←back to thread

NASA's Europa Clipper Launch

(www.youtube.com)
217 points belter | 2 comments | 14 Oct 24 15:28 UTC | HN request time: 0.422s | source
Show context
mmooss ◴[14 Oct 24 17:18 UTC] No.41839623[source]▶
ETA is 2030. Originally planned for a rocket (SLS) which would have delivered the Clipper in ~3 yrs, but which was decided to be not viable for the Clipper (with some lobbying suspected).

How much science is delayed by the extra 2+ years? Looking at the 'project plan', is the Clipper's arrival (and delivery of data) on the critical path for research? And how much research?

I'm picturing a lot of scientists and research projects waiting an extra 2-3 years, and then all the research, follow-on missions, etc. also delayed. Essentially, the decision might shift everything in this field 2-3 years further away, and then centuries from now human habitation of other planets is 2-3 years later (ok, a bit exaggerated).

But seriously, maybe it's not on the critical path or doesn't impact that much. Is anyone here familiar with the research?

replies(8): >>41839754 #>>41839762 #>>41839879 #>>41839899 #>>41839911 #>>41840401 #>>41843379 #>>41852320 #
1. Rebelgecko ◴[14 Oct 24 17:33 UTC] No.41839762[source]▶
Using a commercial launch vehicle reduced the cost quite a bit (saved a billion on the vehicle itself and another billion by not having to design the payload to pass SLS's much more rigorous vibe checks). The $2b saved is about 10% of NASA's annual budget. The next mission to Titan has a budget of around $3b, for reference.

On top of that, there's no guarantee SLS would've actually been able to launch on schedule. The program has had a lot of setbacks, to put it lightly, and has only launched once so far (6 years later than it's original ETA). There's additional rockets in production but if it came down to it the manned SLS missions would probably get priority for political reasons.

replies(1): >>41852249 #
2. panick21_ ◴[15 Oct 24 19:31 UTC] No.41852249[source]▶
It saved far more then 1 billion $ for the launch vehicle. That number is just more SLS propaganda. If you actually do the research its far more. At least 1 $ billion more and that is the very best case, not accounting for any amortized development. In reality its likely considerably more.