DOCSLIB.ORG

Titan a Moon with an Atmosphere

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Titan a Moon with an Atmosphere TITAN A MOON WITH AN ATMOSPHERE Ashley Gilliam Earth 450 – Satellites of Jupiter and Saturn 4/29/13 SATURN HAS > 60 SATELLITES, WHY TITAN? Is the only satellite with a dense atmosphere Has a nitrogen-rich atmosphere resembles Earth’s Is the only world besides Earth with a liquid on its surface • Possible habitable world Based on its size… Titan " a planet in its o# $ght! R = 6371 km R = 2576 km R = 1737 km Ch$%iaan Huy&ns (1629-1695) DISCOVERY OF TITAN Around 1650, Huygens began building telescopes with his brother Constantijn On March 25, 1655 Huygens discovered Titan in an attempt to study Saturn’s rings Named the moon Saturni Luna (“Saturns Moon”) Not properly named until the mid-1800’s THE DISCOVERY OF TITAN’S ATMOSPHERE Not much more was learned about Titan until the early 20th century In 1903, Catalan astronomer José Comas Solà claimed to have observed limb darkening on Titan, which requires the presence of an atmosphere Gerard P. Kuiper (1905-1973) José Comas Solà (1868-1937) This was confirmed by Gerard Kuiper in 1944 Image Credit: Ralph Lorenz Voyager 1 Launched September 5, 1977 M"sions to Titan Pioneer 11 Launched April 6, 1973 Cassini-Huygens Images: NASA Launched October 15, 1997 Pioneer 11 Could not penetrate Titan’s Atmosphere! Image Credit: NASA Vo y a &r 1 Image Credit: NASA Vo y a &r 1 What did we learn about the Atmosphere? • Composition (N2, CH4, & H2) • Variation with latitude (homogeneously mixed) • Temperature profile Mesosphere • Pressure profile Stratosphere Troposphere Image Credit: Fulchignoni, et al., 2005 Image Credit: Conway et al. 2003 What is the main similarity between Earth’s atmosphere and Titan’s? From Conway et al. 2003 Credit: C. P. McKay M = P P = atmospheric pressure g g = gravitaonal acceleraon Titan: N kg 1 Pa = 1 = 1 m2 m s2 P = 1.5 bar = 1.5×105 Pa ! g = 1.35 m s-2 M = 1.1 × 105 kg m-2 The column mass is greater on Titan. More substan2al atmosphere. Earth: P = 1 bar = 1×105 Pa g = 9.78 m s-2 M = 1.0 × 104 kg m-2 Casini-Huy&ns RADAR-SAR instrument was able to penetrate Titan’s thick veil of haze Pre-Cassini Cassini Image Credit: NASA Image Credit: NASA (e Huy&ns Probe • Goals of the mission: • Collect aerosols for chemical analysis • Make spectral measurements and take pictures of Titan’s surface and atmosphere • Measure wind speeds • Identify composition of the atmosphere • Measure the physical properties of the atmosphere • Determine the physical state, topography, and composition of the surface The Huygens probe separated( from thee Cassini Huy orbiter on& Decemberns Probe 25, 2004 Took 148 minutes to descend through the atmosphere Was prepared to touch down on land or liquid Based on the pictures taken by Cassini 1,200 km away, the landing site appeared to resemble a shoreline HUYGENS LANDING SITE Landed January 14, 2005 at 10.2°S, 192.4°W Discovered small “rocks”, possibly made of water ice, at the landing site. Fluvial activity (methane?) Images taken during descent showed no open areas of liquid, but indicated liquid had once flowed Titan Earth Image Credit: NASA POSSIBLE SHORELINE 100 km LAKES ON TITAN Image Credit: NASA Titan: Ligeia Mare Earth: Lake Superior Image Credit: William Hubbard, UA LPL AN ALIEN ENVIRONMENT TITAN EARTH Surface Liquid: Liquid methane & ethane Water Surface: Ice Rock Surface Composition: Hydrocarbons Dirt Titan’s South Pole Clouds over a five hour period Credit: C. P. McKay Credit: C. P. McKay COMPARING TITAN AND EARTH Property Titan Earth Gravity 1/7 1 Pressure 1.5 atm 1 atm Atmosphere N2, CH4 N2, O2 ,CO2 Clouds & Rain CH4, C2H6 H2O Greenhouse N2, CH4, H2 CO2, H2O Temperature -180oC +15oC Rotation 16 days 1 day Solar Orbit 30 years 1 year Habitability of Titan Titan = 0.64 Mars = 0.59 Gliese 581d = 0.43 Credit: Popular Science Future M"sions Aerial Vehicle for In-Situ and Airborne Titan Reconnaissance (AVIATR) Titan Saturn System Mission (TSSM) Titan Mare Explorer (TiME) .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix 1: Venus Missions
    Appendix 1: Venus Missions Sputnik 7 (USSR) Launch 02/04/1961 First attempted Venus atmosphere craft; upper stage failed to leave Earth orbit Venera 1 (USSR) Launch 02/12/1961 First attempted flyby; contact lost en route Mariner 1 (US) Launch 07/22/1961 Attempted flyby; launch failure Sputnik 19 (USSR) Launch 08/25/1962 Attempted flyby, stranded in Earth orbit Mariner 2 (US) Launch 08/27/1962 First successful Venus flyby Sputnik 20 (USSR) Launch 09/01/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Sputnik 21 (USSR) Launch 09/12/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Cosmos 21 (USSR) Launch 11/11/1963 Possible Venera engineering test flight or attempted flyby Venera 1964A (USSR) Launch 02/19/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Venera 1964B (USSR) Launch 03/01/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Cosmos 27 (USSR) Launch 03/27/1964 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Zond 1 (USSR) Launch 04/02/1964 Venus flyby, contact lost May 14; flyby July 14 Venera 2 (USSR) Launch 11/12/1965 Venus flyby, contact lost en route Venera 3 (USSR) Launch 11/16/1965 Venus lander, contact lost en route, first Venus impact March 1, 1966 Cosmos 96 (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Possible attempted landing, craft fragmented in Earth orbit Venera 1965A (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Flyby attempt (launch failure) Venera 4 (USSR) Launch 06/12/1967 Successful atmospheric probe, arrived at Venus 10/18/1967 Mariner 5 (US) Launch 06/14/1967 Successful flyby 10/19/1967 Cosmos 167 (USSR) Launch 06/17/1967 Attempted atmospheric probe, stranded in Earth orbit Venera 5 (USSR) Launch 01/05/1969 Returned atmospheric data for 53 min on 05/16/1969 M.
    [Show full text]
  • Catherinesaunders
    The Utility of Robot Sensory Devices in a Collaborative Autonomic Environment Catherine Saunders, Roy Sterritt, George Wilkie School of Computing and Mathematics University of Ulster Northern Ireland [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract –-This paper proposes an Autonomic architecture that environment and relay meaningful information to each will enable mobile robots to self-manage and collaborate by other. using control loops to monitor their internal state and external environment. The Autonomic Computing MAPE-K control In this paper we discuss the sensor capabilities of the Dr loop is used to design a Robot Autonomic Element and a Robot X80-H platform that will be used for the research. A Mapping Autonomic Element; each can exchange data and collaborate to find an object located within a room. A review of design of the proposed system is included and explained. A the sensor capabilities of the X80-H mobile robot platform is brief literature review of robotic collaborative systems is undertaken with emphasis on how useful each sensor will be to also included. The Research Background section looks at the proposed research. A literature review of other projects why self-managing software systems are needed. that feature robot collaboration is also included. Keywords - autonomic computing; mobile robot; Dr Robot II. ROBOT SENSORY DEVICES X80-H; collaboration; MAPE-K This section gives an overview of the sensors that the Dr Robot X80-H is equipped with. We assess how reliable they are and how useful they will be for our research. We will be I.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Saturn-Versus-Jupiter Tether Operation
    Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics Comparative Saturn-Versus-Jupiter Tether Operation J. R. Sanmartin1 ©, J. Pelaez1 ©, and I. Carrera-Calvo1 Abstract Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, among the four Giant Outer planets, have magnetic field B about 20 times weaker than Jupiter. This could suggest, in principle, that planetary capture and operation using tethers, which involve B effects twice, might be much less effective at Saturn, in particular, than at Jupiter. It was recently found, however, that the very high Jovian B itself strongly limits conditions for tether use, maximum captured spacecraft-to-tether mass ratio only reaching to about 3.5. Further, it is here shown that planetary parameters and low magnetic field might make tether operation at Saturn more effective than at Jupiter. Operation analysis involves electron plasma density in a limited radial range, about 1-1.5 times Saturn radius, and is weakly requiring as regards density modeling. 1. Introduction All Giant Outer planets have magnetic field B and corotating plasma, allowing nonconventional exploration. Electrodynamic tethers, which are thermodynamic (dissipative) in character, can 1. provide propellantless drag both for deorbiting spacecraft in Low Earth Orbit at end of mission and for planetary spacecraft capture and operation down the gravitational well, and 2. generate accompanying, useful electrical power, or store it to later invert tether current (Sanmartin et al., 1993; Sanmartin & Estes, 1999). At Jupiter, tethers could be effective because its field B is high (Sanmartin et al., 2008). Tethers would allow a variety of science applications (Sanchez-Torres & Sanmartin, 2011). The Saturn field is 20 times smaller, however, and tether operation involves field B twice, which makes that thermodynamic character manifest: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • + New Horizons
    Media Contacts NASA Headquarters Policy/Program Management Dwayne Brown New Horizons Nuclear Safety (202) 358-1726 [email protected] The Johns Hopkins University Mission Management Applied Physics Laboratory Spacecraft Operations Michael Buckley (240) 228-7536 or (443) 778-7536 [email protected] Southwest Research Institute Principal Investigator Institution Maria Martinez (210) 522-3305 [email protected] NASA Kennedy Space Center Launch Operations George Diller (321) 867-2468 [email protected] Lockheed Martin Space Systems Launch Vehicle Julie Andrews (321) 853-1567 [email protected] International Launch Services Launch Vehicle Fran Slimmer (571) 633-7462 [email protected] NEW HORIZONS Table of Contents Media Services Information ................................................................................................ 2 Quick Facts .............................................................................................................................. 3 Pluto at a Glance ...................................................................................................................... 5 Why Pluto and the Kuiper Belt? The Science of New Horizons ............................... 7 NASA’s New Frontiers Program ........................................................................................14 The Spacecraft ........................................................................................................................15 Science Payload ...............................................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • (Preprint) AAS 18-416 PRELIMINARY INTERPLANETARY MISSION
    (Preprint) AAS 18-416 PRELIMINARY INTERPLANETARY MISSION DESIGN AND NAVIGATION FOR THE DRAGONFLY NEW FRONTIERS MISSION CONCEPT Christopher J. Scott,∗ Martin T. Ozimek,∗ Douglas S. Adams,y Ralph D. Lorenz,z Shyam Bhaskaran,x Rodica Ionasescu,{ Mark Jesick,{ and Frank E. Laipert{ Dragonfly is one of two mission concepts selected in December 2017 to advance into Phase A of NASA’s New Frontiers competition. Dragonfly would address the Ocean Worlds mis- sion theme by investigating Titan’s habitability and prebiotic chemistry and searching for evidence of chemical biosignatures of past (or extant) life. A rotorcraft lander, Dragonfly would capitalize on Titan’s dense atmosphere to enable mobility and sample materials from a variety of geologic settings. This paper describes Dragonfly’s baseline mission design giv- ing a complete picture of the inherent tradespace and outlines the design process from launch to atmospheric entry. INTRODUCTION Hosting the moons Titan and Enceladus, the Saturnian system contains at least two unique destinations that have been classified as ocean worlds. Titan, the second largest moon in the solar system behind Ganymede and the only planetary satellite with a significant atmosphere, is larger than the planet Mercury at 5,150 km (3,200 miles) in diameter. Its atmosphere, approximately 10 times the column mass of Earth’s, is composed of 95% nitrogen, 5% methane, 0.1% hydrogen along with trace amounts of organics.1 Titan’s atmosphere may resemble that of the Earth before biological processes began modifying its composition. Similar to the hydrological cycle on Earth, Titan’s methane evaporates into clouds, rains, and flows over the surface to fill lakes and seas, and subsequently evaporates back into the atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Outer Planets Assessment Group (OPAG) View of Decadal Survey
    Outer Solar System: Many Worlds to Explore Outer Planets Assessment Group (OPAG) View of Decadal Survey Progress May 2017 Alfred McEwen, OPAG Chair LPL, University of Arizona This presentation will address (relevant to OPAG): • 1. Most important new discoveries 2011-2017 – (V&V writing was completed in late 2010) • 2. Progress made in implementing Decadal advice – Flight investigations • Flagship Missions • New Frontiers – R&A and infrastructure – Technology • 3. Other issues relevant to the committee’s statement of task – Smallsats for Outer Planet Exploration – How to make the Discovery Program useful for Outer Planets – Europa Lander – Coordination with ESA JUICE mission – Adding Ocean Worlds to New Frontiers 4 – Future mission studies to prepare for next Decadal • 4. Summary grade recommendations on Decadal progress • 5. OPAG top recommendations to mid-term review 1. Most Important New Discoveries 2011-present • Jupiter system: – Europa plate tectonics (Prockter et al., 2014) – Europa cryovolcanism (Quick et al., 2017; Prockter et al., 2017) – Europa plumes (Roth et al., 2014; Sparks et al., 2017) – Confirmation of subsurface ocean in Ganymede (Saur et al., 2015) – Evidence for extensive melt in Io’s mantle (Khurana et al., 2011; Tyler et al., 2015) – Fabulous results from Juno (papers submitted) • Saturn System: – MUCH from Cassini—see upcoming slides • Uranus and Neptune systems: – Standard interior models do not fit observations; Uranus and Neptune may be quite different (Nettelmann et al. 2013) – Intense auroras seen at Uranus (Lamy et al., 2012, 2017) – Weather on Uranus and Neptune confined to a “thin” layer (<1,000 km) (Kaspi et al. 2013) – Ice Giant growing around nearby TW Hydra (Rapson et al., 2015) – Triton’s tidal heating and possible subsurface ocean (Gaeman et al., 2012; Nimmo and Spencer, 2015) • Pluto system—lots of results from New Horizons – The Pluto system is complex in the variety of its landscapes, activity, and range of surface ages.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Sector Brochure
    SPACE SPACE REVOLUTIONIZING THE WAY TO SPACE SPACECRAFT TECHNOLOGIES PROPULSION Moog provides components and subsystems for cold gas, chemical, and electric Moog is a proven leader in components, subsystems, and systems propulsion and designs, develops, and manufactures complete chemical propulsion for spacecraft of all sizes, from smallsats to GEO spacecraft. systems, including tanks, to accelerate the spacecraft for orbit-insertion, station Moog has been successfully providing spacecraft controls, in- keeping, or attitude control. Moog makes thrusters from <1N to 500N to support the space propulsion, and major subsystems for science, military, propulsion requirements for small to large spacecraft. and commercial operations for more than 60 years. AVIONICS Moog is a proven provider of high performance and reliable space-rated avionics hardware and software for command and data handling, power distribution, payload processing, memory, GPS receivers, motor controllers, and onboard computing. POWER SYSTEMS Moog leverages its proven spacecraft avionics and high-power control systems to supply hardware for telemetry, as well as solar array and battery power management and switching. Applications include bus line power to valves, motors, torque rods, and other end effectors. Moog has developed products for Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) Systems, such as high power DC converters, switching, and power stabilization. MECHANISMS Moog has produced spacecraft motion control products for more than 50 years, dating back to the historic Apollo and Pioneer programs. Today, we offer rotary, linear, and specialized mechanisms for spacecraft motion control needs. Moog is a world-class manufacturer of solar array drives, propulsion positioning gimbals, electric propulsion gimbals, antenna positioner mechanisms, docking and release mechanisms, and specialty payload positioners.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface of Ligeia Mare, Titan, from Cassini Altimeter and Radiometer Analysis Howard Zebker, Alex Hayes, Mike Janssen, Alice Le Gall, Ralph Lorenz, Lauren Wye
    Surface of Ligeia Mare, Titan, from Cassini altimeter and radiometer analysis Howard Zebker, Alex Hayes, Mike Janssen, Alice Le Gall, Ralph Lorenz, Lauren Wye To cite this version: Howard Zebker, Alex Hayes, Mike Janssen, Alice Le Gall, Ralph Lorenz, et al.. Surface of Ligeia Mare, Titan, from Cassini altimeter and radiometer analysis. Geophysical Research Letters, American Geophysical Union, 2014, 41 (2), pp.308-313. 10.1002/2013GL058877. hal-00926152 HAL Id: hal-00926152 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00926152 Submitted on 19 Jul 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. PUBLICATIONS Geophysical Research Letters RESEARCH LETTER Surface of Ligeia Mare, Titan, from Cassini 10.1002/2013GL058877 altimeter and radiometer analysis Key Points: Howard Zebker1, Alex Hayes2, Mike Janssen3, Alice Le Gall4, Ralph Lorenz5, and Lauren Wye6 • Ligeia Mare, like Ontario Lacus, is flat with no evidence of ocean waves or wind 1Departments of Geophysics and Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA, 2Department of • The
    [Show full text]
  • Titan and Enceladus $1 B Mission
    JPL D-37401 B January 30, 2007 Titan and Enceladus $1B Mission Feasibility Study Report Prepared for NASA’s Planetary Science Division Prepared By: Kim Reh Contributing Authors: John Elliott Tom Spilker Ed Jorgensen John Spencer (Southwest Research Institute) Ralph Lorenz (The Johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory) KSC GSFC ARC Approved By: _________________________________ Kim Reh Dr. Ralph Lorenz Jet Propulsion Laboratory The Johns Hopkins University, Applied Study Manager Physics Laboratory Titan Science Lead _________________________________ Dr. John Spencer Southwest Research Institute Enceladus Science Lead Pre-decisional — For Planning and Discussion Purposes Only Titan and Enceladus Feasibility Study Report Table of Contents JPL D-37401 B The following members of an Expert Advisory and Review Board contributed to ensuring the consistency and quality of the study results through a comprehensive review and advisory process and concur with the results herein. Name Title/Organization Concurrence Chief Engineer/JPL Planetary Flight Projects Gentry Lee Office Duncan MacPherson JPL Review Fellow Glen Fountain NH Project Manager/JHU-APL John Niehoff Sr. Research Engineer/SAIC Bob Pappalardo Planetary Scientist/JPL Torrence Johnson Chief Scientist/JPL i Pre-decisional — For Planning and Discussion Purposes Only Titan and Enceladus Feasibility Study Report Table of Contents JPL D-37401 B This page intentionally left blank ii Pre-decisional — For Planning and Discussion Purposes Only Titan and Enceladus Feasibility Study Report Table of Contents JPL D-37401 B Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Study Objectives and Guidelines............................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Relation to Cassini-Huygens, New Horizons and Juno.......................................... 1-1 1.3 Technical Approach...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Its Founding and Early Years Ewen A. Whitaker
    The University of Arizona's LUNAR AND PLANETARY LABORATORY Its Founding and Early Years Ewen A. Whitaker Set in Varityper Times Roman and printed at the University of Arizona Printing-Reproductions Department Equal Employment Opportunity· Affirmative Action Employer CONTENTS THE PRE-TUCSON ERA Historical background ........................................ I Enter Gerard P. Kuiper ....................................... 2 The Moon enters the picture ................................... 3 A call for suggestions ......................................... 5 The Harold Urey affair ....................................... 6 Preliminaries for the Lunar Atlas ............................... 7 1957 - a dream begins to take shape ............................. 7 The shot that was seen (and heard) around the world ............... 8 Other irons in the fire ......................................... 9 Kuiper seeks full-time help for the Lunar Project .................. 9 1959 - the Lunar Project gathers momentum ..................... 11 A new factor in the Lunar Project LPL story ................... 12 The Air Force enters the lunar cartography business ............... 13 The Lunar Atlas published at last .............................. 14 Big problems with the Yerkes set-up ............................ : 6 The southwestern U.S. begins to beckon ........................ 17 "There is a tide in the affairs of men ..." ....................... 18 Preparing for the move ...................................... 23 THE TUCSON ERA The Lunar Project makes the transfer
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 18 Michael J. Malaska, Ph. D. Jet Propulsion Laboratory
    Michael J. Malaska, Ph. D. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 4800 Oak Grove Dr., MS 183-301 Pasadena, CA 91109-8099 818-354-7652 [email protected] OBJECTIVE Highly creative and enthusiastic individual with a broad background in planetary science, chemistry, and geology with a research program in planetary science at the interface of the sciences of geology, chemistry, and astrobiology with specific skills encompassing field science, laboratory research, and remote sensing. EDUCATION NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, NPP Senior Postdoctoral Fellow, 2012-2015 Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, postdoctoral position in Neurochemistry, 1991-1993. University of California, Berkeley, Ph.D. in Chemistry, 1991. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, S.B. in Chemistry, 1986. RESEARCH SUMMARY My planetary geology research program has focused on the interface of chemical and geological processes on Saturn's moon Titan based on data returned by the Cassini-Huygens spacecraft. These studies examine how liquid hydrocarbon rains and rivers on that world have eroded and dissolved a landscape made of organic materials layered upon rock-hard water ice. My key discoveries include the identification and characterization of labyrinth terrain on Titan, comparison of meandering channels to high-volume rivers on Earth, and the modelling of dissolution processes of Titan surface materials. My current program involves laboratory studies examining the dissolution geology of Titan and the geomorphological mapping of Titan's surface. My 20 year career as an organic chemist in drug discovery was located at the interface of chemistry and biology. This research has discovered new chemical compounds that can interact with enzymes and receptors to control cellular processes and treat diseases.
    [Show full text]
  • Planetary Exploration : Progress and Promise
    PLANET ARY EXPLORATION PROGRESS AND PROMISE CONTENTS: NASA PLANETARY EXPLORATION PLANS: SIGNIFICANT EVENTS PLANETARY EXPLORATION PROGRESS-1978 NASA SPACE SCIENCE PROGRAM FUNDING: 5 -YEAR PLAN NASA OSS 5-YEAR PLAN: PLANETARY PROGRAM FUNDING REFERENCE COP'I PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE compiled by Dr. Leonard Srnka, Staff Scientist Lunar and Planetary Institute 3303 NASA Road One Houston, Texas 77058 Lunar and Planetary Institute Contribution No. 297 (June 1978 update> NASA PLANETARY EXPLORATION PLANS SIGNIFICANT EVENTS MISSION EVENTS PIONEER VENUS ORBITER ORBIT INSERTION, DECEMBER 1978 PIONEER VENUS MULTIPROBE VENUS ENCOUNTER/ENTRY, DECEMBER 1978 PIONEER 11 SATURN ENCOUNTER, SEPTEMBER 1979 VOYAGER 1 JUPITER ENCOUNTER, MARCH 1979 SATURN ENCOUNTER, NOVEMBER 1980 VOYAGER 2 JUPITER ENCOUNTER, JULY 1979 SATURN ENCOUNTER, AUGUST 1981 URANUS ENCOUNTER, JANUARY 1986 SOLAR MAXIMUM MISSION LAUNCH, OCTOBER 1979 VENUS ORBITAL IMAGING RADAR VENUS ENCOUNTER, SPRING 1985 SOLAR POLAR MISSION JUPITER ENCOUNTER, 1984 SOLAR POLES PASSAGE, 1986 GALILEO MISSION MARS FLYBY, APRIL 1982 JUPITER ENCOUNTER (ORBIT INSERTION/ PROBE ENTRY), 1985 COMET HALLEYlTEMPEL, . 2'J MISSION• HALLEY ENCOUNTER, NOVEMBER 1985 TEMPEL 2 ENCOUNTER, JULY 1988 or COMET ENCKE RENDEZVOUS ENCKE ENCOUNTER, 1987 MARS GEOCHEMICAL ORBITER MARS ENCOUNTER, 1987 MARS SAMPLE RETURN MARS ENCOUNTER, 1989 EARTH RETURN, 1991 SATURN ORBITER DUAL PROBE SATURN ENCOUNTER, 1992 from NASA Headquarters 5-year plan May 1978 PLANETARY EXPLORATION -- PROGRESS AND PROMISE CONTENT S: Planetary exploration progress - 1977 fig. 1 The future fig. 2 Inner planets plan fig. 3 Outer planets plan fig. 4 Small bodies plan fig. 5 compiled by Dr. Leonard Srnka, Staff Scientist LUNAR SCIENCE INSTITUTE 3303 NASA Road One Houston, TX 77058 September 1977 LUNAR SCIENCE INSTITUTE CONTRIBUTION No.
    [Show full text]