Neptune Odyssey: A mission concept to the Neptune/Triton system:

[Minmus Taster]

https://science.nasa.gov/files/science-red/s3fs-public/atoms/files/Neptune Odyssey.pdf

Edited July 21, 2021 by Minmus Taster

[wumpus]

Mixing Greek/Roman naming?  BAD.

Poseidon/Odysseus or Neptune/Ulysses, pick one.

It doesn't help that the whole Odyssey existed thanks to Poseidon granting his son Polyphemus's prayer to curse Odysseus and prevent him from getting home.

Maybe they can use Pentium processors for computing power.

[Minmus Taster]

1 hour ago, wumpus said:

Mixing Greek/Roman naming?  BAD.

Poseidon/Odysseus or Neptune/Ulysses, pick one.

It doesn't help that the whole Odyssey existed thanks to Poseidon granting his son Polyphemus's prayer to curse Odysseus and prevent him from getting home.

Maybe they can use Pentium processors for computing power.

Feels like nitpicking to me, I don't think NASA would pass a mission like this because the name is a little ironic, maybe that's the point.

Also they don't seem to be using that name as a reference to The Odyssey but rather it's just the word, still a connection to it but nothing direct.

Also if it makes you feel better:

If approved the orbiter will just be called "Odyssey".

Edited July 18, 2021 by Minmus Taster

[wumpus]

Have you *seen* just how clever the names are that get funded?  Note how our own forum member's project Osiris Rex manages to fit a perfect acronym.  It seems to be one of those things that imply you put some real effort into the proposal, so the committee actually looks at your proposal.

[kerbiloid]

7 hours ago, wumpus said:

Mixing Greek/Roman naming?  BAD.

The Romans did it all their time. 
Pluto is a Greek nick. Cybele and Isis are MidEast goddesses with official Roman cultists. Neptune is Etruscan.

[Minmus Taster]

10 hours ago, wumpus said:

Have you *seen* just how clever the names are that get funded?  Note how our own forum member's project Osiris Rex manages to fit a perfect acronym.  It seems to be one of those things that imply you put some real effort into the proposal, so the committee actually looks at your proposal.

It's not about the names ok?

[wumpus]

3 hours ago, Minmus Taster said:

It's not about the names ok?

When you see a massive correlation between clever names and funding, it becomes harder and harder to believe that.

No funding, no project.  Simple as that.

[Minmus Taster]

37 minutes ago, wumpus said:

When you see a massive correlation between clever names and funding, it becomes harder and harder to believe that.

No funding, no project.  Simple as that.

Why in the name of space would NASA make key choices on which missions fly based of of which has the name which has the best ring to it?

particularly when it comes to nitpicks.

[wumpus]

1 hour ago, Minmus Taster said:

Why in the name of space would NASA make key choices on which missions fly based of of which has the name which has the best ring to it?

particularly when it comes to nitpicks.

They don't.  They just use fancy names as a way to gatekeep projects that people haven't sweated blood over out of consideration.  And a clever name is a shortcut to showing that.

Check the names out of funded mid-cost projects (not Senate Launch System).  They all have terribly clever names.  And I'd expect committee members don't want people to think they don't know the difference between Greek and Latin, and otherwise not be impressed by the name.

There are a ton of potential projects out there and the committees have to dump nearly all of them and then pour through a short list for projects they are going to fund. Don't expect this one to get on the short list.  Basic rule of science, if it isn't funded it doesn't happen.  And space takes a *lot* of funding, so it takes a lot more convincing to get people to hand over the money.

[Minmus Taster]

6 minutes ago, wumpus said:

They don't.  They just use fancy names as a way to gatekeep projects that people haven't sweated blood over out of consideration.  And a clever name is a shortcut to showing that.

Check the names out of funded mid-cost projects (not Senate Launch System).  They all have terribly clever names.  And I'd expect committee members don't want people to think they don't know the difference between Greek and Latin, and otherwise not be impressed by the name.

There are a ton of potential projects out there and the committees have to dump nearly all of them and then pour through a short list for projects they are going to fund. Don't expect this one to get on the short list.  Basic rule of science, if it isn't funded it doesn't happen.  And space takes a *lot* of funding, so it takes a lot more convincing to get people to hand over the money.

Were not talking a about the dozens of medium class missions scraped because the government wanted say a few venus probes (rip Trident).

Were talking about flagship missions, stuff that NASA needs to choose wisely, and yeah there is a (pretty good) chance it won't get selected though I do hope it does.

But that's not why I'm sharing it, I'm sharing this concept because it's cool, not to argue about names.

[MKI]

The naming argument/discussion is a massive distraction that doesn't matter. Any flagship mission without a cool sounding name, would probably be named by the community. (See Mars 2020, and Curiosity) That's the least of my worries.

 

I personally think the Ice Giants are criminally under explored. A "Cassini level" mission to Neptune/Uranus should be next on the list of Flagship level exploration. I'm not sure if people care about it enough, and its harder to approve missions of this length, and this price point since its so far away and takes to long to get there.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Are they required to use SLS to get funding?

[Minmus Taster]

2 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Are they required to use SLS to get funding?

I don't know, the paper says starships is a possible LV.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Minmus Taster

[MKI]

19 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Are they required to use SLS to get funding?

I don't think so. I read the part that stated the mission could be executed by a Falcon Heavy.  

Dragging the SLS into the equation could possibly get it help getting approved though ;D

[Minmus Taster]

1 hour ago, MKI said:

I don't think so. I read the part that stated the mission could be executed by a Falcon Heavy.  

Dragging the SLS into the equation could possibly get it help getting approved though ;D

We all know congress LOVES the SLS!

[sevenperforce]

They should include a Triton lander.

[Minmus Taster]

5 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

They should include a Triton lander.

They're choosing to use a Neptune probe instead because it will be heavier and we really don't know what Tritons surface is like.

[sevenperforce]

11 minutes ago, Minmus Taster said:

They're choosing to use a Neptune probe instead because it will be heavier and we really don't know what Tritons surface is like.

Also because part of the whole mission profile is to orbit Neptune prograde, opposite (but coplanar with) Triton, and thus use Triton for gravity assists to alter trajectory for free.

But still, I want a lander.

[Minmus Taster]

28 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

Also because part of the whole mission profile is to orbit Neptune prograde, opposite (but coplanar with) Triton, and thus use Triton for gravity assists to alter trajectory for free.

But still, I want a lander.

Actually it would orbit retrograde relative to Neptune's rotation.

[sevenperforce]

1 hour ago, Minmus Taster said:

Actually it would orbit retrograde relative to Neptune's rotation.

Neptune rotates prograde relative to its orbit, like all planets other than Venus.

Triton orbits Neptune retrograde relative to Neptune’s rotation and is the only large moon in the solar system to do so.

This mission would enter a prograde Neptunian orbit in order to use Triton to adjust its orbit repeatedly. Gravity assists are most efficient when your path is opposite the body you’re getting the assist from.

 

[Minmus Taster]

7 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

Neptune rotates prograde relative to its orbit, like all planets other than Venus.

Triton orbits Neptune retrograde relative to Neptune’s rotation and is the only large moon in the solar system to do so.

This mission would enter a prograde Neptunian orbit in order to use Triton to adjust its orbit repeatedly. Gravity assists are most efficient when your path is opposite the body you’re getting the assist from.

 

It's will orbit the direction of Triton's orbit around Neptune (retrograde), says so in the paper.

[sevenperforce]

1 hour ago, Minmus Taster said:

It's will orbit the direction of Triton's orbit around Neptune (retrograde), says so in the paper.

Well clearly I misread. Whoops. 

[kerbiloid]

6 hours ago, Minmus Taster said:

They're choosing to use a Neptune probe instead because it will be heavier and we really don't know what Tritons surface is like.

It's a cantaloupe crust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triton_(moon)#Cantaloupe_terrain

The Moon is made of cheese, the Triton - of cantaloupe.

***

Probably it's too early to land there, as first they should at least have its fullportrait to define, where to land best.

Also they should first check if the cantaloupe has a tail.

We yet haven't seen its both poles.

[Minmus Taster]

On 7/20/2021 at 10:58 PM, kerbiloid said:

It's a cantaloupe crust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triton_(moon)#Cantaloupe_terrain

The Moon is made of cheese, the Triton - of cantaloupe.

***

Probably it's too early to land there, as first they should at least have its fullportrait to define, where to land best.

Also they should first check if the cantaloupe has a tail.

We yet haven't seen its both poles.

C A N T A L O U P E

Such a strange thing to call a planet

[kerbiloid]

It's even more strange thing to make the planet of it,