NASA Investigates Future Planetary Missions

[Waspie_Dwarf]

NASA Selects Investigations for Future Key Planetary Mission

NASA has selected five science investigations for refinement during the next year as a first step in choosing one or two missions for flight opportunities as early as 2020. The submitted proposals would study Venus, near-Earth objects and a variety of asteroids.

Each investigation team will receive $3 million to conduct concept design studies and analyses. After a detailed review and evaluation of the concept studies, NASA will make the final selections by September 2016 for continued development leading up to launch. Any selected mission will cost approximately $500 million, not including launch vehicle funding or the cost of post-launch operations.

Read more...

[Merc14]

My vote, for what little it is worth, is the NEOcam as it seems the most relevant with regard to what the small but growing private sector asteroid mining companies are exploring. Also, NEOs have the most potential of doing damage to the earth so the more we know about them the better.

[toast]

My vote, for what little it is worth, is the NEOcam as it seems the most relevant with regard to what the small

but growing private sector asteroid mining companies are exploring. Also, NEOs have the most potential of

doing damage to the earth so the more we know about them the better.

Exactly. I would vote for the NEO and asteroid projects. But for the asteroid project primary not in relationto

mining purposes but in relation to understand and to know the various material properties of these objects

much better than today to be able to develop devices and/or procedures to destroy such objects or to influence

their trajectory. And, such research would also result into results that might be of benefit for the mining

matter due to positive side effects.

Edited October 1, 2015 by toast

[Waspie_Dwarf]

My vote, for what little it is worth, is the NEOcam as it seems the most relevant with regard to what the small but growing private sector asteroid mining companies are exploring.

Personally I don't think that this is a good justification for this mission. If the private sector want to mine asteroids then the private sector should pay to explore asteroids. NASA's exploration should be purely for scientific purposes. When it launches an Earth observation mission then it's primary mission should be Earth science NOT looking for oil for the private sector, I think the same principle should apply with planetary missions too.

Also, NEOs have the most potential of doing damage to the earth so the more we know about them the better.

This IS a good a good justification for the mission.

I think all these missions have the potential for good scientific discovery. No doubt that will be one of the major criteria in the selection of a mission (or two).

[Merc14]

Personally I don't think that this is a good justification for this mission. If the private sector want to mine asteroids then the private sector should pay to explore asteroids. NASA's exploration should be purely for scientific purposes. When it launches an Earth observation mission then it's primary mission should be Earth science NOT looking for oil for the private sector, I think the same principle should apply with planetary missions too.

I meant it as a by-product of the science being performed, not the reason for the mission. I should have been more clear. Also, some of these companies are planning on launching their own small satellites to scout for likely asteroids and I am sure that NASA would be able to use those findings in their science data base.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

I meant it as a by-product of the science being performed, not the reason for the mission

I didn't mean to argue against what you said, just to five my position. Ultimately NASA isn't my national space agency and isn't paid for from my taxes, so my position is purely academic.

As for providing information that is useful to the commercial sector, like you I'm not adverse to it, it just shouldn't be a major justification. My example with NASA's Earth observation satellites holds true here too. NASA isn't launching them to search for oil, but that doesn't mean that the data isn't useful to oil companies in their searches.

Scientifically I think Psyche and Lucy would also be hugely fascinating missions, both will be visiting a type of object we haven't seen up close before. NeoCam would provide a vast amount of useful data but the real sexy missions are the ones which actually visit new worlds.

But I must not be a hypocrite here, I've spent several days arguing that science shouldn't be about what is most exciting but about the acquisition of knowledge, so may the best project win.

[Merc14]

Waspie, it seems to me that DAVINCI and VERITAS missions could be lifted on the same vehicle thereby cutting the final cost of each. Is that within the realm of possibility? I realize the lift vehicle isn't factored into the costs with this study but it seems such a natural pairing that someone must be considering it.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Waspie, it seems to me that DAVINCI and VERITAS missions could be lifted on the same vehicle thereby cutting the final cost of each.

I suppose that would depend on how large/heavy they were and what launcher would be required. You else have to factor in the risk that a single launch vehicle failure would result in the loss of two $500 million missions.

Edited to add:

There is also the risk that one mission could run into technical difficulties, delaying both missions.

Edited October 1, 2015 by Waspie_Dwarf