Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Saru

$2bn Europa clipper mission proposed

27 posts in this topic

Scientists are hoping to send a probe to find signs of life on Jupiter's ice-covered waterworld moon.

scientists have drawn up plans for a mission that could look for life on Europa, a moon of Jupiter that is covered in vast oceans of water under a thick layer of ice. The Europa Clipper would be the first dedicated mission to the waterworld moon, if it gets approval for funding from Nasa. The project is set to cost $2bn.

arrow3.gifRead more...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Icant see the point.Its to far away to have life as we know it and to cold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Europa disserve a mission to explore it how about a multination mission to spread the costs don't go it alone NASA.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Icant see the point.Its to far away to have life as we know it and to cold.

You haven't been keeping up with the last 20 or so years of discoveries about the moons of the giant planets.

It is believed that Europa and several other moons have liquid water oceans beneath the icy surface. The oceans are warmed by tidal interactions with the planet they orbit (in this case Jupiter).

If it is warm enough for liquid water then it is potentially warm enough for life.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is warm enough for liquid water then it is potentially warm enough for life.

Yes, and another part of what fuels this idea is how they've found life on Earth in extreme conditions (ie. near volcanoes or deep under the ice). Also I've always wondered if there'd have to be liquid water between the ice and the core... just cause of the "goldilocks" effect between surface and core. Fun to think about.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think that spreading out the available funding to disparate projects will leave as many questions as those that they are hoped to answer.

Mars most certainly, seems to have water and liquid water at the surface during certain seasons (there are plenty of images to suggest water flowing at certain times of the year), and with the possible discovery of Clays and sediments, surely this is a more achievable target?

I know that Arthur C. Clark proposed Europa as a source of life, but it was just a work of Science Fiction, and the "life" he promulgated was not exactly "sentient" . I do not expect to find any sentient life in the Solar System, so we have to concentrate Fiscal Imperitives on accessibility to the environments, within a time - scale that can maintain popular momentum (sorry, but you need peoples backing on these explorations). Mars should continue to be Our focus. Send probes to the poles to bore through the Ice, go to Olympus Mons (rich in all minerals), go into the Great Rift Valley where Mars' atmosphere is more heavily concentrated (still minute compared to the Atmospheric Pressure of the Earth). Just make a concentrated effort, internationally to thoroughly explore one of the planets... Just IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ wimfloppp, Have you seen the Life and know how Cold it is at the Bottom of our ocean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ wimfloppp, Have you seen the Life and know how Cold it is at the Bottom of our ocean?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here DONTEATUS.

Deep ocean water is usually between 0 & 3°C. That is far warmer than the average surface temperature of even Mars (in fact it about the current temperature of my back garden).

Europa has a surface temperature which varies between -160°C at the equator and -220°C at the poles, and so without the heat generated by tidal flexing, wimfloppp would be right, it would be too cold for life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't they do a Cassini-type mission and send a probe down to the surface? I understand it would be more difficult because Europa doesn't have an atmosphere to slow down with...such as was the case with the Huygens probe and Titan.

But I wonder how they plan to look for signs of life through all that ice. We're talking an ice cover that is estimated at 60 miles thick.

I'm all for the mission. Europa is my favorite of all of the Jovian moons. I just wish they'd do more I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't they do a Cassini-type mission and send a probe down to the surface? I understand it would be more difficult because Europa doesn't have an atmosphere to slow down with...such as was the case with the Huygens probe and Titan.

I'm not sure how much you could learn from the surface. It's rather smooth and featureless, which means it is a relatively new surface. Sure, you could do some chemical analysis of the surface ice, but would the scientific returns be worth the complexity, risk and expense of a lander?

An orbiter would probably give greater scientific return for less risk. An orbiter would be able to map the entire surface for example. Monitoring the orbit of the vehicle would lead to a better understanding of the internal make up of the planet.

But I wonder how they plan to look for signs of life through all that ice. We're talking an ice cover that is estimated at 60 miles thick.

Searching for signs of life is a bit of journalistic sensationalism. The official NASA/JPL page for this mission makes no mention of such an objective (HERE).

Your figure of 60 miles deep is the figure for the water layer on Europa, including the ice and the liquid ocean. The depth of the ice crust isn't known and the Europa Clipper would carry a radar to try and determine that. If the crust is relatively thin then future missions might be able to melt their way through the ice to the ocean beneath.

I'm all for the mission. Europa is my favorite of all of the Jovian moons. I just wish they'd do more I guess.

I'm with you on this, although it all depends on the US government and the funds they allocate of course.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nasa have wanted to visit Europa ever since Voyager first noticed that there were other "active" bodies in our Solar System (they noticed Pele erupting on Io). Before this they believed all other planets and moons were inactive. The series "The Planets" made in 1999 talks about sending a probe to Europa but the costs and more importantly how they get through the ice with the probe was still beyond their engineers at the time.

If they send a probe it will have to land then have some way of getting through the ice (example : drill or heat) then once through the ice it would have to survive immersed in water. Nasa would probably want to be able to search around so a propulsion system will be needed and a light source so we could see and maybe a chemical chamber for sampling. Every mission with Robotic rovers is absolutly amazing to see how they have acheived each one. This mission would be (I'm not sure what tops amazing) the ultimate in engineering and computing if it was to go ahead. I just hope I'm still around to witness this feat :yes: !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until we can devise away of getting through the ice I really cannot see the point of just looking at a frozen surface. Hardly sounds like the most exciting missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until we can devise away of getting through the ice I really cannot see the point of just looking at a frozen surface. Hardly sounds like the most exciting missions.

So you would attempt to get through the ice without finding out how thick it is first? Or confirming the existence of the liquid ocean beneath? Or locating the best place to attempt to get through the ice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about sending a relatively (!!) cheap sonar - acoustic arrays to impact the Ice, the acoustic cannon can be deployed over various frequencies, with the Sonar collecting the reflected signals and sending them back to Earth. This is already widely used in the Petro-Gas industries when prospecting for new Oil and Gas. The boundaries between layers are very distinct, would tell you how deep the ice is and also the depth of any liquid water below it.

It is a very well understood practise here on earth, and may de-risk any nascent technologies that may be "nice - to - have".

Just an idea...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a very well understood practise here on earth, and may de-risk any nascent technologies that may be "nice - to - have".

Just an idea...

If I understand your idea it would still require a lander, which would be expensive, complicated and risky. As MedicTJ pointed out Europa has no appreciable atmosphere and so we would need a landing system that would make Curiosity's "seven minutes of terror" look like child's play. The price tag is $2 billion for an orbiter, I suspect a lander would be considerably more expensive.

We have to learn to walk before we can run. The Europa Clipper will provide us with a detailed map of the surface of Europa and its radar may help determine the best place for future missions to land.

NASA has always done its robotic exploration in a logical and systematic way, first flybys, then orbiters and then landers. This is how they have explored the Moon and Mars. Each phase builds on the knowledge of the last. Risk is reduced and scientific returns maximised. It seems sensible to explore Europa in the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It interesting to read the diversity of commentary in this thread. Does it also reflect the diversity of mission in NASA? If we harken back to the JFK era when NASA was given the primary mission of getting a man on the moon, it did so with a focused zeal that brought the world together in marvelous celebration to where an entire civilization was able to move beyond the Earth and set foot on an alien world. Does this translate into a comparable manned mission, to perhaps Mars, to establish a foothold in another world? Or, does NASA perhaps focus on finding life on another world? Certainly deciding upon a mission is open to debate, but I think that NASA has historically done its best work when it was focused. This world sorely needs a comparable challenge of a stature to the manned endeavor to the moon to stimulate us, as a civilization, to greater realization and opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It interesting to read the diversity of commentary in this thread. Does it also reflect the diversity of mission in NASA? If we harken back I think that NASA has historically done its best work when it was focused.

I agree but it is the very nature of NASA that it's focus must come from the US government. As long as politicians continue to change NASA's goals every 4 or 8 years then it is impossible for the agency to be focused.

Space projects take years to plan and execute. They are long term objectives, politicians need to look further ahead than the next election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning landing and one day exploring below the ice. Someone mentioned the ice may be 60 miles thick before you reach the liquid ocean. If that is so (and I have no idea if that figure is correct) how likely is it we can get a probe down to the water? With -160 to -220 on the surface, any hole that we could melt or bore would instantly refreeze. Could you receive a signal through that much ice from an untethered ROV? It also seems unlikely that you could have 60 miles of cable from the surface to an ROV. You would almost need a robot that could melt its way down to the water, operate independently, take video and samples and the melt itself back to the surface. No small task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we harken back to the JFK era when NASA was given the primary mission of getting a man on the moon, it did so with a focused zeal that brought the world together in marvelous celebration to where an entire civilization was able to move beyond the Earth and set foot on an alien world.

We must remember that at that time the "world" was a divided body when it came to Space travel. If it were not for the Soviet Union (at the time) trying to reach the Moon during the early 60's, we as mankind may have taken a little longer to reach other bodies besides our Planet. President Kennedy was adamant in getting to the Moon first and in turn threw all the finacial backing that NASA needed to get the job done. (and to be truthful they were in second place until the final stretch)

In today's world where we now work together (as a world) to acheive these missions, the governments are not as eager to put the dollars towards these type of endeavours.

Maybe we need another space race to eventuate so the governments are more driven, (don't get your hopes up :no: ) as it seems the cost of curiosity and knowledge is too much for governments to warrant these type of missions.

Personally I feel privileged to witness all of the missions that NASA manages to have approved and accomplish. "We only see the surface of a very deep pond"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole venture was a huge waste of time and money just so the US could win over Russia. The world's technology is only now getting to the point where this sort of thing becomes reasonably worth while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole venture was a huge waste of time and money just so the US could win over Russia. The world's technology is only now getting to the point where this sort of thing becomes reasonably worth while.

The "reason" may be dubious but the result was definitely worth it.

Sometimes the reasons for doing something may not be the best at heart but if the end result is as amazing as walking on the Moon, then maybe the Space race was worth the dubious reason.

Without the 2 superpowers battling to be first to the Moon, maybe the record books would have a German name as the first person on the Moon (they both took as much information from "Von Braun" as they could to advance their programs)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the ice thickness, most things I have read put the ice thickness at 2-5 miles. Which, if right, is a thickness we can deal with. :)

And I for one look forward to this mission being launched within my lifetime :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I understand your idea it would still require a lander, which would be expensive, complicated and risky. As MedicTJ pointed out Europa has no appreciable atmosphere and so we would need a landing system that would make Curiosity's "seven minutes of terror" look like child's play. The price tag is $2 billion for an orbiter, I suspect a lander would be considerably more expensive.

.

Not quite Waspie, I was proposing 2 impactors (acoustic cannon, and Sonar Transponder), with only 1/10th the gravity of Earth and no appreciable atmospher the impactors to approach at very low speed (relatively) and embed in the ice, although this is not an essential requirement with an omnidirectional transponder. Not looking for a soft landing, and the instrumentation would not require it.

I dont know, just an idea, I'll move on now :unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "reason" may be dubious but the result was definitely worth it.

Sometimes the reasons for doing something may not be the best at heart but if the end result is as amazing as walking on the Moon, then maybe the Space race was worth the dubious reason.

Without the 2 superpowers battling to be first to the Moon, maybe the record books would have a German name as the first person on the Moon (they both took as much information from "Von Braun" as they could to advance their programs)

Your point is well taken, and it may be that the loss of face that the Russians incurred, after they made the challenge, of having to abandon it, is part of why the Soviet Union as we then knew it no longer exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "reason" may be dubious but the result was definitely worth it.

Sometimes the reasons for doing something may not be the best at heart but if the end result is as amazing as walking on the Moon, then maybe the Space race was worth the dubious reason.

Without the 2 superpowers battling to be first to the Moon, maybe the record books would have a German name as the first person on the Moon (they both took as much information from "Von Braun" as they could to advance their programs)

Not quite right Major Payne.. The USA, UK, and Russia took everything that remained (Operation Paperclip) the German Authorities that remained had no access to, or knowledge of the projects as the knowledge was closely guarded by Himmler (Reichsfuhrer), and that which was discovered comprised of only those project notes and prototypes (or functional machines as in the case of the V2) that were not summarily destroyed.Germany was deprived of all access, as was France

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.