Venus colonies would float in the clouds. The atmosphere is REALLY dense, so the buoyancy is quite high; - floating structures can thus be relatively heavy.
As soon as a heard Neptune I thought of how freaking awesome it would be to have an orbiter, but then it was just a flyby. However it would be another thing to go interstellar.
It’s possible we could have a small probe with a heat shield go into orbit. Triton has a thin atmosphere that could be used for aerobraking. Of course at such high speeds you wouldn’t be able to lose much velocity without burning up, so it would likely end up in an eccentric orbit of Neptune.
I have been interested on space communications and the DSN ever since I experimented with a SDR dongle years ago, but there is not much info on youtube.
Man ...I'm in my late 40s n because of that I wish these missions could happen much sooner,I love anything to do with space..... great video thanks for all you do.
Hey man, I feel you, I'm 51 and when my time comes my biggest sadness will be that I won't be able to continue to watch the results of space exploration.
@@DLBBALL You are so very lucky. I am like the rest here. Most likely will not see these missions mature. But am hopeful your generation will carry the tourch. Live long DL, love much ... it goes by oh so very quickly.
Popcorn's Art I believe he was referring to the fact the Pioneer probes were the last ones sent by NASA to explore the atmosphere directly; Magellan was a radar mapper similar to VERITAS
On that point, the Galileo HGA was prevented from opening fully by a heat pipe that was added late in the mission design to help survive the heat load. The heat load was over the original specs because schedule changes forced using Venus for gravity assist, bringing the vessel closer to the Sun than originally intended. On an unrelated note, the Europa Clipper is now looking at design changes because SLS schedule slippage means using Venus for gravity assist if SLS is used as the launch vehicle. Yeah... history doesn't quite repeat but it rhymes.
@@jounik : They seriously need to stop depending on single-launch missions for this stuff. If they were just willing to use SLS for primary launch, and then attach a separately launched boost rocket at the ISS then there would be far less disruption to these missions, and they could still allocate instrument mass until the SLS was required anyways.
@@absalomdraconis Eh, you don't want to do Earth departure from 51.6 degrees inclination. ISS is really hampered in its usefulness as any sort of waypoint or depot because it has to be inclined high enough for the Russians to reach it.
@@jounik SLS has the delta-V to get Europa Clipper onto a direct-to-Jupiter trajectory. You're correct in saying that SLS schedule slippage is prompting design reviews, but that's because they're being asked to consider alternative launch vehicles; such as the Delta IV Heavy or the Falcon Heavy, which would require multiple Venus/Earth flybys to get Europa Clipper to Jupiter (or a Falcon Heavy plus a kick stage, which would only require one Earth flyby.)
4:01 This Earth - Venus - Earth - Earth - Jupiter route is pretty much exactly the same as the Kerbin - Eve - Kerbin - Kerbin - Jool route in KSP! (Bradley Whistance especially comes to mind)
@@NoNameAtAll2 yea it does ksp's physics is pretty accurate but i wish they used n body simulation its more accurate but i think it uses more computation power
Except that it’s just a quick flyby 😩. Let’s go orbit IO now, for the next inexpensive “Discovery Class” mission and fly through some volcanoes (for SCIENCE! 😂). Then, let’s go get some real $$ for a separate Neptune / Triton orbiter. A Neptune / Triton orbiter needs to be done. That would be extremely exciting!
I was thinking the same thing. He even mentions Magellan in the video. Perhaps he was referring to the fact that Pioneer 13 was the last NASA mission to Venus that actually entered the Venusian atmosphere?
@@Josh_Freeman Point taken. Let me restate: Pioneer 13 was the last NASA mission to Venus where the ENTIRE POINT of the mission was dive into the Venusian atmosphere like Scrooge frickin' McDuck into his money bin. Magellan dove into said atmosphere because it was useless trash at that point, and they had to do something with it.
@@deusexaethera You may be confusing Magellan with MESSENGER, which was primarily a mission to Mercury, but made two fly-bys of Venus. MESSENGER is one of only two probes in history to explore Mercury. It's also the only man-made object ON Mercury, since it crashed into it at the end of its mission.
my vote is for one of the two venus missions. Its been a while since we have gone there and its close enough that we dont have to wait 10 plus years for any results.
I remember reading how it was an option to send Cassini from Saturn to Neptune, but it would have taken 20 years to get there so they opted for the de-orbit instead. :/
Pentagon: We need to see where we can save money in our budget Also Pentagon: $125 billion of our funding could be saved by cutting administrative expenses?? Cover this up, no one can find out!!
I think they should attempt to land there, and then also right away melt some submarine down into the subsurface ocean. There's a lot of debate on whether there is life there or not. Now me, personally, I believe life is very common throughout the universe. And what kind of news would that be to find life on a planet so far away from it's star, in a completely closed environment, protected from any outside danger. That would be the kind of discovery similar to the invention of fire!!!
The likelihood of life is why we should not *yet* attempt a landing. We need to get better at sterilization, first. The most promising approach is probably totally autonomous construction in space.
@@fnamelname9077 The comment that you were commenting to was in reference to the book/movie 2010. I was referencing the book 2061 in my comment to your comment, but I mistakenly stated 2065. At least, I think that's what goes down in that book... I haven't read it, you see, and only know of it vaguely from it being referenced in 3001... The result, it would seem, is that Europa is still off limits. Even if it can be done safely by 2065.
My choices are Triton and Venus -- Triton because it's now-or-never, and Venus because it's been 40+ years since we last went there. The moons of Jupiter are cool and I do want to explore them, but the level of detail we want will require a flagship mission, so we shouldn't waste money on anything less than that.
5:54 The last time NASA launched a Venus probe was the Magellan spacecraft, also referred to as the Venus Radar Mapper. Magellan was launched on May 4, 1989 and entered orbit 10 October 1990, deorbited 13 October 1994 .
To be frank: None of those would be as exiting as landing on any icemoon and drilling into subsurface ocean. But of these 4, the Triton mission isn't going to be this cost efficient for a long time. So we should do that one first.
Wow congrats on one million subs. You deserve it! I very much like your channel. You are the reason I got anywhere in Kerbal. Thank you and keep up the good work.
There must be entire departments in the various scientific organisations that do nothing all day but shoehorn techno-babble into acronyms that at least vaguely resemble words in dictionaries as if their lives depended on it.
you need to capture the interest of politicians to get missions approved. trying to push science on politicians is like getting your kids to eat their vegetables, sometimes a cute nickname and some cheese is all it takes.
I'm really disappointed they didn't choose Triton. Sure, Venus needs some love, but we could've essentially visited a second Pluto for a fraction of the delta V.
@@PhilfreezeCH KuK137 - Tax Havens like Delaware lol.... Communism doesn't work. While warehouse conditions at Amazon Distribution centres are not wonderful, it is not the worst paying job on the planet (ie: tipped workers exist). Without Billionnaires you have ZERO investment opportunity for large projects. We need to focus on orbital infrastructure around Earth and the Moon before private capital moves further out. Just throwing away your money like they did in 1918 October Revolution = Hyper Inflation. Learn some economics and observe reality, as opposed to letting your feelings get in the way of reason. The truth hurts, and nature doesn't care about your "socialist" idealogy.
@@PhilfreezeCH and @Kuk137 I'm very much interested to see your cold hard facts or reasonable logic on this one. As it stands, anti-vaxxers have more credit than you do.
I think it is the cost to design, build and operate for the primary mission which might be 4 years unless it is to the outer solar system (salaries for the scientists, time on DSN etc) but excluding launch vehicle. Falcon Heavy is 90 million I think so it adds a little to the total cost.
Venus atmosphere at 50 km above the surface has the same presure and temperature as Earth there could be easly life in there, send everything to Veeenuuuus we are 30 years lateeeee.
@Johnny PvP I agree. I’m not getting any younger. I was born during the first space race in the 1960’s. Triton and IO would take too long for me to see results from it.
8:43 I wish we were playing in creative mode too, Scott. That said, if we'd (as a civilization or even just as a country) get our priorities straight, I think that it wouldn't really be a huge burden to fund all of these. For now I just dream of a better future, I believe we'll get all this data eventually.
As a kid I watched a documentary (it was a Nova episode) about Galileo a million times, it was from before it had actually launched and was about all the problems and delays it had suffered along the way. I was so excited for that mission and it broke my heart when the crazy elastic gold mesh dish wouldn't open. It was meant to send back so many photos
I would rather have a proper Neptune orbiter (Flagship tier) than a Triton flyby (Discovery tier) Unless you only can send an Uranus orbiter. But my pick is Io + Venus.
So, Io is a "choose your poison" type of satellite only Dante could really appreciate. Your heartfelt desire to have all of them fly certainly strikes a sympathetic chord with me; particularly in light of the fact that we have a defense budget that surpasses the sum total of the next 16 countries' and has proven itself to be a hotbed for waste. A fraction of which, could fund all three of these missions. So, current NASA budgets, like politics, being the art of the possible, make your point about the orbital mechanics of the Triton mission something of a clincher. Fly that one and forget the Hell that is Io for the time being. Thank you for the concise overview on these, Scott.
While I'd love to see it, such a colony would do little to contribute to the space economy. It would be fairly easy to descend into venus but hard to get out, and mineral resources would be very difficult to get. Main products of venus would likely be synthetic polymers and other carbon materials, but we can get those easier from earth. So, hard to find a good economic case for venus.
Man, we really need to go to all three of these places! If only the science Community was larger, maybe one day it will be! Thanks for the great content!!
Is this all you have to say? No words of support? Just taking pot-shots at the content? Perhaps you should start your own channel so WE may pick apart all your hard work using closed-end questions implying a certain air of superiority. Find a better hobby or work on asking questions in a more amiable manner.
Its just a question.I did not say the content was bad. Scott knows way more than I do and I was just wondering if there was some obvious detail I was missing where Magellan wasn't included. I Probably could have worded it better, but to assume that it was an attack on content is a bad assumption.
@@geraldhenrickson7472 seems like the dude had some friendly constructive criticism, making sure the viewers-readers know of the little slipup, doesnt mean he has to bow and say that the rest of the video is great, because nobody is disputing that anyways. its scott manley so we already know hes cool, but doesnt mean the errors should be just glossed over. and the question still leaves scott an option to explain the 78 claim
@@ludwigvonkoopa2156 That, and/or time to use gravity for orbital insertion. Spend money on fuel, or spent (lots of) time? When you have neither, a fly-by it is. ;-)
@@JeffCounsil-rp4qv The thing is you need more fuel to lift that extra fuel in the probe, but then need exponentially more fuel to lift the fuel you need to carry to lift the probe's fuel.
@@ludwigvonkoopa2156 Yes, I know. Which means more expense with a heavier lift capable launch vehicle and subsequent stages. I'll take the fly-by in this instance and be happy with it.
I remember I did something similar to that contest thing in an astronomy class I took in college. We made groups and had to develop a mission, and then somehow the prof chose which one was the best (i think she got some other profs and TA's to vote on it) and my group won. I don't remember exactly what our mission was, but I know it was a mission to send a probe to some far away body, Kuiper Belt maybe, something like Eris, Haumea, or Makemake I think. It was a lot of fun.
8:53 - 9:04 i disagree it's a shame that NASA don't have the budget and the political push to afford a Flagship Neptune orbiter. If Trident gets aprooved, we would likely have to wait luckly another two or tree decades to see another mission to the ice giant. No thanks!
Imagine sending something like new and improved Cassini to Neptune, with an atmospheric probe. I'd love to see it. But the time to get to Neptune's orbit is like 15 years probably? Add the time of design&build and you'll have the orbiter there by 2040. That's a looong time. That's the problem here.
I prefer a Venus orbiter mission that extends the Interplanetary Internet to Venus, for the sake of making future missions there (and possibly elsewhere) easier... But I guess I'll make an exception for the Triton orbital window.
Hi Scott! I think I have never commented on your videos, although I am following your work for years by now. I can not emphasize how educational and entertaining all your videos are, thank you for your enthusiasm and the way You share real science with us, on a simple way! You would really deserve a week or two onboard the the ISS :) Long ago I had Microsoft Space Simulator installed on my computer from 3 floppy disks and I remember how amazed I was to dock with "Space Station Freedom" and travel the solar system around in the "Missions" option :) :) :) I spent a couple of years as part of the RadioJOVE Team, listening and documenting radio noise storms from the Jupiter-Io system from Hungary and as a result of this, I even had a chance to be invited to NASA Goddard SFC in 2005 :) By the way, I am an ultralight pilot flying trikes and gyrocopters but in my heart, I belong a 100 miles higher :) To compensate down here, I sometimes fly my tiny aircraft really like a bird, "low and slow" and when You say: "fly safe" I try to consider it personal! :))) Please keep up the good work and THANK YOU SCOTT!
Jani Akujärvi By that logic, cutting funding for space programs and giving it to the poor would be a great idea, because there are absolutely no other ways to help the poor financially without sacrificing space programs /s I think it’s really cool. Not only could space be used to give humanity a massive boost in resources in the far future, but in the near future, I think it’s great that we’re learning about our own home star system. Things like photos and other data can help us imagine what all these other planets look like. Stuff like how the ancients knew about Venus, but only now do we know just how inhospitable it would be for humans, for instance.
@Jani Akujärvi your comment noted and ignored, for it's irrelevant and or lack of context. I would absolutely love to see the surface of Io from the surface and that's that.
8:43 All 4 missions, constrained by the Discovery program, would cost a total of $1.2 billion. SLS is slated for $2 billion per launch, James Webb is already over $10 billion, and the US defense budget is over $600 billion. Pretty sure we do have the money for these, we just choose to spend elsewhere.
Lyle Checkeye actually some consider Earth and its main “moon” Luna to be a binary system like Pluto and Charon. If that’s the case then we need to send a probe to our “true” moon Cruithne.
If you're in a long orbit around (like the io mission), there is a long time between flybys to transmit data back home, so that's not going to be your limiting science factor. Getting a sample you can analyze in a laboratory will be much more valuable, if you have the rocket power to send something back.
@@taiming71 The return trip will need gravity assists and other fuel saving tricks just like the other trip. Anyway, in 10 to 20 years it should be possible and safer to analyze returned samples in a moon-based laboratory, at least until all infection risks have been eliminated. A Moon lab can be controlled in real time from another moon base or the gateway station.
Very exciting times. I'm with Veritas. Venus is chronically under explored given its interesting earth like features, and InSAR is the be all and end all of Venus exploration thanks to atmosphere penetration. The data can be used by many different disciplines not just planetary science practicioners. Sure, InSAR doesn't give you that pretty of pictures, but solar system expiration should be more than just a trending Twitter picture for a day or so. Also, developing InSAR will have knock on effects for earth remote sensing which is useful for all sorts of engineering.
it is definitely the triton flyby for me. Guys, think about all the data that came out of new horizons and then consider that while triton is tiny and has to be "scienced" from up close, Neptune will also be there and useful data for it could be gathered from it for much longer. It's like getting 2 flybys for the price of one. Also, i think it could be really cool if they had a huygens style probe dive into neptune.
Regarding a mission to Triton: Do they actually need RTGs? My idea is: The Spacecraft has enough solar panels to produce ~20-30W. These panels might be enough to work with an ion-drive close to sun to save on mass. In the vicinity of Triton, the space probe can use a hydrazin-oxygen or hydrazin with dinitrogen-tetroxid fuel cell to ramp up the power production for powering all the instruments during flight time. The advantage would be, that the spacecrafts experiments will not be limited by the amount of energy an RTG can deliver. On the other hand, the spacecraft would just have a limited amount of time to run, until fuel is depleted. Other advantage: The fuel will also be needed for reaction control, so they don't two extra tanks, but they can't run the RCS dry (which they shouldn't do anyways). For a simple flyby-mission, I wouldn't waste an RTG. Oh, and heater units could be made of americium 241... that stuff is readily available.
Neptune only receives 0.1% as much sunlight as earth does. Getting any usable energy from that at all does not seem feasible. If we use New Horizons as an example, transmitting data back home will be the largest consumer of energy in the mission. The problem is that at that distance, the data rate will be so slow that it will take months of continual transmission to send it all back. I don't believe a fuel cell would be suitable for this even if you could produce a trickle of solar power to keep the probe alive while coasting. Americium-241 has in fact been studied for use in RTGs. As you said, the big advantage to it is that it's readily available as a nuclear waste product. However, mass may be an issue, since you need 4x as much of it as you would plutonium, and it requires somewhat more radiation shielding for safety, although this could perhaps be mitigated by designing shielding for use during handling that can be removed shortly before launch, once the probe is mounted in the rocket and no further human contact will be made.
@@Keldor314 Yes That's why I suggested to make Am-241 heater units. Those are just relatively small pellets, not a fully blown RTG. They just need to deliver 20-100W thermal energy to keep the spacecraft warm. On the flip side, there are Am241 pellets commercially available as radiation sources for industrial and scientific purposes. 0.1% solar flux means, that there is 1-2W of energy per square meter, or ~0.2W(el), for 20W, that would be 100-200m². In my opinion, that's doable. even 500m² is possible if needed. Another option would of course be a smaller RTG to keep it alive, and a fuel cell system to boost the energy when the science experiments need it.
The Trident mission could be interesting with the possibility of an extended mission. Much like New Horizons did, fly by Triton, sciencing the crap out of it. Then look for another target on its trajectory for an extended mission.
I want to see Triton win. It's a rare alignment for this low delta V trajectory. Like you said, venus is "right there" and one of those missions could easily be sent in the next round.
Sorry off subject... I've noticed you have a Gozanti-class cruiser on your display shelf. If you don't mind me asking, how and where did you get it? I've been looking for about 2 years for models of it and have only found the a civilian version used in a TT game. Thanks for any help.
Landing on a different planetary body is always cool, and Io is the prettiest moon out there, but it has to be Triton even if it can't get into orbit around Neptune. It's such a mysterious object and if there's a good window they should use it!
Whilst true that ESA sent a mission to Venus in the last 15 years, NASA has sent a dedicated mission since Magellan (1989 - 1993) and no mission has penetrated the clouds of Venus to land on its surface since the Venera 14 mission that ended operations in the mid-80's
I have to give my vote for Venus. I'd really love for another surface probe with modern tech. I know the Russians got a few pics but I bet we could get WAY more data with tech we have now
Excellent stuff! All cool missions but I hope the Io mission will succeed as it seems the most spectacular mission with the biggest chance of discovering something new and unexpected.
Fun Fact: In Contact Report 115, from October 19, 1978, Billy Meier not only foretold the then forthcoming discovery of the two satellites beyond Pluto, but also that Io was the most volcanically active body in the solar system. Extra Credit: What year did NASA announce this discovery?
Could they combine a Venus flyby or 3, along with a trip to Io in the same mission, especially if they are going around Venus as part of the route to Io?
Also it could be used to calibrate the sensors, while gaining extra data. Also this could apply to Io or Triton. Edits added text and corrected a target.
"You can always send a mission to Venus" is why no missions get sent to Venus :(
Venus missions is Russian interest, Mars the US interest.
So they’re each going to have colonies on their respective planets. That sounds like a recipe for every sci-fi interplanetary war.
@@sphaera2520 Good luck building a colony on Venus. The temps there will melt lead.
warpigs330 the colony would be floating above the clouds of Venus. 😁
Venus colonies would float in the clouds.
The atmosphere is REALLY dense, so the buoyancy is quite high; - floating structures can thus be relatively heavy.
"DA VINCI"
Does NASA has a acronym division working 24/7 ?
Nah, 9999/7
And DARPA too.
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
That's what half of the annual budget goes to
The other half goes to SLS
I actually want the Triton mission just because we’ve only been to Neptune once, and that was a flyby over 30 years ago.
The Triton mission would just be a flyby as well.
DirtyBlastard and this is why I should comment _after_ watching
@Jani Akujärvi Like your imagination and quest for knowledge is?
As soon as a heard Neptune I thought of how freaking awesome it would be to have an orbiter, but then it was just a flyby.
However it would be another thing to go interstellar.
It’s possible we could have a small probe with a heat shield go into orbit. Triton has a thin atmosphere that could be used for aerobraking. Of course at such high speeds you wouldn’t be able to lose much velocity without burning up, so it would likely end up in an eccentric orbit of Neptune.
Scott, do a deep dive video on data transmission options from probes and the like.
Yes please! Duly seconded.
Yes!
I have been interested on space communications and the DSN ever since I experimented with a SDR dongle years ago, but there is not much info on youtube.
Up!!!
I wish all of them could be chosen.
Sadly the US government has quite a thing for guns
700 BILLION
It would cost a lot of money and time, it takes like 12 years to get to Neptune and 6 to 8 to get to Jupiter for IO.
NASA is prioritizing the moon and mars right now
Adjusted for inflation a Saturn V costs 2.5b, its crazy how much money is wasted in "defense"
Man ...I'm in my late 40s n because of that I wish these missions could happen much sooner,I love anything to do with space..... great video thanks for all you do.
I'm approaching 63, and I feel the pain a bit more. ;-)
68. Not happy 😡.
Hey man, I feel you, I'm 51 and when my time comes my biggest sadness will be that I won't be able to continue to watch the results of space exploration.
I really hope my generation will be able to continue in the footsteps of your generations. (I’m only 16, and LOVE astronomy).
@@DLBBALL You are so very lucky. I am like the rest here. Most likely will not see these missions mature. But am hopeful your generation will carry the tourch. Live long DL, love much ... it goes by oh so very quickly.
"Magellan++"
Ah, there's the programmer coming out.
Wasn't Magellan also a NASA mission? Why does Scott keep referring to the 1978 Pioneers as the last US mission?
Popcorn's Art I believe he was referring to the fact the Pioneer probes were the last ones sent by NASA to explore the atmosphere directly; Magellan was a radar mapper similar to VERITAS
@@JarrodBaniqued I immediately thought of Magellan too. Definitely a NASA Venus probe - launched in 1989.
@@JarrodBaniqued Makes sense Jarrord, thanks!
NOTE: Galileo was hampered by a defective partially deployed high gain antenna.
On that point, the Galileo HGA was prevented from opening fully by a heat pipe that was added late in the mission design to help survive the heat load. The heat load was over the original specs because schedule changes forced using Venus for gravity assist, bringing the vessel closer to the Sun than originally intended.
On an unrelated note, the Europa Clipper is now looking at design changes because SLS schedule slippage means using Venus for gravity assist if SLS is used as the launch vehicle.
Yeah... history doesn't quite repeat but it rhymes.
@Pup314
I always thought he was hampered by permanent house arrest, as ordered by the Inquisition.
... I'll get my coat.
😴
@@jounik : They seriously need to stop depending on single-launch missions for this stuff. If they were just willing to use SLS for primary launch, and then attach a separately launched boost rocket at the ISS then there would be far less disruption to these missions, and they could still allocate instrument mass until the SLS was required anyways.
@@absalomdraconis Eh, you don't want to do Earth departure from 51.6 degrees inclination. ISS is really hampered in its usefulness as any sort of waypoint or depot because it has to be inclined high enough for the Russians to reach it.
@@jounik SLS has the delta-V to get Europa Clipper onto a direct-to-Jupiter trajectory. You're correct in saying that SLS schedule slippage is prompting design reviews, but that's because they're being asked to consider alternative launch vehicles; such as the Delta IV Heavy or the Falcon Heavy, which would require multiple Venus/Earth flybys to get Europa Clipper to Jupiter (or a Falcon Heavy plus a kick stage, which would only require one Earth flyby.)
4:01 This Earth - Venus - Earth - Earth - Jupiter route is pretty much exactly the same as the Kerbin - Eve - Kerbin - Kerbin - Jool route in KSP!
(Bradley Whistance especially comes to mind)
and besides that - it works in kerbal space program!
I normally do Kerbin - Eve - Eve myself. Not exactly sure how much I lose out on in terms of Δv
@@NoNameAtAll2 yea it does ksp's physics is pretty accurate but i wish they used n body simulation its more accurate but i think it uses more computation power
all hail Brad Whistance with his KEEKEKJ transfers! (don't quote me on the exact route)
@@mastershooter64 there's a mod for that, Principia. Scott tried it once a fair bit back.
The triton one sounds the most exciting for sure
Except that it’s just a quick flyby 😩.
Let’s go orbit IO now, for the next inexpensive “Discovery Class” mission and fly through some volcanoes (for SCIENCE! 😂).
Then, let’s go get some real $$ for a separate Neptune / Triton orbiter.
A Neptune / Triton orbiter needs to be done. That would be extremely exciting!
Wait a minute. The last time the US sent a mission to Venus was Magellan in 1990.
I was thinking the same thing. He even mentions Magellan in the video. Perhaps he was referring to the fact that Pioneer 13 was the last NASA mission to Venus that actually entered the Venusian atmosphere?
It was only a flyby and it only happened because it was a convenient time to test the instruments while performing a gravity-assist maneuver.
@@Duncan_Idaho_Potato technically, Magellan entered the atmosphere at the end of the mission.
@@Josh_Freeman Point taken. Let me restate: Pioneer 13 was the last NASA mission to Venus where the ENTIRE POINT of the mission was dive into the Venusian atmosphere like Scrooge frickin' McDuck into his money bin. Magellan dove into said atmosphere because it was useless trash at that point, and they had to do something with it.
@@deusexaethera You may be confusing Magellan with MESSENGER, which was primarily a mission to Mercury, but made two fly-bys of Venus. MESSENGER is one of only two probes in history to explore Mercury. It's also the only man-made object ON Mercury, since it crashed into it at the end of its mission.
my vote is for one of the two venus missions. Its been a while since we have gone there and its close enough that we dont have to wait 10 plus years for any results.
It is especially worth it now!
DAVICI+ and VERITAS it is.
2* love for Venus - after 50 years
Triton!!!!! We need go back to Neptune.
(Edit) Oh, flyby... Hmmm. Tough.
I remember reading how it was an option to send Cassini from Saturn to Neptune, but it would have taken 20 years to get there so they opted for the de-orbit instead. :/
@@mccpcorn2000 Damn, that sucks!
@@parkershaw8529 Yeah, I miss missions like Cassini!
@@mccpcorn2000 We are literally at the beginning of the Expanse, the next a few decades will be super exciting for space exploration!!!
Yeah... I was hoping it would orbit the moon itself or at least orbit Neptune kind of how the Io one is supposed to.
I want them all, every single one of them
Very good sir, that will be two billion dollars. Cash or check? :P
@@gangfire5932 Cut the budget of SLS for one year and use the funding for these missions.
@@Artur-kp4hj Much more sensible: cut useless military funding and divert it to NASA.
Gabriel Guedes Balogo
Who says it’s useless? Just because it’s military funding doesn’t always mean it’s funding a war or weapons development.
@@Gabu_ Not building a couple bombers would be adequate
My choice is Triton and Io solely from visual, esthetic viewpoint
DaVinci+ would provide high-res images of the surface of venus though...
@@johnr.2398 I'm not sure about that it's more like an atmospheric probe I guess
"Aesthetic" you tried though.
Scott doing a video about something I’m working on (IVO)! Best week ever!
"If only there was an infinite stash of money"
US Military : Why are y'all looking at me ?
1200 bucks for a wrench, bud
Pentagon: We need to see where we can save money in our budget
Also Pentagon: $125 billion of our funding could be saved by cutting administrative expenses?? Cover this up, no one can find out!!
“ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS, EXCEPT EUROPA.
ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE.
USE THEM TOGETHER. USE THEM IN PEACE.”
― Arthur C. Clarke, 2010: Odyssey Two
I think they should attempt to land there, and then also right away melt some submarine down into the subsurface ocean. There's a lot of debate on whether there is life there or not. Now me, personally, I believe life is very common throughout the universe. And what kind of news would that be to find life on a planet so far away from it's star, in a completely closed environment, protected from any outside danger. That would be the kind of discovery similar to the invention of fire!!!
The likelihood of life is why we should not *yet* attempt a landing. We need to get better at sterilization, first.
The most promising approach is probably totally autonomous construction in space.
@@fnamelname9077 2065 will be the year to attempt that mission, but I have word that the life there can stand up for itself.
I don't know what kind of joke you're trying to tell, but I imagine by 2065 we'll probably be able to do it safely.
@@fnamelname9077 The comment that you were commenting to was in reference to the book/movie 2010. I was referencing the book 2061 in my comment to your comment, but I mistakenly stated 2065. At least, I think that's what goes down in that book... I haven't read it, you see, and only know of it vaguely from it being referenced in 3001... The result, it would seem, is that Europa is still off limits. Even if it can be done safely by 2065.
My choices are Triton and Venus -- Triton because it's now-or-never, and Venus because it's been 40+ years since we last went there. The moons of Jupiter are cool and I do want to explore them, but the level of detail we want will require a flagship mission, so we shouldn't waste money on anything less than that.
Really need a Venus balloon mission.
Some kind of motorglider might also be viable.
high concentration of h2so4
@@bartoszbartosz7692 Supposedly there's an atmo level that's Earthlike, without too much acid.
@@Earthenfist i have heard otherwise, but thats the question woth asking ;)
I’ve always felt that if the ancients knew anything about the surface of Venus they would have called it something else.
"Hell."
Muspelheim??
"Vulcanus"
what's wrong with "planet of the women"? i think it's quite fitting :))
"Gehenna"
thank you scott your work is always so informative
6:15 Someone's proud of that acronym...
People are always proud of the acronyms they think of.
Thumbs up 👍 on your profile
I've come to call those acronyms "shoehornyms" for how painfully contrived they are just to form some vaguely recognisable word.
5:58 Don't forget about the Magellan spacecraft launched in 1989 by a space shuttle. It gave us the best maps of Venus so far.
5:54 The last time NASA launched a Venus probe was the Magellan spacecraft, also referred to as the Venus Radar Mapper. Magellan was launched on May 4, 1989 and entered orbit 10 October 1990, deorbited 13 October 1994 .
To be frank: None of those would be as exiting as landing on any icemoon and drilling into subsurface ocean.
But of these 4, the Triton mission isn't going to be this cost efficient for a long time. So we should do that one first.
Wow congrats on one million subs. You deserve it!
I very much like your channel. You are the reason I got anywhere in Kerbal. Thank you and keep up the good work.
There must be entire departments in the various scientific organisations that do nothing all day but shoehorn techno-babble into acronyms that at least vaguely resemble words in dictionaries as if their lives depended on it.
"What's the first and only rule for starting a rock band?"
Have a cool name for it.
More like great career opportunities for those with the artistic ability to create such names for their own projects.
you need to capture the interest of politicians to get missions approved. trying to push science on politicians is like getting your kids to eat their vegetables, sometimes a cute nickname and some cheese is all it takes.
Next up, the SHOEHORN mission
Let's be honest, every scientist and engineer loves naming their projects with corny acronyms. I sure as hell do.
I'm really disappointed they didn't choose Triton. Sure, Venus needs some love, but we could've essentially visited a second Pluto for a fraction of the delta V.
4:18 can we use time-warp just like KSP?
TFW you remember that Jeff Bezos could sponsor ALL of these missions from his own pocket, and still have three times as much left over.
'Could.'
However, he *is* more interested in cisclunar space...
@@PhilfreezeCH KuK137 - Tax Havens like Delaware lol....
Communism doesn't work. While warehouse conditions at Amazon Distribution centres are not wonderful, it is not the worst paying job on the planet (ie: tipped workers exist).
Without Billionnaires you have ZERO investment opportunity for large projects. We need to focus on orbital infrastructure around Earth and the Moon before private capital moves further out.
Just throwing away your money like they did in 1918 October Revolution = Hyper Inflation. Learn some economics and observe reality, as opposed to letting your feelings get in the way of reason. The truth hurts, and nature doesn't care about your "socialist" idealogy.
@@PhilfreezeCH and @Kuk137 I'm very much interested to see your cold hard facts or reasonable logic on this one. As it stands, anti-vaxxers have more credit than you do.
That doesn't work that way. Most of his net worth is property, not actual money.
Jeff recently paid 165 million for the most expensive house in California.
3:04 If they fly through a plume wouldn't sulfur and other materials collect on the solar panels like 2010: Space Odyssey USS Discovery?
There would have to be a reason why they would stick to the solar panels. The particles would most likely just bounce off.
Another damn fine presentation by Scott Manley. Thank you, my friend!
Can you make ksp video's again?
Hold out for ksp2!
I made one this morning twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1228348481535803393?s=20
Scott Manley, Okay, thanks for responding!
Ohh Triton!! that would be a good one as we've not really spent any time there, the journey would long though
Magellan was launched in 1989.
I find all of these missions far more interesting than the planned missions to Mars. I hope they are funded.
Would love the Venus mission to win.
5:54 Magellan screaming, "Remember me?!"
Also, 500 million is peanuts in the grand scheme of things, send them all!
That only includes the cost for the actual payload. Left out is the mission control cost for the duration and a launch vehicle?
I think it is the cost to design, build and operate for the primary mission which might be 4 years unless it is to the outer solar system (salaries for the scientists, time on DSN etc) but excluding launch vehicle. Falcon Heavy is 90 million I think so it adds a little to the total cost.
I would like to dive into the ocean of Enceladus.
there's no way Enceladus Clipper would make it into Discovery class cost wise
I'd like to delve deeper into Uranus
@@domenicobulzis4397 but there's lots of brown holes on Mars which are closer to get to?
Steve JB Seconded; Mars has two moons that need looking at
@@JarrodBaniqued They are basically just captured asteroids.
It is very hard being an impatient person who is also very interested in space travel.
Venus atmosphere at 50 km above the surface has the same presure and temperature as Earth there could be easly life in there, send everything to Veeenuuuus we are 30 years lateeeee.
@Johnny PvP I agree. I’m not getting any younger. I was born during the first space race in the 1960’s. Triton and IO would take too long for me to see results from it.
"lateeeee" - How the hell do you pronounce a word where the repeated vowel is the _silent_ one???
This man knows too much!!
8:43 I wish we were playing in creative mode too, Scott. That said, if we'd (as a civilization or even just as a country) get our priorities straight, I think that it wouldn't really be a huge burden to fund all of these. For now I just dream of a better future, I believe we'll get all this data eventually.
Triton! we'd get good science from neptune too! Its imperitive to use that window, could be more than 80 years before another.
Triton: opportunity only knock once (in a human lifetime) and it is knocking now.
Launch windows reign supreme, do Triton first.
Or we could just send a laser-powered solar sail 15 years from now and get there at the same time
As a kid I watched a documentary (it was a Nova episode) about Galileo a million times, it was from before it had actually launched and was about all the problems and delays it had suffered along the way. I was so excited for that mission and it broke my heart when the crazy elastic gold mesh dish wouldn't open. It was meant to send back so many photos
I would rather have a proper Neptune orbiter (Flagship tier) than a Triton flyby (Discovery tier) Unless you only can send an Uranus orbiter. But my pick is Io + Venus.
So, Io is a "choose your poison" type of satellite only Dante could really appreciate. Your heartfelt desire to have all of them fly certainly strikes a sympathetic chord with me; particularly in light of the fact that we have a defense budget that surpasses the sum total of the next 16 countries' and has proven itself to be a hotbed for waste. A fraction of which, could fund all three of these missions. So, current NASA budgets, like politics, being the art of the possible, make your point about the orbital mechanics of the Triton mission something of a clincher. Fly that one and forget the Hell that is Io for the time being. Thank you for the concise overview on these, Scott.
They need a Neptune orbiter really. I've been dreaming of one since I was a kid, still hasn't happen.
"The last time the U.S. sent a mission to Venus was 1978, the Pioneer orbiter"
Magellan spacecraft: "Am I a joke to you?"
Venus please. We need a "Cloud City" there. The upper atmosphere of Venus is the most earthlike place in the solar system.
Isn't that weird? The most Earth-like place in the solar system is an atmosphere of a planet and not the planet itself.
While I'd love to see it, such a colony would do little to contribute to the space economy. It would be fairly easy to descend into venus but hard to get out, and mineral resources would be very difficult to get.
Main products of venus would likely be synthetic polymers and other carbon materials, but we can get those easier from earth.
So, hard to find a good economic case for venus.
Nolan
Lando made it work though.
Man, we really need to go to all three of these places! If only the science Community was larger, maybe one day it will be! Thanks for the great content!!
"The last time the US sent a mission to Venus was 1978." Did you forget about Magellan? Or doesn't that one count for some reason?
Don't see any reason it wouldn't count.
I'm confused by that, too, especially since he mentions Magellan later in the video. And Magellan definitely was a US mission.
Is this all you have to say? No words of support? Just taking pot-shots at the content? Perhaps you should start your own channel so WE may pick apart all your hard work using closed-end questions implying a certain air of superiority. Find a better hobby or work on asking questions in a more amiable manner.
Its just a question.I did not say the content was bad. Scott knows way more than I do and I was just wondering if there was some obvious detail I was missing where Magellan wasn't included. I Probably could have worded it better, but to assume that it was an attack on content is a bad assumption.
@@geraldhenrickson7472 seems like the dude had some friendly constructive criticism, making sure the viewers-readers know of the little slipup, doesnt mean he has to bow and say that the rest of the video is great, because nobody is disputing that anyways. its scott manley so we already know hes cool, but doesnt mean the errors should be just glossed over. and the question still leaves scott an option to explain the 78 claim
I love your videos Scott.
All the missions. Launch costs are about to get quite low. DO ALL THE THINGS!
Venus sounds like when you live all the time in a tourist time and never go to the sites as its just always there
We’re overdue for a mission out towards Neptune
Who’s here after Nasa announced it chose Davinci+ and Veritas?
orbiter to neptune/triton would be much more intereting
Yeah but you need excessive amounts of fuel that you can't carry
@@ludwigvonkoopa2156 That, and/or time to use gravity for orbital insertion. Spend money on fuel, or spent (lots of) time? When you have neither, a fly-by it is. ;-)
@@JeffCounsil-rp4qv The thing is you need more fuel to lift that extra fuel in the probe, but then need exponentially more fuel to lift the fuel you need to carry to lift the probe's fuel.
@@ludwigvonkoopa2156 Yes, I know. Which means more expense with a heavier lift capable launch vehicle and subsequent stages. I'll take the fly-by in this instance and be happy with it.
Your enthusiasm is great. Keep up the great videos.
Wait, didn't the U.S. send Magellan to Venus in the 1980s?
I remember I did something similar to that contest thing in an astronomy class I took in college. We made groups and had to develop a mission, and then somehow the prof chose which one was the best (i think she got some other profs and TA's to vote on it) and my group won. I don't remember exactly what our mission was, but I know it was a mission to send a probe to some far away body, Kuiper Belt maybe, something like Eris, Haumea, or Makemake I think. It was a lot of fun.
Poor Scott has no love for Megellan 1989.
Check you staging!
Pioneer Venus was the last time they dropped stuff into the atmosphere.
As of today DAVINCI and VERITAS were selected.
We need to go back to venus.
I vote for the Triton mission, or anything Neptune related.
8:53 - 9:04 i disagree
it's a shame that NASA don't have the budget and the political push to afford a Flagship Neptune orbiter. If Trident gets aprooved, we would likely have to wait luckly another two or tree decades to see another mission to the ice giant. No thanks!
Imagine sending something like new and improved Cassini to Neptune, with an atmospheric probe. I'd love to see it. But the time to get to Neptune's orbit is like 15 years probably? Add the time of design&build and you'll have the orbiter there by 2040. That's a looong time. That's the problem here.
I prefer a Venus orbiter mission that extends the Interplanetary Internet to Venus, for the sake of making future missions there (and possibly elsewhere) easier...
But I guess I'll make an exception for the Triton orbital window.
No mission to Europa? Did someone tell them to attempt no landing there?
Europa Clipper is set to launch in 2025
You forgot to start your reply with "Ackshully"
Hi Scott! I think I have never commented on your videos, although I am following your work for years by now. I can not emphasize how educational and entertaining all your videos are, thank you for your enthusiasm and the way You share real science with us, on a simple way! You would really deserve a week or two onboard the the ISS :) Long ago I had Microsoft Space Simulator installed on my computer from 3 floppy disks and I remember how amazed I was to dock with "Space Station Freedom" and travel the solar system around in the "Missions" option :) :) :) I spent a couple of years as part of the RadioJOVE Team, listening and documenting radio noise storms from the Jupiter-Io system from Hungary and as a result of this, I even had a chance to be invited to NASA Goddard SFC in 2005 :) By the way, I am an ultralight pilot flying trikes and gyrocopters but in my heart, I belong a 100 miles higher :) To compensate down here, I sometimes fly my tiny aircraft really like a bird, "low and slow" and when You say: "fly safe" I try to consider it personal! :))) Please keep up the good work and THANK YOU SCOTT!
Would love to see the surface of Io from a landers perspective.
@Jani Akujärvi not entirely, it could supply us of resource and even water
Jani Akujärvi By that logic, cutting funding for space programs and giving it to the poor would be a great idea, because there are absolutely no other ways to help the poor financially without sacrificing space programs /s
I think it’s really cool. Not only could space be used to give humanity a massive boost in resources in the far future, but in the near future, I think it’s great that we’re learning about our own home star system. Things like photos and other data can help us imagine what all these other planets look like. Stuff like how the ancients knew about Venus, but only now do we know just how inhospitable it would be for humans, for instance.
@Jani Akujärvi your comment noted and ignored, for it's irrelevant and or lack of context.
I would absolutely love to see the surface of Io from the surface and that's that.
8:43 All 4 missions, constrained by the Discovery program, would cost a total of $1.2 billion. SLS is slated for $2 billion per launch, James Webb is already over $10 billion, and the US defense budget is over $600 billion. Pretty sure we do have the money for these, we just choose to spend elsewhere.
I would love them to send a probe by our 2nd moon " Cruithne " take some nice pictures or put a observation probe on it
Lyle Checkeye actually some consider Earth and its main “moon” Luna to be a binary system like Pluto and Charon. If that’s the case then we need to send a probe to our “true” moon Cruithne.
Awesome; congrats on one million subscribers btw.
What if we tried -more power- sending up probes with huge amounts of memory and then returned the memory storage instead of samples?
If you're in a long orbit around (like the io mission), there is a long time between flybys to transmit data back home, so that's not going to be your limiting science factor. Getting a sample you can analyze in a laboratory will be much more valuable, if you have the rocket power to send something back.
That would take a decade or more. Plus the fuel to return to Earth.
@@taiming71 The return trip will need gravity assists and other fuel saving tricks just like the other trip. Anyway, in 10 to 20 years it should be possible and safer to analyze returned samples in a moon-based laboratory, at least until all infection risks have been eliminated. A Moon lab can be controlled in real time from another moon base or the gateway station.
Chant with me: Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton! Tri-Ton!
Very exciting times. I'm with Veritas. Venus is chronically under explored given its interesting earth like features, and InSAR is the be all and end all of Venus exploration thanks to atmosphere penetration. The data can be used by many different disciplines not just planetary science practicioners. Sure, InSAR doesn't give you that pretty of pictures, but solar system expiration should be more than just a trending Twitter picture for a day or so.
Also, developing InSAR will have knock on effects for earth remote sensing which is useful for all sorts of engineering.
Congratulations on 1 million subscribers!!
I see the only reason to go to Venus. Crewed mission. With flatearthers onboard.
"Start with Io." BECAUSE IT'S THE MOST AMAZING! :) The few images Galileo and New Horizons caught of Io's volcanoes just made me hungry for more.
I see 2 views and 2 comments, but the comments haven't loaded. What's the betting they both say "first"?
Reloaded to check. I was wrong. Only one of them.
it is definitely the triton flyby for me. Guys, think about all the data that came out of new horizons and then consider that while triton is tiny and has to be "scienced" from up close, Neptune will also be there and useful data for it could be gathered from it for much longer. It's like getting 2 flybys for the price of one. Also, i think it could be really cool if they had a huygens style probe dive into neptune.
Regarding a mission to Triton: Do they actually need RTGs?
My idea is: The Spacecraft has enough solar panels to produce ~20-30W. These panels might be enough to work with an ion-drive close to sun to save on mass.
In the vicinity of Triton, the space probe can use a hydrazin-oxygen or hydrazin with dinitrogen-tetroxid fuel cell to ramp up the power production for powering all the instruments during flight time.
The advantage would be, that the spacecrafts experiments will not be limited by the amount of energy an RTG can deliver. On the other hand, the spacecraft would just have a limited amount of time to run, until fuel is depleted. Other advantage: The fuel will also be needed for reaction control, so they don't two extra tanks, but they can't run the RCS dry (which they shouldn't do anyways).
For a simple flyby-mission, I wouldn't waste an RTG.
Oh, and heater units could be made of americium 241... that stuff is readily available.
Neptune only receives 0.1% as much sunlight as earth does. Getting any usable energy from that at all does not seem feasible.
If we use New Horizons as an example, transmitting data back home will be the largest consumer of energy in the mission. The problem is that at that distance, the data rate will be so slow that it will take months of continual transmission to send it all back. I don't believe a fuel cell would be suitable for this even if you could produce a trickle of solar power to keep the probe alive while coasting.
Americium-241 has in fact been studied for use in RTGs. As you said, the big advantage to it is that it's readily available as a nuclear waste product. However, mass may be an issue, since you need 4x as much of it as you would plutonium, and it requires somewhat more radiation shielding for safety, although this could perhaps be mitigated by designing shielding for use during handling that can be removed shortly before launch, once the probe is mounted in the rocket and no further human contact will be made.
@@Keldor314 Yes
That's why I suggested to make Am-241 heater units. Those are just relatively small pellets, not a fully blown RTG. They just need to deliver 20-100W thermal energy to keep the spacecraft warm. On the flip side, there are Am241 pellets commercially available as radiation sources for industrial and scientific purposes.
0.1% solar flux means, that there is 1-2W of energy per square meter, or ~0.2W(el), for 20W, that would be 100-200m². In my opinion, that's doable. even 500m² is possible if needed.
Another option would of course be a smaller RTG to keep it alive, and a fuel cell system to boost the energy when the science experiments need it.
The Trident mission could be interesting with the possibility of an extended mission. Much like New Horizons did, fly by Triton, sciencing the crap out of it. Then look for another target on its trajectory for an extended mission.
I want to see Triton win. It's a rare alignment for this low delta V trajectory. Like you said, venus is "right there" and one of those missions could easily be sent in the next round.
Sorry off subject... I've noticed you have a Gozanti-class cruiser on your display shelf. If you don't mind me asking, how and where did you get it? I've been looking for about 2 years for models of it and have only found the a civilian version used in a TT game. Thanks for any help.
Amazon clearance, part of x wing miniatures game if I remember correctly, there should be opening video somewhere in the depths of this channel.
@@randomnickify thanks
Landing on a different planetary body is always cool, and Io is the prettiest moon out there, but it has to be Triton even if it can't get into orbit around Neptune. It's such a mysterious object and if there's a good window they should use it!
I agree. All of the above! Fascinating stuff.
8:44 Meanwhile, in the Pentagon...
"Five hundred million dollars? Why, we could use that to fund our activities for six or seven months!"
@ 04:08 your infographic summary title says Trident Trajectory. I believe that is supposed to be Triton Trajectory if I'm not mistaken.
at 11:36 you say that we haven't sent anything to Venus since 1978, but what about Venus Express, 2005 to 2015?
Whilst true that ESA sent a mission to Venus in the last 15 years, NASA has sent a dedicated mission since Magellan (1989 - 1993) and no mission has penetrated the clouds of Venus to land on its surface since the Venera 14 mission that ended operations in the mid-80's
I have to give my vote for Venus. I'd really love for another surface probe with modern tech. I know the Russians got a few pics but I bet we could get WAY more data with tech we have now
Excellent stuff! All cool missions but I hope the Io mission will succeed as it seems the most spectacular mission with the biggest chance of discovering something new and unexpected.
Fun Fact: In Contact Report 115, from October 19, 1978, Billy Meier not only foretold the then forthcoming discovery of the two satellites beyond Pluto, but also that Io was the most volcanically active body in the solar system.
Extra Credit: What year did NASA announce this discovery?
It would be cool if Spacex could step up and launch one of these as well.
Trident and DaVinci+ are my two picks. But I wouldn't be upset with any of them.
Could they combine a Venus flyby or 3, along with a trip to Io in the same mission, especially if they are going around Venus as part of the route to Io?
Also it could be used to calibrate the sensors, while gaining extra data. Also this could apply to Io or Triton. Edits added text and corrected a target.
please for the love of god I hope they pick Triton. the outer 2 planets interest me the most since we know the least about them