Unstung
Active member
I can't find the original source I read it from, but here's a .pdf:Are you sure the solar panels were to power the orbiter? As I recall, some variants of the ice giant and Chiron missions propose using solar-electric propulsion as far as the asteroid belt. The SEP stage would then be jettisoned and the actual orbiter (or flyby probe) would use ASRGs for power and storable chemical propellants for propulsion after that.
As you suggest, solar power at Uranus doesn't make any sense. From what I've read powering Juno with solar is pushing the envelope, and they only opted for that to preserve Pu-238 stocks.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/opag/march09/presentations/hofstadter.pdf
Scroll down a bit for an illustration. It's supposed to produce 100W.
And a longer version of the .pdf:
http://spacepolicyonline.com/pages/images/stories/PSDS Sat1 Hofstadter-Uranus and Sat Sci.pdf
Its specifications/objectives are quite different than the one proposed for NASA, which I believe is more like Cassini-Huygens while this has a highly elliptical orbit like Juno. The solar panels on that type of mission are purported to enable a 100kg greater payload.
Why not use a cheaper alternative like this if the NASA proposal is too expensive? A mission is only possible every 15 years.
Last edited: