|
|
|
|
|
by tg16
975 days ago
|
|
The probe itself is a relatively insignificant cost. The launch costs and timing windows are the limiting factor. The tyranny of the rocket equation is the fact that to carry more fuel to orbit, you need more fuel to get it into orbit, which itself needs more fuel.
That's why gravity assists are so essential for escaping the solar system on a budget. The planetary alignment that enabled the Voyager launch windows only occurs once every 175 years. We should definitely be sending out more probes, but we can't just do it whenever we want, at least not without a lot more expense. |
|
More conservative trajectories giving fewer flybyes but relying on more probes would be possible, and are in fact what we've accomplished with the Gallileo & Juno (Jupiter), Cassini-Huygens (Saturn), and New Horizons (Pluto) spacecraft. There are NASA (U.S.) and Chinese proposals for a return visit to Uranus and Neptune, though those remain in planning stages.
<https://www.space.com/nasa-uranus-orbiter-and-probe-mission-...>
The orbiter missions had a much longer time-on-station. For Gallileo, roughly 7 years 9 months, Cassini-Huygens 13 years, and Juno 7 years to date, with another 5 or more possible.
The Ulysses solar probe also flew past Jupiter, using the planet for an orbital assist to both slow it down to approach the Sun more closely and incline its orbit above and below the planetary plane so that the Sun's poles could be observed directly.