Congress Directs NASA To Study Europa Mission

[crazyewok]

I would love to see a mission to Europa. The thought of finding extraterrestrial microorganisms makes the microbiologist in excited.

But the fact that congress has its grubby dirty incompetent usless bureaucratic mitts on this I dont hold much hope.

It will go like this:

Projects goes ahead

NASA spends $200 Million+ on the project and gets 90% complete

New round of elections

New Congress members force NASA to can the project and focus on something else to spite the last goverment.

Result: Hundreds of millions or prehapes billion wasted, NASA get nowhere and we dont see a Europa Mission.

[Kilmeister]

I would love to see a mission to Europa. The thought of finding extraterrestrial microorganisms makes the microbiologist in excited.

But the fact that congress has its grubby dirty incompetent usless bureaucratic mitts on this I dont hold much hope.

It will go like this:

Projects goes ahead

NASA spends $200 Million+ on the project and gets 90% complete

New round of elections

New Congress members force NASA to can the project and focus on something else to spite the last goverment.

Result: Hundreds of millions or prehapes billion wasted, NASA get nowhere and we dont see a Europa Mission.

Congress would never ground a mission due to spite *cough* Triana

Well I guess they will =( **ooh I guess they are finally planning on launching it in 2015.... 15 years late is better than never**

I think they should plan a mission to actually land on Europa rather than just do flybys. Juno will be reaching Jupiter soon (2016), but I don't think it's anywhere in its mission to even look at any of its moons, and It will not have an extended mission because it is going to enter the atmosphere in 2017. And for Saturn/Titan, if Cassini doesn't get axed, it's going to plunge into Saturn in 2017. So As of 2017 we won't have a satellite around either of them.

[John Crichton]

The problem with congress is the short-term focus. So yes, they granted a budget this time, but if they pull it again the very next year (which happens all the time!), it's wasted money. Missions need to be fully funded from the start, not in tranches...because if congress changes its mind (again, happens all the time due to politics), that mission will be scrapped.

Having said that, would be exciting to learn more about Europa...so let's hope they really pull through this time.

[NASAFanboy]

I would love to see a mission to Europa. The thought of finding extraterrestrial microorganisms makes the microbiologist in excited.

But the fact that congress has its grubby dirty incompetent usless bureaucratic mitts on this I dont hold much hope.

It will go like this:

Projects goes ahead

NASA spends $200 Million+ on the project and gets 90% complete

New round of elections

New Congress members force NASA to can the project and focus on something else to spite the last goverment.

Result: Hundreds of millions or prehapes billion wasted, NASA get nowhere and we dont see a Europa Mission.

No need to worry.

Dictators change office more than Congress members.

Every election, only around a dozen new members get in.

Also, remember this was an bipartisan deal, which means it has support of both parties. Whenever a congressman is elected, they will support the interests of their own party. SInce both parties are interested in the SLS and Europa, it will likely last for quite a while.

Most Congressmen serve around five terms in office. Congress ain't going anywhere for a long time.

[The Jedi Master]

This is going to earn me the disdain of my fellow forum members, but it needs to be said: We don't have the money for this. If we spent less on the military, we might have the money, but good luck with that.

[Albert VDS]

@The Jedi Master: A mission to Europa would be less than peanuts compared to the budget of America's defense budget. I bet they wouldn't even notice if they took money from the defense budget for a Europa mission.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Albert VDS

[SargeRho]

We actually do have the money for this. What we don't have the money for is a 700 billion dollar defense budget.

[Brotoro]

As an American who actually has to pay U.S. income taxes, *I* want more money spent on space probes and less money spent on most of the other things the government spends my money on. But that's just me.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Brotoro

[Klingon Admiral]

Isn't it absolutely clear that we should attempt no landings on Europa?

[Soda Popinski]

This is going to earn me the disdain of my fellow forum members, but it needs to be said: We don't have the money for this. If we spent less on the military, we might have the money, but good luck with that.

The Curiosity mission is to cost $2.5 billion. That's a little bit more than a B-2 Stealth Bomber. We're down to 1 war, and that's suppose to be winding down. Hopefully, we'll find the money. After all, that's only about $0.16 per American per week over the course of one year.

[crazyewok]

We're down to 1 war, and that's suppose to be winding down.

Wanna bet that will change just look how quickly USA and UK wanted to jump into syria. Mark my words there will be another war by the end of the decade.

Anyway I know from a few contacts linked to boeing thats there a massive project going on thats going to be sucking up a fair bit of cash. The B-2 are likley going to lose there position as the flagship aircraft of the USAF. On the plus side what I have heard is whatever there doing will make SSTO alot easier.

Edited February 10, 2014 by crazyewok

[SargeRho]

Isn't it absolutely clear that we should attempt no landings on Europa?

No, it's absolutely clear that we should land there. And not just once, but many times, in various regions of the moon, with melt probes or ice drills to get into the ocean.

[The Jedi Master]

No, it's absolutely clear that we should land there. And not just once, but many times, in various regions of the moon, with melt probes or ice drills to get into the ocean.

You did not get that joke, did you?

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

No, it's absolutely clear that we should land there. And not just once, but many times, in various regions of the moon, with melt probes or ice drills to get into the ocean.

What if human disease kills all life on it?

[crazyewok]

What if human disease kills all life on it?

1) You sterlise the probes

2) I doubt it would work like that. You cant be a 100% But if there life there then its going to be adapted to the envroment there. Any microbs that are introduced will be at the disadvanatge.

[Albert VDS]

All life not related to Earth's tree of life will not be affected by any virus from Earth.

Why? Because a virus evolves along side the host which they infect.

[jfull]

Excuse me? Venus easier to Colonise than Mars? Did you check the surface conditions recently? A comfortable 100 atmospheres with cozy warm 460°C in the shade, slight possibility of sulphuric acid rain on Venus. You cannot colonise Venus.

Even if you disregard those issues, there's also the fact that the thick atmosphere and surface gravity similar to earth would make returning to orbit close to impossible, compared to the ease of getting to orbit from Mars.

[Soda Popinski]

All life not related to Earth's tree of life will not be affected by any virus from Earth.

Why? Because a virus evolves along side the host which they infect.

Viruses. No chance. They rarely jump species to species, even in closely related species.

Bacteria on the other hand... Unlikely to thrive in such an alien environment, but it could get a foothold in the environment, but causing disease usually needs to be evolved into the bacteria.

[Klingon Admiral]

No, it's absolutely clear that we should land there. And not just once, but many times, in various regions of the moon, with melt probes or ice drills to get into the ocean.

All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landings there. Use them together, use them in peace.

Possible consequences of landing on Europa include, but are not limited to, Jupiter turning into a second sun.

On a more serious note, do we even know how the surface of Europa looks? Would be kind of a shame to send a nifty lander there only to find out that for some reason the surface is far too rugged to land there.

[Superfluous J]

All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landings there. Use them together, use them in peace.

Possible consequences of landing on Europa include, but are not limited to, Jupiter turning into a second sun.

On a more serious note, do we even know how the surface of Europa looks? Would be kind of a shame to send a nifty lander there only to find out that for some reason the surface is far too rugged to land there.

Yeah they've managed to snap a couple photos. And even make pretty strong guesses as to its composition.

[Klingon Admiral]

Does these photos show any sort of small geological features? While Europa is indeed very smooth on a macro-level, it could still be very rugged on a smaller scale. We have absolutely no information about the way Europa's surface behaves.

[Dodgey]

I'm assuming that it was just an example.....

[Kryten]

No, it's absolutely clear that we should land there. And not just once, but many times, in various regions of the moon, with melt probes or ice drills to get into the ocean.

Considering just how thick the ice is, and how much equipment and effort it took to get samples from Lake Vostok (which is much closer to the surface than Europa's ocean), I don't really think that's going to be practical in anything like the near term.

[Klingon Admiral]

I'm assuming that it was just an example.....

We still haven't ever sent anything into orbit around Europa, only fly-bys. So far, no other Europa-centric mission is planned, JUICE will mostly focus on Ganymede and only feature 2 fly-bys. Going from fly-bys to a landing is a huge step, and I'm convinced NASA nows this. Congress, on the other hand...

[Soda Popinski]

I recall seeing a concept for a nuclear powered thermal mole probe. It would be shaped like a pointy cigar, where the lander faces it downward (point down). The point gets really hot, and melts the ice, and gravity does the rest. I would think there's a duct near the front to allow the melt water to flow behind the probe as it sinks through the miles of ice for weeks or months. Not really clear how and signal gets back to the lander, as I would expect the water behind the probe to freeze, jamming any tether. Though I suppose a thin wire could be spooled up inside the probe, and just be continually laid down.