Members Can Post Anonymously On This Site
Hubble's Latest Look at Pluto's Moons Supports a Common Birth
-
Similar Topics
-
By Space Force
The USSF Honor Guard is participating in the thier first state funeral honoring the 39th President of the United States Jimmy Carter.
View the full article
-
By NASA
On Jan. 7, 1610, Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei peered through his newly improved 20-power homemade telescope at the planet Jupiter. He noticed three other points of light near the planet, at first believing them to be distant stars. Observing them over several nights, he noted that they appeared to move in the wrong direction with regard to the background stars and they remained in Jupiter’s proximity but changed their positions relative to one another. Four days later, he observed a fourth point of light near the planet with the same unusual behavior. By Jan. 15, Galileo correctly concluded that he had discovered four moons orbiting around Jupiter, providing strong evidence for the Copernican theory that most celestial objects did not revolve around the Earth.
Two of Galileo’s telescopes.National Geographic. Painting by Giuseppe Bertini (1858) of Galileo demonstrating his telescope to the Doge of Venice.gabrielevanin.it Page from Galileo’s notebook about his observations of Jupiter’s satellites.University of Michigan Special Collections Library. In March 1610, Galileo published his discoveries of Jupiter’s satellites and other celestial observations in a book titled Siderius Nuncius (The Starry Messenger). As their discoverer, Galileo had naming rights to Jupiter’s satellites. He proposed to name them after his patrons the Medicis and astronomers called them the Medicean Stars through much of the seventeenth century, although in his own notes Galileo referred to them by the Roman numerals I, II, III, and IV, in order of their distance from Jupiter. Astronomers still refer to the four moons as the Galilean satellites in honor of their discoverer.
In 1614, the German astronomer Johannes Kepler suggested naming the satellites after mythological figures associated with Jupiter, namely Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto, but his idea didn’t catch on for more than 200 years. Scientists didn’t discover any more satellites around Jupiter until 1892 when American astronomer E.E. Barnard found Jupiter’s fifth moon Amalthea, much smaller than the Galilean moons and orbiting closer to the planet than Io. It was the last satellite in the solar system found by visual observation – all subsequent discoveries occurred via photography or digital imaging. As of today, astronomers have identified 95 moons orbiting Jupiter.
Image of Jupiter and three of its four Galilean satellites through an amateur telescope, similar to what Galileo might have seen. Hubble Space Telescope image of Jupiter and three of its four Galilean satellites during a rare triple transit. Although each of the Galilean satellites has unique features, such as the volcanoes of Io, the heavily cratered surface of Callisto, and the magnetic field of Ganymede, scientists have focused more attention on Europa due to the tantalizing possibility that it might be hospitable to life. In the 1970s, NASA’s Pioneer 10 and 11 and Voyager 1 and 2 spacecraft took ever increasingly detailed images of the large satellites including Europa during their flybys of Jupiter. The photographs revealed Europa to have the smoothest surface of any object in the solar system, indicating a relatively young crust, and also one of the brightest of any satellite indicating a highly reflective surface. These features led scientists to hypothesize that Europa is covered by an icy crust floating on a subsurface salty ocean. They further postulated that tidal heating caused by Jupiter’s gravity reforms the surface ice layer in cycles of melting and freezing.
Image of Europa taken by Pioneer 10 during its flyby of Jupiter in 1973. Image of Europa taken by Voyager 1 during its 1979 flyby of Jupiter. Image of Europa taken by Voyager 2 during its 1979 flyby of Jupiter. More detailed observations from NASA’s Galileo spacecraft that orbited Jupiter between 1995 and 2003 and completed 11 close encounters with Europa revealed that long linear features on its surface may indicate tidal or tectonic activity. Reddish-brown material along the fissures and in splotches elsewhere on the surface may contain salts and sulfur compounds transported from below the crust and modified by radiation. Observations from the Hubble Space Telescope and re-analysis of images from Galileo revealed possible plumes emanating from beneath Europa’s crust, lending credence to that hypothesis. While the exact composition of this material is not known, it likely holds clues to whether Europa may be hospitable to life.
Global view of Europa from the Galileo spacecraft. More detailed views of varied terrain on Europa from Galileo. Cutaway illustration of Europa’s icy crust, subsurface ocean and possible vents that transport material to the surface. Future robotic explorers of Europa may answer some of the outstanding questions about this unique satellite of Jupiter. NASA’s Europa Clipper set off in October 2024 on a 5.5-year journey to Jupiter. After its arrival in 2030, the spacecraft will enter orbit around the giant planet and conduct 49 flybys of Europa during its four-year mission. Managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, and the Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, Europa Clipper will carry nine instruments including imaging systems and a radar to better understand the structure of the icy crust. Data from Europa Clipper will complement information returned by the European Space Agency’s JUICE (Jupiter Icy Moon Explorer) spacecraft. Launched in April 2023, JUICE will first enter orbit around Jupiter in 2031 and then enter orbit around Ganymede in 2034. The spacecraft also plans to conduct studies of Europa complementary with Europa Clipper’s. The two spacecraft should greatly increase our understanding of Europa and perhaps uncover new mysteries.
Illustration of the Europa Clipper spacecraft investigating Europa. Illustration of the JUICE spacecraft exploring Europa.European Space Agency. View the full article
-
By Space Force
During the keynote remarks, Gen. Stephen Whiting emphasized the joint functions and the importance of operating across the joint team using a common playbook to enable joint force commanders to synchronize, integrate, and execute joint operations.
View the full article
-
By NASA
An artist’s concept of the Earth, Moon, and Mars.Credit: NASA As NASA develops a blueprint for space exploration throughout the solar system for the benefit of humanity, the agency released several new documents Friday updating its Moon to Mars architecture. The roadmap sets NASA on course for long-term lunar exploration under the Artemis campaign in preparation for future crewed missions to Mars.
Following an Architecture Concept Review, the 2024 updates include a revision of NASA’s Architecture Definition Document which details technical approaches and processes of the agency’s exploration plans, an executive overview, and 12 new white papers on key Moon to Mars topics.
“NASA’s Architecture Concept Review process is critical to getting us on a path to mount a human mission to Mars,” said NASA Associate Administrator Jim Free. “We’re taking a methodical approach to mapping out the decisions we need to make, understanding resource and technological trades, and ensuring we are listening to feedback from stakeholders.”
One newly released white paper highlights NASA’s decision to use fission power as the primary source of power on the Martian surface to sustain crews — the first of seven key decisions necessary for human Mars exploration. Fission power is a form of nuclear power unaffected by day and night cycles or potential dust storms on Mars.
New additions this year also include a broader, prioritized list of key architecture decisions that need to be made early in NASA’s plans to send humans to the Red Planet. Two new elements are now part of the agency’s Moon to Mars architecture — a lunar surface cargo lander and an initial lunar surface habitat. The lunar surface cargo lander will deliver logistics items, science and technology payloads, communications systems, and more. The initial surface habitat will house astronauts on the lunar surface to extend the crew size, range, and duration of exploration missions and enable crewed and uncrewed science opportunities.
The newest revision of the Architecture Definition Document adds more information about NASA’s decision road mapping process — how the agency decides which decisions must be made early in the planning process based on impacts to subsequent decisions — and a list of architecture-driven opportunities that help technology development organizations prioritize research into new technologies that will enable the Moon to Mars architecture.
“Identifying and analyzing high-level architecture decisions are the first steps to realizing a crewed Mars exploration campaign,” said Catherine Koerner, associate administrator, Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters in Washington. “Each yearly assessment cycle as part of our architecture process is moving us closer to ensuring we have a well thought out plan to accomplish our exploration objectives.”
NASA’s Moon to Mars architecture approach incorporates feedback from U.S. industry, academia, international partners, and the NASA workforce. The agency typically releases a series of technical documents at the end of its annual analysis cycle, including an update of the Architecture Definition Document and white papers that elaborate on frequently raised topics.
Under NASA’s Artemis campaign, the agency will establish the foundation for long-term scientific exploration at the Moon, land the next Americans and first international partner astronaut on the lunar surface, and prepare for human expeditions to Mars for the benefit of all.
For NASA’s Moon to Mars architecture documents, visit:
https://www.nasa.gov/moontomarsarchitecture
-end-
Rachel Kraft / Kathryn Hambleton
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-1600
rachel.h.kraft@nasa.gov / kathryn.a.hambleton@nasa.gov
Share
Details
Last Updated Dec 13, 2024 EditorJessica TaveauLocationNASA Headquarters Related Terms
Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate Artemis Earth's Moon Mars View the full article
-
By NASA
This article is from the 2024 Technical Update.
The NESC evaluated material compatibility of some common aerospace metals in monomethylhydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (MON-3). Previous work had identified a lack of quantitative compatibility data for nickel alloy 718, 300 series stainless steel, and titanium Ti-6Al-4V in MMH and MON-3 to support the use of zero-failure-tolerant, thin-walled pressure barriers in these propellants. Static (i.e., not flowing) general corrosion and electrochemistry testing was conducted, evaluating varied processing forms and heat treatment of the metals, water content of propellant, and exposure duration. Corrosion-rate data for all tested product forms, fluids, and durations were on the order of 1 x 10–6 inch per year rather than the previously documented “less than 1 x 10–3 inch per year”. The majority of the corrosion products were seen in the first 20 days of exposure, with an overall corrosion rate decreasing with time due to the increased divisor (time). It is therefore recommended that corrosion testing be performed at multiple short-term durations to inform the need for longer-duration testing.
Background
Nickel alloy 718, 300 series stainless steel, and Ti-6Al-4V are commonly used in storable propulsion systems (i.e., MMH/MON-3), but a concern was raised regarding what quantitative compatibility data were available for proposed zero-failure-tolerant, thin-walled (~0.005 to 0.010 inch thickness) pressure barrier designs. A literature search found that limited and conflicting data were available for commonly used aerospace metals in MMH and MON-3. For example, corrosion behavior was listed qualitatively (e.g., “A” rating), data on materials and fluids tested were imprecise, fluids were identified as contaminated without describing how they were contaminated, no compatibility data were found on relevant geometry specimens (i.e., very thin-walled or convoluted), and limited data were available to quantify differences between tested materials and flight components. When corrosion data were quantified, documented sensitivity was “1 x 10–3 inch per year or less”, which is insufficient for assessing long-duration, thin-walled, flight-weight applications.
Discussion
General corrosion testing was performed with a static/non-flowing configuration based on NASA-STD-6001, Test 15 [1]. Design of experiments methods were used to develop a test matrix varying material, propellant, propellant water content, and tested duration. Materials tested were nickel alloy 718 (solution annealed sheet, aged sheet, aged/welded sheet, and hydroformed bellows), 300 series stainless steel (low carbon sheet, titanium stabilized sheet, and hydroformed bellows), and Ti 6Al-4V sheet. Samples were tested in sealed test tubes in MMH and MON-3 with water content ranging from as-received (“dry”) up to specification allowable limits [2,3]. Tested durations ranged from 20 to 365 days. Measurements included inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS) to identify corrosion products and their concentrations in test fluid, gravimetric (i.e., scale) measurements pre- and post-exposure, and visual inspection. Bimetallic pairs (titanium stabilized 300 series stainless steel: Ti 6Al-4V and nickel alloy 718: Ti 6Al-4V) were tested for up to 65 days in both MMH and MON-3. The test setup incorporated important features of the test standard (e.g., electrode spacing and finish) and adapted the configuration for MMH/MON-3 operation. Measurements included potential difference and current flow between samples. Figure 1 shows images of the general corrosion and bimetallic pair test setups.
Test Results
For all tested materials and product forms, corrosion rates were on the order of 1 x 10–6 inch per year in MMH or MON-3, three orders of magnitude lower than historically reported. Corrosion products were generated in the first 20 days of exposure, and corrosion rate decreased with time due to the increase in divisor (i.e., time). Corrosion products increased as the water content of the propellants increased but remained in the same order of magnitude between the as-received dry propellant and propellant containing the maximum water content allowed by specification. Figure 2 illustrates test results for corrosion rate, mass loss with duration, and mass loss with water content. It is important to note that water has been demonstrated to contribute to flow decay even when water is within the specification allowable limit, and previous NASA-STD-6001 Test 15 data have demonstrated susceptibility of some nickel alloys to crevice-type corrosion attack [4]. Therefore, these results do not reduce the importance of considering the system impact of water content and evaluating for crevice corrosion behavior. Finally, in the bimetallic pair testing, tested materials did not measurably corrode in MON-3 and MMH within specification-allowable water content, as evidenced by no visual indications of corrosion and very low electrical interaction (i.e., corrosion rates derived to be less than 1 microinch per year from electrical interaction).
Recommendations
It is recommended that corrosion testing be performed at multiple shortterm durations to inform the need for longer-duration testing.
References
NASA-STD-6001 Flammability, Odor, Offgassing, and Compatibility Requirements
and Test Procedures for Materials In Environments that Support Combustion MIL-PRF-27404 Performance Specification: Propellant, Monomethylhydrazine MIL-PRF-26539 Performance Specification: Propellants, Dinitrogen Tetroxide WSTF Test 15 Report 12-45708 and WSTF Test 15 Report 13-46207 View the full article
-
-
Check out these Videos
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.