Xref: utzoo sci.space:25476 sci.astro:10343
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!public!joshi
From: joshi@public.BTR.COM (Nikhil R. Joshi  joshi@btr.com)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: CRAF/Cassini Update - 11/09/90
Message-ID: <976@public.BTR.COM>
Date: 13 Nov 90 23:21:48 GMT
References: <1990Nov11.001924.10302@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> <7034.273fd310@abo.fi>
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA, Contact: cs@btr.com 415-966-1429
Lines: 25



In article <1990Nov13.104319.11134@irisa.fr> Henry.Thomas@irisa.fr writes:
>>In article <7034.273fd310@abo.fi>, mlindroos@abo.fi writes:
>>
>> 30 minutes! Why can't we send an advanced long-life, Viking-style probe
>> to Titan instead?! The Viking lander was "only" about twice as heavy as the
>> Huygens probe will be so the lack of a powerful-enough launcher surely cannot
>> be the reason? Is this just because of financial considerations again, or...?
>
>The reason is maybe that we have NO data of the condition down there:
>
>	- Is there any *solid* ground ?
>	- pressure ?
>	- temperature ?
>

 Was the Viking lander at least partially solar powered?  If so, that
 explains it's long life.  The solar flux at Saturn isn't nearly great
 enough to power even an orbital probe like Voyager, let alone a lander
 after being attenuated by Titan's atmosphere.   But then why can't we
 put an RTG like Voyager's on the probe?

 Nikhil Joshi
 joshi@btr.com