’s surface.

The team also worked closely with engineers to design a system capable of landing on a surface about which very little is known. Given that Europa has no atmosphere, the team developed a concept that could deliver its science payload to the icy surface without the benefit of technologies like a heat shield or parachutes.

This artist’s rendering shows NASA’s Europa mission spacecraft, which is being developed for a launch sometime in the 2020s. The spacecraft would orbit around Jupiter in order to perform a detailed investigation of Europa before a follow-up landing mission. The probe could look for “biosignatures” or molecular signs of life, such as the byproducts of metabolism, transported from the moon’s ocean to its surface. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

The concept lander is separate from the solar-powered Europa multiple flyby mission, now in development for launch in the early 2020s. The spacecraft will arrive at Jupiter after a multi-year journey, orbiting the gas giant every two weeks for a series of 45 close flybys of Europa. The multiple flyby mission will investigate Europa’s habitability by mapping its composition, determining the characteristics of the ocean and ice shell, and increasing our understanding of its geology. The mission also will lay the foundation for a future landing by performing detailed reconnaissance using its powerful cameras.

We can’t help but be excited by the prospects of life-seeking missions to Europa. Sometimes wonderful things come in small packages.

NASA Approves First Commercial Airlock for Space Station Science and SmallSat Deployment

Artists concept of first commercially funded airlock on the space station being developed by NanoRacks that will launch on a commercial resupply mission in 2019. It will be installed on the station’s Tranquility module. Credits: NanoRacks
Artists concept of first commercially funded airlock on the space station being developed by NanoRacks that will launch on a commercial resupply mission in 2019. It will be installed on the station’s Tranquility module. Credits: NanoRacks

In a significant move towards further expansion of the International Space Station’s (ISS) burgeoning research and commercial space economy capabilities, NASA has approved the development of the first privately developed airlock and is targeting blastoff to the orbiting lab complex in two years.

Plans call for the commercial airlock to be launched on a commercial cargo vessel and installed on the U.S. segment of the ISS in 2019.

It enhances the US capability to place equipment and payloads outside and should triple the number of small satellites like CubeSats able to be deployed.

The privately funded commercial airlock is being developed by Nanoracks in partnership with Boeing, which is the prime contractor for the space station.

The airlock will be installed on an open port on the Tranquility module – that already is home to the seven windowed domed Cupola observation deck and the commercial BEAM expandable module built by Bigelow Aerospace.

“We want to utilize the space station to expose the commercial sector to new and novel uses of space, ultimately creating a new economy in low-Earth orbit for scientific research, technology development and human and cargo transportation,” said Sam Scimemi, director, ISS Division at NASA Headquarters in Washington, in a statement.

“We hope this new airlock will allow a diverse community to experiment and develop opportunities in space for the commercial sector.”

The airlock will launch aboard one of NASA’s commercial cargo suppliers in 2019. But the agency has not specified which contractor. The candidates include the SpaceX cargo Dragon, an enhanced ATK Cygnus or potentially the yet to fly SNC Dream Chaser.

Boeing will supply the airlock’s Passive Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) hardware to connect it to the Tranquility module.

Artists concept of first commercially funded airlock on the space station being developed by NanoRacks that will launch on a commercial resupply mission in 2019. It will be installed on the station’s Tranquility module. Credits: NanoRacks

The airlock will beef up the capability of transferring equipment, payloads and deployable satellites from inside the ISS to outside, significantly increasing the utilization of ISS, says Boeing.

“The International Space Station allows NASA to conduct cutting-edge research and technology demonstrations for the next giant leap in human exploration and supports an emerging space economy in low-Earth orbit. Deployment of CubeSats and other small satellite payloads from the orbiting laboratory by commercial customers and NASA has increased in recent years. To support demand, NASA has accepted a proposal from NanoRacks to develop the first commercially funded airlock on the space station,” says NASA.

“The installation of NanoRacks’ commercial airlock will help us keep up with demand,” said Boeing International Space Station program manager Mark Mulqueen. “This is a big step in facilitating commercial business on the ISS.”

Right now the US uses the airlock on the Japanese Experiment Module (JEM) to place payloads on the stations exterior as well as for small satellite deployments. But the demand is outstripping the JEM’s availability.

The Nanoracks airlock will be larger and more robust to take up the slack.

NASA has stipulated that the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS), NASA’s manager of the U.S. National Laboratory on the space station, will be responsible for coordinating all payload deployments from the commercial airlock – NASA and non NASA.

“We are entering a new chapter in the space station program where the private sector is taking on more responsibilities. We see this as only the beginning and are delighted to team with our friends at Boeing,” said Jeffrey Manber, CEO of NanoRacks.

The NanoRacks commercial airlock could potentially launch to the ISS in the trunk of a SpaceX cargo Dragon. This Up close view shows the SpaceX Dragon CRS-9 resupply ship and solar panels sitting atop a Falcon 9 rocket at pad 40 prior to blastoff to the ISS on July 18, 2016 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com

Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and Planetary science and human spaceflight news.

Ken Kremer

Can We Launch Nuclear Waste Into the Sun?

Can We Launch Nuclear Waste Into the Sun?
Can We Launch Nuclear Waste Into the Sun?

When I look at the Sun, I don’t see a warm life-giving orb, nourishing all living creatures here on Earth. No, I see that fiery ball as a cosmic garbage compactor. A place I can dump all my household garbage, to make room for new impulse purchases.

I mean, the Sun is right there, not doing anything right? It’s hotter than any garbage incinerator, and it’s the gravitational well at the heart of the Solar System. Get me a rocket, let’s blast that waste into oblivion.

Okay, I suspect it’s going to get expensive, so let’s just start with the worst garbage on Earth: nuclear waste. You know, the byproduct of nuclear reactors that generate electricity for many parts of the world. This stuff is highly toxic and it’s going to be around for hundreds of thousands of years.

It’s also pretty dense, maybe it does make sense to get this stuff off Earth and into the Sun? Let’s run the numbers.

Nuclear waste, or radioactive waste, of course, is anything leftover material that still has radioactivity. For the most part, we get this as the leftover material from nuclear power reactors, but it’s also generated by hospitals, and nuclear weapons manufacturing. We’ve got leftover nuclear waste from uranium mining, radium processing, and various civil and military research projects.

Inside this geometric is a demolished uranium mill and its radioactive tailings. Credit: U.S. Department of Energy

For example, when you mine uranium from the ground, you get leftover radium and radioactive rock, soil, and even the water. When you power a nuclear reactor, the spent fuel rods are still highly radioactive and dangerous. In the United States alone, there are hundreds of different sites which are heavily contaminated, over thousands of acres.

According to the World Nuclear Association, OPEC nations generate 300 million tonnes of toxic waste every year. We’re talking about poisonous chemicals, medical waste, coal dust. Really anything that you don’t want anywhere near you, or inside you.

Just to give you a sense of scale, that’s a cube of toxic poisons nearly a kilometer to a side, assuming the stuff is a little more dense than water.

Out of this, only 97,000 tonnes of nuclear waste is generated across the planet every year. This is radioactive wastes of all types. That’s only .03% of all the toxic waste.

But for the purpose of our calculations, I’m going to zero in on the most toxic, most radioactive material we’re dealing with: the high-level waste produced by nuclear reactors. Now we’re merely talking about 12,000 tonnes per year, or 12% of the nuclear waste showing up on our planet every year.

Now, let’s look at launch costs. Most rocket companies are going to charge you $10,000 to $20,000 per kilogram to blast a payload into Low Earth Orbit. The best deal on the market right now is SpaceX at around $4,000 USD per kilogram. And if they get the Falcon Heavy flying this year, it could bring the price down to around $2,500 per kilogram.

If all we wanted to do was blast all this waste into Low Earth Orbit, the calculations are pretty simple. 12,000 tonnes is 12 million kilograms. Multiply that by $2,500 per kilogram, and you get 30 billion dollars. You’re looking at 240 Falcon Heavy launches per year. Almost a launch every single day carrying a payload of high-level nuclear waste. Out of sight, out of mind.

SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket poised for launch from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida in this updated artists concept. Credit: SpaceX

That’s a lot of money, but in theory, the world could afford it if they wanted to stop having wars, or something. If they wanted to blast off all the nuclear waste, it would be more like 250 billion. Again. An incomprehensible amount of money, but still within the realm of possibility, assuming that SpaceX gets the Falcon Heavy launching, lofting payloads of nuclear waste 50 tonnes at a time.

But this is Low Earth Orbit, and we don’t want to go there. Anything in LEO still experiences friction from the Earth’s atmosphere, and eventually it’s going to return back to Earth. Imagine regular meteor showers of highly radioactive plutonium. That would be bad.

It would be more safer to launch this stuff into Geostationary Orbit, where the television satellites are broadcasting from. Material in this orbit can be expected to hang around for a long long time.

You’re looking at twice the price to blast off to GEO, so go ahead and double your costs to put that stuff safely out into space. 60 billion dollars for high-level waste. 500 billion for all the nuclear waste.

I’m sure SpaceX will give you a volume discount. And there might be smarter orbits where the waste has totally decayed into something safer by the time it re-enters the Earth’s atmosphere. What I’m saying is, there might be some cost savings.

Let’s say we’ve run all these numbers, and the cost is still worth it. But here’s the problem, rockets fail on a regular basis. They explode on the launch pad, or on their way to orbit. One bad explosion could spray highly toxic plutonium across a huge swath of the planet.

SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. Credit: USLaunchReport

For one rocket, there’s a pretty low risk. Rockets are about 95% reliable, which means that 1 in 20 is going to fail somehow. If you’re only launching 240 rockets, you’re looking at 12 failure, some of which will be detonations on the launch pad, or explosions at a high altitude. At that rate, we’re guaranteed that it’ll always be cloudy with a chance of plutonium rain somewhere on Earth.

If having thousands of tonnes of nuclear waste hanging over your head makes you nervous, then you’re going to want to hear about more, permanent options. Let’s crash that stuff into the Sun.

It turns out, blasting it into the Sun is much much more expensive. Here’s why: You’d think that just blasting your waste into space means that it would just fall into the Sun, but your waste is still orbiting the Sun at the Earth’s velocity – 30 m/s sideways.

In order to actually get it to drop into the Sun, you need to cancel out the orbital velocity. In other words, you need to give your rocket about 31.7 m/s in velocity, to account for the atmosphere drag of Earth, and then cancel out the orbital velocity.

NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft needed 16.1 m/s to reach Pluto, so you’re talking about double the velocity.

To be fair, New Horizons and other spacecraft use gravitational slingshots to steal velocity from Jupiter and other planets, so it’s possible you could perform some complicated trajectory sweeping past the various planets to get the change in velocity you need. I haven’t done the math, but let’s just assume, there could be savings.

If you don’t cancel out that motion, your nuclear waste is going to just orbit the Sun forever, like an asteroid of garbage.

There’s another path you could take. Instead of trying to drop down into the Sun, you fly outwards until you’ve almost escaped the pull of the Sun. Where the angular momentum, that sideways motion, is almost zero. Cancel that out with a little thrust, and then let the Sun’s gravity pull your waste back down to its doom.

It’ll take hundreds or even thousands of years, but there would be cost savings. Then you only need to gain about 16.5 m/s in velocity.

The Falcon Heavy, once operational, will be the most powerful rocket in the world. Credit: SpaceX

Rockets need to carry more of their payload as fuel if they’re going to gain higher velocities. A Falcon Heavy can carry more than 54 tonnes to Low Earth Orbit, but only 2.9 tonnes to Pluto.

In other words, using the most efficient trajectory, you’d still need about 20 times more rockets to blast your fuel into the Sun. In other words, multiple your costs by a factor of 20.

$1.2 trillion to launch the high-level waste into the Sun on a trajectory that takes a long long time.

The bottom line is that blasting our nuclear waste off into space, into the Sun, is just too expensive – by several orders of magnitude. Not to mention incredibly dangerous for the inevitable rocket failures that will compound the problem.

No, we need to learn how to recycle nuclear waste, to make it less toxic. We need to be willing to spend the resources to properly clean up contaminated sites, and we need to careful consider the long term consequences of how we generate our energy. Not just with nuclear power, but with any polluting form of energy generation.

But you know what idea I like even better? I agree with Jeff Bezos when he says that we’re eventually going to want to move all heavy industry and manufacturing off Earth and out into space.

We could take our manufacturing off-planet to reduce environmental risks. NASA/Denise Watt

Instead of cleaning the waste out of our environment, let’s mine it, refine it and manufacture it out in space in the first place. Then we can send the products back to Earth, and skip most of the pollution.

Now I’ve done the numbers, what do you think? Still worth it to launch nuclear waste into space? Let me know your thoughts in the comments.

Watch the Moon Make a Pass at Earth’s Shadow, Then Kiss Regulus This Valentine’s Weekend

Regulus Occultion
The Moon occults Regulus of January 15th, 2017. Image credit and copyright: Lucca Ruggiero
Regulus Occultion
The Moon occults Regulus of January 15th, 2017. Image credit and copyright: Lucca Ruggiero

In the southern hemisphere this weekend in the ‘Land of Oz?’ Are you missing out on the passage of Comet 45/P Honda-Mrkos-Pajdušáková, and the penumbral lunar eclipse? Fear not, there’s an astronomical event designed just for you, as the Moon occults (passes in front of) the bright star Regulus on the evening of Saturday, January 11th.

The entire event is custom made for the continent of Australia and New Zealand, occurring under dark skies. Now for the bad news: the waning gibbous Moon will be less than 14 hours past Full during the event, meaning that the ingress (disappearance) of Regulus will occur along its bright leading limb and egress (reappearance) will occur on the dark limb. We prefer occultations during waxing phase, as the star winks out on the dark limb and seems to slowly fade back in on the bright limb.

The footprint for the February 11th occultation of Regulus by the Moon. Image credit: Occult 4.2 software

The International Occultation Timing Association has a complete list of precise ingress/egress times for cities located across the continent. An especially interesting region to catch the event lies along the northern graze line across the sparsely populated Cape York peninsula, just north of Cairns.

The northern grazeline for the February 11th occultation of Regulus by the Moon. Graphic by author.

The Moon occults Aldebaran and then Regulus six days later during every lunation in 2017. This is occultation number three in a cycle of 19 running from December 18, 2016 to April 24, 2018. The Moon occults Regulus 214 times in the 21st century, and Regulus is currently the closest bright star to the ecliptic plane, just 27′ away.

We’ve also got a very special event just under 14 hours prior, as a penumbral lunar eclipse occurs, visible on all continents… except Australia. Mid-eclipse occurs at 00:45 Universal Time (UT, Saturday morning on February 11th), or 7:45 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST) on the evening of Friday, February 10th, when observers may note a dusky shading on the northern limb of the Moon as the Moon just misses passing through the dark edge of the Earth’s inner umbral shadow. Regulus will sit less than seven degrees off of the lunar limb at mid-eclipse Friday night.

How often does an eclipsed Moon occult a bright star? Well, stick around until over four centuries from now on February 22nd, 2445, and observers based around the Indian Ocean region can watch just such an event, as the eclipsed Moon also occults Regulus. Let’s see, I should have my consciousness downloaded into my second android body by then…

A graphic study of the simultaneous lunar eclipse and occultation of Regulus in 2445. Credit: NASA/GSFC/Fred Espenak/Occult 4.2/Stellarium.

We’ll be streaming the Friday night eclipse live from Astroguyz HQ here in Spring Hill, Florida starting at 7:30 PM EST/00:30 UT, wifi-willing. Astronomer Gianluca Masi of the Virtual Telescope Project will also carry the eclipse live starting at 22:15 UT on the night of Friday, February 10th.

This eclipse also marks the start of eclipse season one of two, which climaxes with an annular eclipse crossing southern Africa and South America on February 26th. The second and final eclipse season of 2017 starts with a partial lunar eclipse on August 7th, which sets us up for the Great American Eclipse crossing the United States from coast to coast on August 21st, 2017.

A lunar occultation of Regulus also provides a shot at a unique scientific opportunity. Spectroscopic measurements suggest that the primary main sequence star possesses a small white dwarf companion, a partner which has never been directly observed. This unseen white dwarf may – depending on the unknown orientation of its orbit – make a brief appearance during ingress or egress for a fleeting split second, when the dark limb of the Moon has covered dazzling Regulus. High speed video might just nab a double step occlusion, as the white dwarf companion is probably about 10,000 times fainter than Regulus at magnitude +11 at the very brightest. Regulus is located 79 light years distant.

Our best results for capturing an occultation of a star or planet by the Moon have always been with a video camera aimed straight through our 8” Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope. The trick is always to keep the star visible in the frame near the brilliant Full Moon. Cropping the Moon out of the field as much as possible can help somewhat. Set up early, to work the bugs out of focusing, alignment, etc. We also run WWV radio in the background for an audible time hack on the video.

The January 15th, 2017 occultation of Regulus by the Moon. Image credit and copyright: Lucca Ruggiero.

The best occultation of Regulus by the Moon for North America in 2017 occurs on October 15th, when the Moon is at waning crescent phase. Unfortunately, the occultation of Regulus by asteroid 163 Erigone back in 2014 was clouded out, though the planet Venus occults the star on October 1st, 2044. Let’s see, by then I’ll be…

Comets and eclipses and occultations, oh my. It’s a busy weekend for observational astronomy, for sure. Consider it an early Valentine’s Day weekend gift from the Universe.

Webcasting the eclipse or the occultation this weekend? Let us know, and send those images of either event to Universe Today’s Flickr forum.

Read about eclipses, occultations and more tales of astronomy in our yearly guide 101 Astronomical Events For 2017, free from Universe Today.

The Magellenic Clouds Stay Connected By A String Of Stars

This image shows the two "bridges" that connect the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds. The white line traces the bridge of stars that flows between the two dwarf galaxies, and the blue line shows the gas. Image: V. Belokurov, D. Erkal and A. Mellinger
This image shows the two "bridges" that connect the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds. The white line traces the bridge of stars that flows between the two dwarf galaxies, and the blue line shows the gas. Image: V. Belokurov, D. Erkal and A. Mellinger

Astronomers have finally observed something that was predicted but never seen: a stream of stars connecting the two Magellanic Clouds. In doing so, they began to unravel the mystery surrounding the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) and the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC). And that required the extraordinary power of the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Gaia Observatory to do it.

The Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (LMC and SMC) are dwarf galaxies to the Milky Way. The team of astronomers, led by a group at the University of Cambridge, focused on the clouds and on one particular type of very old star: RR Lyrae. RR Lyrae stars are pulsating stars that have been around since the early days of the Clouds. The Clouds have been difficult to study because they sprawl widely, but Gaia’s unique all-sky view has made this easier.

Small and Large Magellanic Clouds over Paranal Observatory Credit: ESO/J. Colosimo

The Mystery: Mass

The Magellanic Clouds are a bit of a mystery. Astronomers want to know if our conventional theory of galaxy formation applies to them. To find out, they need to know when the Clouds first approached the Milky Way, and what their mass was at that time. The Cambridge team has uncovered some clues to help solve this mystery.

The team used Gaia to detect RR Lyrae stars, which allowed them to trace the extent of the LMC, something that has been difficult to do until Gaia came along. They found a low-luminosity halo around the LMC that stretched as far as 20 degrees. For the LMC to hold onto stars that far away means it would have to be much more massive than previously thought. In fact, the LMC might have as much as 10 percent of the mass that the Milky Way has.

The Large Magellanic Cloud. Image: Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=57110

The Arrival of the Magellanic Clouds

That helped astronomers answer the mass question, but to really understand the LMC and SMC, they needed to know when the clouds arrived at the Milky Way. But tracking the orbit of a satellite galaxy is impossible. They move so slowly that a human lifetime is a tiny blip compared to them. This makes their orbit essentially unobservable.

But astronomers were able to find the next best thing: the often predicted but never observed stellar stream, or bridge of stars, stretching between the two clouds.

A star stream forms when a satellite galaxy feels the gravitational pull of another body. In this case, the gravitational pull of the LMC allowed individual stars to leave the SMC and be pulled toward the LMC. The stars don’t leave at once, they leave individually over time, forming a stream, or bridge, between the two bodies. This action leaves a luminous tracing of their path over time.

The astronomers behind this study think that the bridge actually has two components: stars stripped from the SMC by the LMC, and stars stripped from the LMC by the Milky Way. This bridge of RR Lyrae stars helps them understand the history of the interactions between all three bodies.

A Bridge of Stars… and Gas

The most recent interaction between the Clouds was about 200 million years ago. At that time, the Clouds passed close by each other. This action formed not one, but two bridges: one of stars and one of gas. By measuring the offset between the star bridge and the gas bridge, they hope to narrow down the density of the corona of gas surrounding the Milky Way.

Mystery #2: The Milky Way’s Corona

The density of the Milky Way’s Galactic Corona is the second mystery that astronomers hope to solve using the Gaia Observatory.

The Galactic Corona is made up of ionised gas at very low density. This makes it very difficult to observe. But astronomers have been scrutinizing it intensely because they think the corona might harbor most of the missing baryonic matter. Everybody has heard of Dark Matter, the matter that makes up 95% of the matter in the universe. Dark Matter is something other than the normal matter that makes up familiar things like stars, planets, and us.

The other 5% of matter is baryonic matter, the familiar atoms that we all learn about. But we can only account for half of the 5% of baryonic matter that we think has to exist. The rest is called the missing baryonic matter, and astronomers think it’s probably in the galactic corona, but they’ve been unable to measure it.

A part of the Small Magellanic Cloud galaxy is dazzling in this image from NASA’s Great Observatories. The Small Magellanic Cloud is about 200,000 light-years way from our own Milky Way spiral galaxy. Credit: NASA.

Understanding the density of the Galactic Corona feeds back into understanding the Magellanic Clouds and their history. That’s because the bridges of stars and gas that formed between the Small and Large Magellanic Clouds initially moved at the same speed. But as they approached the Milky Way’s corona, the corona exerted drag on the stars and the gas. Because the stars are small and dense relative to the gas, they travelled through the corona with no change in their velocity.

But the gas behaved differently. The gas was largely neutral hydrogen, and very diffuse, and its encounter with the Milky Way’s corona slowed it down considerably. This created the offset between the two streams.

Eureka?

The team compared the current locations of the streams of gas and stars. By taking into account the density of the gas, and also how long both Clouds have been in the corona, they could then estimate the density of the corona itself.

When they did so, their results showed that the missing baryonic matter could be accounted for in the corona. Or at least a significant fraction of it could. So what’s the end result of all this work?

It looks like all this work confirms that both the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds conform to our conventional theory of galaxy formation.

Mystery solved. Way to go, science.

Uber Brings In NASA Engineer To Build Flying Cars

Uber recently announced that NASA engineer Mark Moore will be spearheading its plans for an on-demand aviation service, known as Uber Elevate. Credit: Uber

Flying cars have become something of a hot ticket item of late. In the past few years, companies like Terrafugia, Aeromobil and Moller International have all grabbed headlines with their particular designs. And soon enough, international transportation giant Uber could be joining the ranks of those looking to turn a popular staple of science fiction into science fact.

In a move to expand their ride-sharing services to the skies, the company recently hired NASA aerospace engineer Mark D. Moore to spearhead Uber Elevate. For 30 years, Moore has worked for NASA, researching advanced aircraft and technologies and vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) applications. And in 2010, he published a white paper in which detailed a revolutionary new concept for electric flying cars.

In this paper – titled “NASA Puffin Electric Tailsitter VTOL Concept” – Moore presented an outline for equipping  VTOL craft with electronic engines. The benefits of this, he claimed, include zero emissions, a high engine power to weight rating, high efficiency and very little noise or vibrations. On top of that, the technology is scalable, offering the same benefits regardless of size.

Artist’s concept of the NASA X-57 “Maxwell” electronic aircraft. Credit: NASA

This study was the product of Moore’s many years working with the Aeronautics Systems Analysis Branch of NASA’s Langley Research Center, where he specialized in the development of distributed electric propulsion. For the past five years, Moore was the Principle Investigator of the Scalable Convergent Electric Propulsion Technology and Operations Research (SCEPTOR) project, a NASA program to create the first manned Distributed Electric Propulsion aircraft.

Prior to this, Moore was also the Principle Investigator of the Leading Edge Asynchronous Propeller Technology/Hybrid-Electric Integrated Systems Testbed (LeapTECH/HEIST) project, a one-year program that developed and tested a electric propulsion wing that used 18 propellers to achieve flight. The fruits of these labors can be seen with the X-57 “Maxwell” (shown above), a convergent electronic propulsion plane that relies on 14 electric motors with uniquely-designed wings to improve efficiency and reduce noise.

Beyond pushing the envelope for advanced aviation and propulsion designs, Moore strongly believes that this technology – which combines the benefits of efficient and lightweight motors with improvements in battery technology and automation – is the solution to the problems of traffic congestion and urban pollution caused by too many automobiles.

Naturally, his white paper garnered a lot of attention, particularly from billionaire entrepreneurs who are at the forefront of technological development. As Bloomberg Businessweek reported in the summer of 2016, Google co-founder Larry Page created two startups (Zee Aero and Kitty Hawk) to develop the technology, apparently in response to reading Moore’s paper.

Maps prepared by Uber to demonstrate the effectiveness of on-demand aviation vs traditional commutes. Credit: Uber

In October of 2016, Uber Technologies Inc. followed suit and announced the creation of Uber Elevate, a subsidiary charged with developing the technology, and has since hired Moore to serve as Elevate’s director of engineering. Shortly after Elevate was announced, Uber released their own white paper – a 99-page document that outlined the company’s vision of what they called “on-demand aviation”. As it says in this paper:

“Just as skyscrapers allowed cities to use limited land more efficiently, urban air transportation will use three-dimensional airspace to alleviate transportation congestion on the ground. A network of small, electric aircraft that take off and land vertically (called VTOL aircraft for Vertical Take-off and Landing, and pronounced vee-tol), will enable rapid, reliable transportation between suburbs and cities and, ultimately, within cities.

Such a plan would not only rely on VTOL network to bypass the usual infrastructure of roads, railways, bridges and tunnels, but would also call for the repurposing of parts of the urban landscape. Basically, Uber’s plan calls for transforming the tops of parking garages, existing helipads, and unused land surrounding highway interchanges to create a network of “vertiports” and “versistops”, complete with charging stations for their vehicles.

Acquiring Moore was certainly a coup de grace, as the NASA engineer was just a year away from retirement. As a result, he will not be eligible for his pension and health benefits. However, the move appears to be motivated in part by Moore’s desire to see the development of the technology become a reality. And these days, it seems that the private sector – and not within federal agencies – is where this is most likely to happen.

As Moore told Universe Today via email:

“Uber’s well suited to lead this because they are the on-demand market leader, with 55 million active monthly users. They’ve solved the multi-modal last mile problem, with incredible access and availability that provides wait times in major urban areas of only 2 to 3 minutes.”

Naturally, one of the biggest questions is whether Uber’s vehicles will be piloted or automated. On the one hand, Uber has launched a series of pilot project to test self-driving cars in various cities across the US. And a little over a week ago (Jan. 31st, 2017), Uber announced that it will be partnering with Daimler to introduce the automaker’s self-driving cars to their network.

These moves are a strong indication that the company is looking to automate in the long-term. And as Moore indicated, there is likely to be a period of transition:

“There will be an evolution from professional human pilots to autonomy over time as the background automation proves itself reliable and not requiring intervention by the human pilot – just as Uber is doing now with autonomous cars on the ground (which is a much harder problem because of how cluttered the ground environment is.”

In addition to Google and Uber, multinational aerospace giant Airbus is also working on its own VTOL car project – known as Project Vahana. As the company announced in November of 2016, Vahana is being run by the company’s Silicon Valley arm (A³, or “a cubed”) with the aim of producing of self-piloted VTOL craft by the early 2020s.

And there’s Joby Aviation, another Silicon Valley-based company that specializes in airframe design and electric motors that is hoping to expand into the VTOL market. Clearly, there is no shortage of entrepreneurs looking to harness the dream of VTOL transportation.

Of course, there are those who would say that these VTOL concepts are not “flying cars” in the strictest sense. Whereas companies like Aeromobil, Terrafugia and Moller International are specializing in vehicles that can both drive on land and fly, Google Airbus and Uber are looking to create vehicles that are more akin to transportation drones or personal helicopters.

But the terminology behind this concept, which has deep roots in science-fiction, has never been entirely accurate. In the end, the term “flying car” has been used rather loosely to refer to vehicles that relied on aerial traffic networks to get people from point A to point B. And with multiple companies looking to make this old promise a reality, the promise of flying cars in the 21st century might finally come true!

Further Reading: Bloomberg, NASA, Uber

31 Years After Disaster, Challenger Soccer Ball Finally Gets To Orbit

Astronaut Shane Kimbrough took this photo of the Challenger soccer ball floating in front of the ISS's cupola window to mark NASA's day of remembrance for the Challenger disaster. Image: NASA
Astronaut Shane Kimbrough took this photo of the Challenger soccer ball floating in front of the ISS's cupola window to mark NASA's day of remembrance for the Challenger disaster. Image: NASA

The Challenger disaster is one of those things that’s etched into people’s memories. The launch and resulting explosion were broadcast live. Professional astronauts may have been prepared to accept their fate, but that doesn’t make it any less tragic.

There’ve been fitting tributes over the years, with people paying homage to the crew members who lost their lives. But a new tribute is remarkable for its simplicity. And this new tribute is all centred around a soccer ball.

Ellison Onizuka was one of the Challenger seven who perished on January 28, 1986, when the shuttle exploded 73 seconds into its flight. His daughter and other soccer players from Clear Lake High School, near NASA’s Johnson Space Center, gave Ellison a soccer ball to take into space with him. Almost unbelievably, the soccer ball was recovered among the wreckage after the crash.

Ellison Onizuka, one of the seven who perished in the Challenger accident, carried a soccer ball into space. The ball was given to him by his daughter and other soccer players at a local high school. Image: NASA
Ellison Onizuka, one of the seven who perished in the Challenger accident, carried a soccer ball into space. The ball was given to him by his daughter and other soccer players at a local high school. Image: NASA

The soccer ball was returned to the high school, where it was on display for the past three decades, with its meaning fading into obscurity with each passing year. Eventually, the Principal of the high school, Karen Engle, learned about the significance of the soccer ball’s history.

Because of Clear Lake High School’s close proximity to the Johnson Space Center, another astronaut now has a son attending the same school. His name is Shane Kimbrough, and he offered to carry a memento from the high school into space. That’s when Principal Engle had the idea to send the soccer ball with Kimbrough on his mission to the International Space Station.

NASA astronaut Shane Kimbrough, who took the soccer ball into space. Image: NASA
NASA astronaut Shane Kimbrough, who took the soccer ball into space. Image: NASA

The causes of the Challenger accident are well-known. An O-ring failed in the cold temperature, and pressurized burning gas escaped and eventually caused the failure of the external fuel tank. The resulting fiery explosion left no doubt about the fate of the people onboard the shuttle.

It’s poignant that the soccer ball got a second chance to make it into space, when the Challenger seven never will. This tribute is touching for its simplicity, and is somehow more powerful than other tributes made with fanfare and speeches.

It must be difficult for family members of the Challenger seven to see the photos and videos of the explosion. Maybe this simple image of a soccer ball floating in zero gravity will take the place of those other images.

The Challenger seven deserve to be remembered for their spirit and dedication, rather than for the explosion they died in.

These are the seven people who perished in the Challenger accident:

  • Ellison Onizuka
  • Francis R. Scobee
  • Michael J. Smith
  • Ronald McNair
  • Judith Resnik
  • Gregory Jarvis
  • Christa McAuliffe