DOCSLIB.ORG

(TABS) Mission Design Und Technologie Für Ein Titan Aerobot Ba

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(TABS) Mission Design Und Technologie Für Ein Titan Aerobot Ba Mission Design and Technology for a Titan Aerobot Balloon System (TABS) Mission Design und Technologie für ein Titan Aerobot Ballon-System (TABS) A thesis accepted by the Faculty of Aerospace Engineering and Geodesy of the Universität Stuttgart in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Engineering Sciences (Dr.-Ing.) By Jaime Esper Born in Colombia Main referee: Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Hans-Peter Röser Co-referees: Prof. Michael W. Plesniak, Ph.D. Prof. Dr. –Ing. Stefanos Fasoulas Date of Defense: 28 March 2012 Institute of Space Systems University of Stuttgart 2012 Dedication In living memory of my father Dr. Alfredo Esper, who instilled in me a deep sense of awe and admiration for nature, and a curiosity to always reach for the stars. To my family, whose love gives warmth and meaning to my journey. ii Table of Contents Dedication …………………………………………………………………………………………………... ii List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………………………. v List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. vi Acronyms …………………………………………………………………………………………………… vi Abstract / Kurzfassung …………………………………………………………………………………….. vii 1.0 Introduction and Background …………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.1 Research Plan ………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 1.2 Technology Functional Areas …………………………………………………………………. 1 1.3 Dissertation Methodology/Outline …………………………………………………………….. 6 2.0 Scientific Objectives and Science Instruments .......................................................................................... 7 3.0 Mission Design .......................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Design Approach ......................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Trajectory Design ........................................................................................................................ 7 3.3 Trajectory Computation ............................................................................................................... 9 3.4 Trajectory Correction Maneuvers ................................................................................................ 18 3.5 Entry Flight Path Angle ............................................................................................................... 18 4.0 Communications ........................................................................................................................................ 19 4.1 Link Analysis and TABS Antenna Sizing ................................................................................... 19 4.2 Onboard Storage, Downlink Duty Cycle, and Total Data ........................................................... 22 4.3 Carrier Spacecraft Flyby and Relay Communications ................................................................ 24 4.4 Communications Summary ......................................................................................................... 25 5.0 TABS Buoyant Gas System ....................................................................................................................... 26 5.1 Hydrogen Balloon (baseline) ....................................................................................................... 26 5.2 Montgolfier Balloon .................................................................................................................... 28 5.3 Comparison of Different Balloon Types ..................................................................................... 29 5.3.1 Super Pressure Hydrogen versus Montgolfier Balloons ............................................ 29 5.3.2 Super Pressure Hydrogen versus Helium Balloons ................................................... 31 5.4 TABS H2 Tank Sizing ................................................................................................................. 33 5.4.1 Primary Spherical Tank Sizing .................................................................................. 33 5.4.2 Primary Toroidal Tank Sizing ................................................................................... 35 5.4.3 Auxiliary Toroidal Tank Sizing ................................................................................. 36 5.5 Tank Gas Flow Rate and Balloon Inflation Time ....................................................................... 37 6.0 Entry Probe ................................................................................................................................................ 40 6.1 Instrument Platform Size ............................................................................................................. 40 6.2 High Gain Antenna ...................................................................................................................... 40 6.3 Aeroshell Geometry and Size ...................................................................................................... 41 6.4 Payload Thermal Control ............................................................................................................. 42 6.5 Aft Component Accommodation ................................................................................................. 42 6.6 Probe Layout and Overall Dimension .......................................................................................... 43 6.7 Vehicle Aerodynamic Stability Considerations ........................................................................... 43 6.8 Deployment Scheme and Operational Configuration .................................................................. 45 6.9 Entry Probe Equipment List ......................................................................................................... 48 7.0 Aerothermodynamic Entry Analysis .......................................................................................................... 51 7.1 Titan's Atmospheric Model .......................................................................................................... 52 7.1.1 Atmospheric Scale Height .......................................................................................... 52 7.1.2 Exponential Atmospheric Model ................................................................................ 53 iii 7.1.3 Atmospheric Model Comparisons .............................................................................. 55 7.1.4 Flow Regime Estimation ............................................................................................ 56 7.2 Aerodynamics .............................................................................................................................. 57 7.2.1 Aerodynamic Loading and Velocity Evolution .......................................................... 57 7.2.2 Dynamic Pressure ....................................................................................................... 58 7.2.3 Entry Flight Time ....................................................................................................... 59 7.3 Aerothermodynamics ................................................................................................................... 60 7.3.1 Total Convective Heat Load and Body Average Heating Rate .................................. 61 7.3.2 Stagnation Point Heating – Convective ...................................................................... 62 7.3.3 Stagnation Point Heating – Radiative ......................................................................... 64 7.3.4 Total Heat Input at the Stagnation Point ..................................................................... 67 7.3.5 Thermal Protection System (TPS) Requirements ....................................................... 68 7.4 Aerothermodynamic Model Validation Based on Huygens Results ............................................ 72 7.4.1 Entry Aerodynamics .................................................................................................... 72 7.4.2 Entry Aerothermodynamics ......................................................................................... 75 7.4.3 Summary Results and Comparison .............................................................................. 81 8.0 Decelerator System Sizing and Balloon Inflation ....................................................................................... 83 8.1 Drogue Decelerator Sizing ............................................................................................................ 83 8.2 Main Parachute Sizing and Balloon Inflation ............................................................................... 87 9.0 Carrier Spacecraft ........................................................................................................................................ 93 9.1 Interface Structure and TABS Accommodation ........................................................................... 93 9.2 Carrier Spacecraft (CS) Sizing ...................................................................................................... 93 9.3 Chemical Propulsion System (CHEM) ......................................................................................... 98 9.4 Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) Module ....................................................................................... 100 9.5 Solar Array ...................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GAS DIVISION NEWSLETTER Official Publication of the BFA Gas Division
    GAS DIVISION NEWSLETTER Official Publication of the BFA Gas Division Volume 4, Issue 2 Copyright Peter Cuneo & Barbara Fricke, 2003 August 2003 On Saturday morning, we were greeted with a hotel RACE TO KITTY HAWK message saying the morning launch had been cancelled by Ray Bair but a briefing would take place at 7:00 a.m. The entire day was scrubbed due to substantial thunderstorms just west of Dayton in Indiana. As it turned out, the storms dissipated, and the day was pleasant for visiting the As part of the centennial celebration of powered various museums and city historic sites. That evening, flight, RE/MAX sponsored a Balloon Celebration we were treated to a reception at the Air Force Museum which included both hot air and gas flights for the and a briefing that made a Sunday morning launch seem weekend of the Fourth of July. At least that was the possible. Again the threat of severe weather prevented a plan. While about half the field of hot air balloons Saturday night launch. Later that night I found myself finally flew on Sunday morning, the gas flight was clustered in the main briefing room as the hotel staff totally scrubbed. gathered everyone for a tornado “drill”. The intended gas competition was an accuracy flight Sunday morning we were back on the field and once to the monument marking the first flight of the again prepared the equipment for launch. Another Wright brothers in Kitty Hawk, N.C. This is about couple of hours Sunday morning was only slightly better 500 miles from the launch site at Wright Patterson as the local weather allowed launch of some of the hot AFB in Dayton, Ohio.
    [Show full text]
  • Qualification Over Ariane's Lifetime
    r bulletin 94 — may 1998 Qualification Over Ariane’s Lifetime A. González Blázquez Directorate of Launchers, ESA, Paris M. Eymard Groupe Programme CNES/Arianespace, Evry, France Introduction Similarly, the RL10 engine on the Centaur stage The primary objectives of the qualification of the Atlas launcher has been the subject of an activities performed during the operational ongoing improvement programme. About 5000 lifetime of a launcher are: tests were performed before the first flight, and – to verify the qualification status of the vehicle 4000 during the subsequent ten years. – to resolve any technical problems relating to subsystem operations on the ground or in On-going qualification activities of a similar flight. nature were started for the Ariane-3 and 4 launchers in 1986, and for Ariane-5 in 1996. Before focussing on the European family of They can be classified into two main launchers, it is perhaps informative to review categories: ‘regular’ and ‘one-off’. just one or two of the US efforts in the area of solid and liquid propulsion in order to put the Ariane-3/4 accompanying activities Ariane-related activities into context. Regular activities These activities are mainly devoted to In principle, the development programme for a launcher ends with the verification of the qualification status of the qualification phase, after which it enters operational service. In various launcher subsystems. They include the practice, however, the assessment of a launcher’s reliability is a following work packages: continuing process and qualification-type activities proceed, as an – Periodic sampling of engines: one HM7 and extension of the development programme (as is done in aeronautics), one Viking per year, tested to the limits of the over the course of the vehicle’s lifetime.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Thrust In-Space Liquid Propulsion Stage: Storable Propellants
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institute of Transport Research:Publications Space Propulsion 2014 – ID 2968378 High-Thrust in-Space Liquid Propulsion Stage: Storable Propellants Etienne Dumont, Alexander Kopp, Carina Ludwig, Nicole Garbers DLR, Space Launcher Systems Analysis (SART), Bremen, Germany [email protected] Abstract In the frame of a project funded by ESA, a consortium led Subscripts, Abbreviations by Avio in cooperation with Snecma, Cira, and DLR is ATV Automated Transfer Vehicle performing the preliminary design of a High-Thrust in- CDF Concurrent Design Facility Space Liquid Propulsion Stage for two different types of ECSS European Cooperation on Space manned missions beyond Earth orbit. For these missions, Standardization one or two 100 ton stages are to be used to propel a Elec assy electronic assembly manned vehicle. Three different propellant combinations; EPS Etage à propergols stockables (Ariane 5’s LOx/LH2, LOx/CH4 and MON-3/MMH are being storable propellant stage) compared. GNC Guidance Navigation and Control HTS High-Thrust Stage The preliminary design of the storable variant (MON- IF Interface 3/MMH) has been performed by DLR. The Aestus II ISS International Space Station engine with a large nozzle expansion ratio has been LEO Low Earth Orbit chosen as baseline. A first iteration has demonstrated, that LEOP Launch and Early Orbit Phase it indeed provides the best performance for the storable LH2 Liquid Hydrogen propellant combination, when considering all engines LOx Liquid Oxygen available today or which may be available in a short- to MLI Multi-Layer Insulation medium term.
    [Show full text]
  • Venus Aerobot Multisonde Mission
    w AIAA Balloon Technology Conference 1999 Venus Aerobot Multisonde Mission By: James A. Cutts ('), Viktor Kerzhanovich o_ j. (Bob) Balaram o), Bruce Campbell (2), Robert Gershman o), Ronald Greeley o), Jeffery L. Hall ('), Jonathan Cameron o), Kenneth Klaasen v) and David M. Hansen o) ABSTRACT requires an orbital relay system that significantly Robotic exploration of Venus presents many increases the overall mission cost. The Venus challenges because of the thick atmosphere and Aerobot Multisonde (VAMuS) Mission concept the high surface temperatures. The Venus (Fig 1 (b) provides many of the scientific Aerobot Multisonde mission concept addresses capabilities of the VGA, with existing these challenges by using a robotic balloon or technology and without requiring an orbital aerobot to deploy a number of short lifetime relay. It uses autonomous floating stations probes or sondes to acquire images of the (aerobots) to deploy multiple dropsondes capable surface. A Venus aerobot is not only a good of operating for less than an hour in the hot lower platform for precision deployment of sondes but atmosphere of Venus. The dropsondes, hereafter is very effective at recovering high rate data. This described simply as sondes, acquire high paper describes the Venus Aerobot Multisonde resolution observations of the Venus surface concept and discusses a proposal to NASA's including imaging from a sufficiently close range Discovery program using the concept for a that atmospheric obscuration is not a major Venus Exploration of Volcanoes and concern and communicate these data to the Atmosphere (VEVA). The status of the balloon floating stations from where they are relayed to deployment and inflation, balloon envelope, Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140002716 2019-08-29T14:36:45+00:00Z Liquid Propulsion Systems – Evolution & Advancements Launch Vehicle Propulsion & Systems LPTC Liquid Propulsion Technical Committee Rick Ballard Liquid Engine Systems Lead SLS Liquid Engines Office NASA / MSFC All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted, unless for course participation and to a paid course student, in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of AIAA and/or course instructor. Contact the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Professional Development Program, Suite 500, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4344 Modules 1. Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2. LRE Applications 3. Liquid Propellants 4. Engine Power Cycles 5. Engine Components Module 1: Rocket Propulsion TOPICS Fundamentals • Thrust • Specific Impulse • Mixture Ratio • Isp vs. MR • Density vs. Isp • Propellant Mass vs. Volume Warning: Contents deal with math, • Area Ratio physics and thermodynamics. Be afraid…be very afraid… Terms A Area a Acceleration F Force (thrust) g Gravity constant (32.2 ft/sec2) I Impulse m Mass P Pressure Subscripts t Time a Ambient T Temperature c Chamber e Exit V Velocity o Initial state r Reaction ∆ Delta / Difference s Stagnation sp Specific ε Area Ratio t Throat or Total γ Ratio of specific heats Thrust (1/3) Rocket thrust can be explained using Newton’s 2nd and 3rd laws of motion. 2nd Law: a force applied to a body is equal to the mass of the body and its acceleration in the direction of the force.
    [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]
  • Accesso Autonomo Ai Servizi Spaziali
    Centro Militare di Studi Strategici Rapporto di Ricerca 2012 – STEPI AE-SA-02 ACCESSO AUTONOMO AI SERVIZI SPAZIALI Analisi del caso italiano a partire dall’esperienza Broglio, con i lanci dal poligono di Malindi ad arrivare al sistema VEGA. Le possibili scelte strategiche del Paese in ragione delle attuali e future esigenze nazionali e tenendo conto della realtà europea e del mercato internazionale. di T. Col. GArn (E) FUSCO Ing. Alessandro data di chiusura della ricerca: Febbraio 2012 Ai mie due figli Andrea e Francesca (che ci tiene tanto…) ed a Elisabetta per la sua pazienza, nell‟impazienza di tutti giorni space_20120723-1026.docx i Author: T. Col. GArn (E) FUSCO Ing. Alessandro Edit: T..Col. (A.M.) Monaci ing. Volfango INDICE ACCESSO AUTONOMO AI SERVIZI SPAZIALI. Analisi del caso italiano a partire dall’esperienza Broglio, con i lanci dal poligono di Malindi ad arrivare al sistema VEGA. Le possibili scelte strategiche del Paese in ragione delle attuali e future esigenze nazionali e tenendo conto della realtà europea e del mercato internazionale. SOMMARIO pag. 1 PARTE A. Sezione GENERALE / ANALITICA / PROPOSITIVA Capitolo 1 - Esperienze italiane in campo spaziale pag. 4 1.1. L'Anno Geofisico Internazionale (1957-1958): la corsa al lancio del primo satellite pag. 8 1.2. Italia e l’inizio della Cooperazione Internazionale (1959-1972) pag. 12 1.3. L’Italia e l’accesso autonomo allo spazio: Il Progetto San Marco (1962-1988) pag. 26 Capitolo 2 - Nascita di VEGA: un progetto europeo con una forte impronta italiana pag. 45 2.1. Il San Marco Scout pag.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Launchers Between Commerce and Geopolitics
    The European Launchers between Commerce and Geopolitics Report 56 March 2016 Marco Aliberti Matteo Tugnoli Short title: ESPI Report 56 ISSN: 2218-0931 (print), 2076-6688 (online) Published in March 2016 Editor and publisher: European Space Policy Institute, ESPI Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria http://www.espi.or.at Tel. +43 1 7181118-0; Fax -99 Rights reserved – No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose with- out permission from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “Source: ESPI Report 56; March 2016. All rights reserved” and sample transmission to ESPI before publishing. ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, inciden- tal or consequential, resulting from the information contained in this publication. Design: Panthera.cc ESPI Report 56 2 March 2016 The European Launchers between Commerce and Geopolitics Table of Contents Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 10 1.1 Access to Space at the Nexus of Commerce and Geopolitics 10 1.2 Objectives of the Report 12 1.3 Methodology and Structure 12 2. Access to Space in Europe 14 2.1 European Launchers: from Political Autonomy to Market Dominance 14 2.1.1 The Quest for European Independent Access to Space 14 2.1.3 European Launchers: the Current Family 16 2.1.3 The Working System: Launcher Strategy, Development and Exploitation 19 2.2 Preparing for the Future: the 2014 ESA Ministerial Council 22 2.2.1 The Path to the Ministerial 22 2.2.2 A Look at Europe’s Future Launchers and Infrastructure 26 2.2.3 A Revolution in Governance 30 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Demonstrating Real-World Cooperative Systems Using Aerobots
    In Proceedings of the 9th ESA Workshop on Advanced Space Technologies for Robotics and Automation 'ASTRA 2006' ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, November 28-30, 2006 DEMONSTRATING REAL-WORLD COOPERATIVE SYSTEMS USING AEROBOTS Ehsan Honary1, Frank McQuade1, Roger Ward1, Ian Woodrow2, Andy Shaw3, Dave Barnes3, Matthew Fyfe4 1SciSys [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Clothier Road, Bristol BS4 5SS, UK TEL: +44 (117) 9717251, FAX: +44 (117) 9721846 2SEA [email protected] Systems Engineering & Assessment Ltd, Beckington Castle, Castle Corner, Beckington, Frome BA11 6TB, UK, TEL: +44 (1373) 852120, FAX: +44 (1373) 831133 3University of Wales Aberystwyth Andy Shaw: [email protected], Dave Barnes: [email protected] Computer Science Department, Penglais, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, SY23 3DB, Wales, UK TEL: +44 (1970) 621561, FAX: +44 (1970) 622455 4SCS [email protected] Systems Consultants Services Limited, Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, England, RG9 2JN TEL: +44 (1491) 412102, FAX: +44 (1491) 412082 ABSTRACT Use of multiple autonomous robots for practical applications has become more important over the years [1][2][3][4]. The potential for applications of collective robotics is high, in particular in the aerospace environment. SciSys has been involved in the development of Planetary Aerobots funded by ESA for use on Mars and has developed image-based localisation technology as part of the activity. It is however possible to use the Aerobots in a different environment to investigate issues in regard with robotics behaviour such as data handling, communications, limited processing power, limited sensors, GNC, etc. This paper summarises the activity where Aerobot platform was used to investigate the use of multiple autonomous Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs), basically simulating their movement and behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Takes Flight Teacher Materials
    Paper Takes Flight Teacher Materials Contents: LESSON PLAN .............................................................................................................................. 1 Summary: .................................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives:................................................................................................................................... 1 Materials:..................................................................................................................................... 1 Safety Instructions:...................................................................................................................... 1 Background: ................................................................................................................................ 1 Procedure:.................................................................................................................................... 2 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 2 Assessment/Evaluation:............................................................................................................... 3 Extensions: .................................................................................................................................. 3 Math Integration.........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Atmospheric Planetary Probes And
    SPECIAL ISSUE PAPER 1 Atmospheric planetary probes and balloons in the solar system A Coustenis1∗, D Atkinson2, T Balint3, P Beauchamp3, S Atreya4, J-P Lebreton5, J Lunine6, D Matson3,CErd5,KReh3, T R Spilker3, J Elliott3, J Hall3, and N Strange3 1LESIA, Observatoire de Paris-Meudon, Meudon Cedex, France 2Department Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA 3Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA 4University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA 5ESA/ESTEC, AG Noordwijk, The Netherlands 6Dipartment di Fisica, University degli Studi di Roma, Rome, Italy The manuscript was received on 28 January 2010 and was accepted after revision for publication on 5 November 2010. DOI: 10.1177/09544100JAERO802 Abstract: A primary motivation for in situ probe and balloon missions in the solar system is to progressively constrain models of its origin and evolution. Specifically, understanding the origin and evolution of multiple planetary atmospheres within our solar system would provide a basis for comparative studies that lead to a better understanding of the origin and evolution of our Q1 own solar system as well as extra-solar planetary systems. Hereafter, the authors discuss in situ exploration science drivers, mission architectures, and technologies associated with probes at Venus, the giant planets and Titan. Q2 Keywords: 1 INTRODUCTION provide significant design challenge, thus translating to high mission complexity, risk, and cost. Since the beginning of the space age in 1957, the This article focuses on the exploration of planetary United States, European countries, and the Soviet bodies with sizable atmospheres, using entry probes Union have sent dozens of spacecraft, including and aerial mobility systems, namely balloons.
    [Show full text]
  • Venus Balloon Technology Summary
    Venus Balloon Technology Summary Jeffery L. Hall Supervisor Extreme Environment Robotics Group Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology December 7, 2015 Introduction • This Venus balloon briefing is being presented to the VEXAG Technology Working Group at their Dec. 7, 2015 telecon. • The purpose is to give a brief overview of Venus balloon technology and show examples for potential future missions. • The information reflects the author’s personal experience and is not meant to be a comprehensive synopsis of the field. 2 History of Venus Ballooning • The only non-terrestrial balloons that have ever flown were the Soviet VEGA-1 and VEGA-2 missions that flew at Venus in 1985. – There was one balloon each carried as a piggyback payload and deployed from the VEGA-1 and VEGA-2 landers during atmospheric descent. • These were short duration balloons that flew in the relatively cool clouds of the upper atmosphere. Key characteristic included: – Helium-filled superpressure balloon. – 2 day flight duration (transmitter battery died before balloon failed). – Flight was in the clouds at a 53-55 km altitude where the temperature ranged from 30 to 50 °C. – Balloon diameter was 3.5 m – Payload mass was 7 kg (everything carried under the balloon) – Balloon was constructed from a heavy, Teflon-like material that was resistant to the sulfuric acid aerosols in the clouds. • Both missions were successful and returned data on Venus winds, temperature and pressure. 3 VEGA Lander and Balloon VEGA lander (750 kg) VEGA balloon (15 kg balloon, 7 kg payload) 4 Future Venus Balloon Options • Many different kinds of balloons have been proposed for future Venus missions: – Different balloons can address different science at different locations.
    [Show full text]