SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Presenting the opening plenary presentation at the SPIE Optics and Photonics Conference in San Diego, Professor Artur Chmielewski, the US Rosetta Project Manager, gave a progress report on the mission. In addition to talking about the newly re-awakened Philae lander, he concluded his talk with Thanks to the space agencies that have been helping the Rosetta Project, and a bit of very exciting news, decided just days before his presentation.
... the Rosetta scientists have now determined how they will be completing this mission: "We will be landing the Rosetta orbiter itself on the comet in 2016 so that will also be generating more exciting data. So we are very happy that the partners NASA, European Space Agency and the DLR (German Space Agency), which built the lander, have now gotten all of their ducks in a row."
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @02:16AM
It is already in orbit about the comet and has been for over a year now. The distance and speed of the orbit are largely dictated by Mr. Kepler, which is about 25 km and a few cm/sec.
And we've got a two-body problem here; stable orbit. Comet composition and mass distribution don't matter. Rosetta orbits about the comet center-of-mass, regardless of how it is distibuted. The largest perturbations to its orbit is solar pressure and getting hit by an unlucky outgassing event from the comet.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Wednesday August 12 2015, @05:22AM
It is already in orbit about the comet and has been for over a year now. The distance and speed of the orbit are largely dictated by Mr. Kepler, which is about 25 km and a few cm/sec.
Which allows me to repeat my original question: what is the advantage to parking the Rosetta on the surface of the comet, instead of remaining in orbit?
(Score: 2) by hubie on Wednesday August 12 2015, @12:16PM
I would surmise that it is due to a combination of issues: it met its primary mission goals, it will have met its extended mission goals, and after its extended mission, it will be too far from the Sun for the solar panels to power the craft. On its return in five or so years, there might be a low probability that the spacecraft would be recoverable. I'm sure they weighed all that, as well as the likelihood of receiving continuing funding out that far, against the science return (and PR) of what you'll get if you let it land on the comet.