Talk:Hayabusa
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Space. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Related projects: | ||
 |
WikiProject Spaceflight | Importance to Spaceflight: Mid |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
|
Japan To-do:
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Substantial Revision
As you can tell, I substantially revised this page with new content. I wrote about the delay in rendezvous from June to September, eliminated the part about "phase I" and "phase II" since it's likely that the mapping schedule has been revised due to the delay, and talked about the Minerva lander. --Centurion328 19:51, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning of 'Hayabusa'
Anyone knows the original meaning of term "Hayabusa".. From Japanece history as I guess.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.145.244.28 (talk • contribs) .
- I don't speak Japanese, but in Chinese translation, it's "??" (a kind of bird). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yaohua2000 (talk • contribs) .
To answer the earlier question, hayabusa means peregrine falcon in Japanese. --Moki80 21:13, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hayabusa is the worlds fastest flying bird. That is why Suzuki named its flagship motorcycle GSX1300R a Hayabusa. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.41.94.220 (talk • contribs) .
[edit] Landing
"Hayabusa is the first spacecraft designed to deliberately land on an asteroid and then take off again." - I wouldn't call it landing, the main spacecraft doesn't touch the surface of the asteroid (if all goes well). --Bricktop 00:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- I think, you are judging too hard. Does an airplane not land, because it only touches the ground with its wheels? More interesting would be the maneuver executed by Hayabusa: Does it fire its engines to leave the asteroid or not? Awolf002 00:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Does a helicopter land only because its tethered payload touches the surface? I think this is a much better comparison for Hayabusa's landing. The spacecraft for itself isn't designed to survive a landing, to stay some time on the surface and then take off (like for example Luna 16 sample return mission). In my eyes Hayabusa performs a sort of landing, but I wouldn't specially point out "the first landing and takeoff" --Bricktop 01:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, all this is moot given that Hayabusa is going to release an undeniable landing craft, the little Minerva probe. Maybe the article just needs rewording to reflect that?The Singing Badger 13:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes Minerva lands indeed, but it doesn't take off any more (ok it jumps around :-), but it can not leave the gravitational pull of the asteroid any more). --Bricktop 14:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- I tried rewriting in light of this ... see what you think. The Singing Badger 15:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ok much better, technically correct and NPOV. Thanks! --Bricktop 16:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- I tried rewriting in light of this ... see what you think. The Singing Badger 15:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes Minerva lands indeed, but it doesn't take off any more (ok it jumps around :-), but it can not leave the gravitational pull of the asteroid any more). --Bricktop 14:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, all this is moot given that Hayabusa is going to release an undeniable landing craft, the little Minerva probe. Maybe the article just needs rewording to reflect that?The Singing Badger 13:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Does a helicopter land only because its tethered payload touches the surface? I think this is a much better comparison for Hayabusa's landing. The spacecraft for itself isn't designed to survive a landing, to stay some time on the surface and then take off (like for example Luna 16 sample return mission). In my eyes Hayabusa performs a sort of landing, but I wouldn't specially point out "the first landing and takeoff" --Bricktop 01:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Status
At IAF in Fukuoka last week Hayabusa was announced to be 3 km from Hayabusa and new close up views were presented. Minerva will be dropped from an altitude of 30 meters. Hektor 23:35, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Did they also say something on the LUNAR-A launch date? --Bricktop 14:24, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
- No news about LUNAR-A. Indeed, they announced that the first flight of H-IIA 204 for next year and of H-IIB in 2008. High debate it seems in Japan to see whether or not the first HTV should fly on the first H-IIB.Hektor 16:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Is the mission a complete failure due to the problems with MINERVA? Or will Hayabusa still be able to land on the surface of this asteroid... Alex 04:18, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- The loss of MINERVA has no effect on the landing. The Singing Badger 05:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] NASA text appears twice
The text describing the miniature NASA rover, which was cancelled, appears twice. I can see why it does, as it fits in both sections, but it feels wrong when reading the article. I'd suggest removing it from the section on Minerva mini-lander, and leaving it in the section on Changes in mission plan. 82.18.44.214 00:01, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] MINERVA Status
I think this doesn't fit well in article, so I'll write here: Information from Shin'ya Matsuura's blog, which quotes JAXA public relations e-mail:
Project manager Jun-ichiro Kawaguchi's comment:
Q) Did MINERVA land on Itokawa?
A) There's no indication of that.
Q) Is there possibility of orbiting around Itokawa?
A) Since we're not observing cyclic ON/OFF signal change, probability of orbiting is low, unless it is some exceptional case.
Q) Is there possibility of MINERVA to return and fall to the asteroid surface?
A) Theoretically, there's possibility of falling by solar radiation pressure.
Its velocity of escaping Itokawa was 8.3cm/sec at infinity.
In case of MINERVA, it will be decelerated by solar radiation by 1.4cm/s/day, and this works like gravity.
It will stop ascending in 6 or 7 days, and it will go back to the same distance from sun around Itokawa after about same duration. That will be 2 weeks in sum.
If the returned position is close enough to Itokawa, it might collide with its surface. If it passes nearby, it will be swung by Itokawa's gravity, and since it isn't directed toward sun, it will gradually pushed away.
For about two weeks, I expect to monitor with Hayabusa's receiver. At least it will be blown back by solar radiation, so, if it is to be inside Hayabusa's receiving antenna pattern, it will be able to communicate. With that result, and after taking some time to lock on, we can deduce its trajectory.
We will continue to use the receiver to monitor the signal from MINERVA.
Q) Is MINERVA a failure?
A) As an engineering experiment payload, its function as probe robot such as its release, communication, data relay transfer, image acquisition, instrument data transfer are working in the place where it is, so I think I can say it proved the functionality.
As for the scientific observation: Although for short duration, temperture measurement affected by heat radiation was done, which I consider is meaningful.
--Fukumoto 20:01, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hayabusa not slated to return to Earth by 2007 due to problems
Please see the following: http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/051214_after_hayabusa.html
I would edit the article, but do not feel like it at the moment. --Marsbound2024 02:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] No sample?
According to today's AP story, analysis of the data shows that "the probe did not show that it had fired a metal projectile onto the asteroid's surface during landing, as previously believed." Not sure what the source of this statement is, though. Rmhermen 23:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Error?
"Second, since it was the first-ever soft contact with the surface of an asteroid it has enormous influence on further asteroid missions."
Is this statement from the 'Scientific and engineering importance of the mission' section correct? From what I have read on the NEAR Shoemaker article (the 'Orbits and landing' section), Shoemaker was the first-ever soft contact landing on an asteroid (even though the orbiter wasn't originally designed for landing).61.68.149.160 15:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Craft image
I've updated the "artist's impression" to show the last iteration of images that I drew for ISAS. It's more accurate and detailed than the one it replaces (which I also drew) - and on that topic, I for one would like some more pictorial references for MINERVA. This was a highly innovative micro-lander, and it has very little public-domain information about it.
JGarry 12:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)J.R.C. Garry
[edit] Swirling dust
The article states that "there is a high probability that some dust swirled into the sampling chamber". Since there is no atmosphere to cause such swirling this probably needs to be reworded. I would change "swirled" to "was deflected" but I don't want to without reading the words used by scientists connected with the mission. Rsduhamel (talk) 19:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think it was written by me and I admit it was bad choice of the word. The original word used is like "there's possibility that some sample was captured to the sample capsule" with the assumption that during the first sampling attempt the sampler horn hit the asteroid surface with a velocity greater than planned, and the sampler horn is designed to deflect any upward-moving objects to the sample catcher.[2] --Fukumoto (talk) 15:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
