At last Friday’s lecture (by Dr. Jon Willis) I asked about the plans to get the probe back from Enceladus. I thought the speaker’s response that “what comes up must come down” was flippant and contrary
At last Friday’s lecture (by Dr. Jon Willis) I asked about the plans to get the probe back from Enceladus. I thought the speaker’s response that “what comes up must come down” was flippant and contrary to Newtonian physics. For instance, geosynchronous satellites do not “come back down” and have never been brought back down to low orbit for repair or refueling.
This is a non-trivial problem. Enceladus is the second most proximal moon to Saturn and is therefore deep in Saturn’s gravity well. Return to earth involves raising the probe to a heliocentric orbit (effectively Saturn escape velocity) then converting to a Hohmann transfer orbit with Earth perihelion at 1 AU. My understanding is that transfer between two circular orbits (E.G.: Earth and Saturn) using a Hohmann transfer orbit requires the same delta-v independent of the direction of the transfer. Since the probe relied on multiple gravity assist manoeuvres to get to Saturn, I doubt it has the luxury of carting a lot of fuel for the return trip.
At Earth orbit perihelion it will need to re-enter Earth’s atmosphere at close to Earth’s escape velocity. I don’t know of a successful re-entry from a heliocentric orbit, or if it is feasible.
I’m not saying return can’t be done, just that getting the probe home is as difficult as getting it up there in the first place. The project invites some interesting jiggery-pokery. Like more gravity assist or aerobraking.
My second question was about return of the plutonium battery and potential radioactive contamination upon re-entry. There have been several inadvertent re-entries of plutonium batteries (Apollo 13 Lunar Module being one). The issue has been addressed by containing the batteries within their own re-entry heat shielding so they would land in one piece (hopefully not in my backyard). Also, the Plutonium-238 isotope used in batteries has a half life of only 64 years, not the 24,000 years of weapons grade plutonium. I feel much safer now.
On the weekend of 10 – 11 September, 2016, the National Board of the RASC met at the Royal Executive Hotel in Calgary to conduct a strategic planning session with Dr. Wilma Slenders, PhD, of Transcend Management Advisors, Inc. 2nd Vice President Robyn Foret set up this session which all national board members attended. National President Craig Levine described this as “Our opportunity to look at what we do with a critical eye and to look at how we can engage more deeply with membership and centres. This could be a generational change. Who do we want to be?… Everything we do from this is going to be time lined, budgeted, with accountability, and measurements. We need to keep each other and committee chairs accountable.” Colin Haig observed: “We need to bake follow up into everything we do”. Robyn Foret explained: “We need to use resources properly. What do we need from 2017 budget to accomplish this objective? There is a lot to be done to do this right.” Treasurer Susan Yeo said: “We need to focus on succession, make sure members have the tools that they need to carry on. We are not a corporation with people here for long term.” Levine agreed, adding that we need an on boarding process and mentoring process.
Colin Haig reminded us that this is the 3rd time we’ve gone through strategic planning process. This was a different approach from previous strategic planning exercises in that the national board sought outside help to facilitate the session. We did this because, as Robyn Foret reminded us, “We don’t know what we don’t know”.
The object of the session was to decide what we wanted the RASC to look like in 5 years in order to remain viable, relevant and sustainable.
Our organization has a charity mentality, tending to place emphasis on costs rather than investment. We are not comfortable with thriving. Only recently have we started to embrace mindset changes such as the creation of a fundraising committee and sponsorships. We are coming to realize that the national board is a hybrid board, not a governance board, with multiple audiences with different needs.
A lot of work was done identifying the RASC’s target audience and the means to serve these audiences. We looked at our members, competitors, collaborators and supporters.
The national board realizes that it is time to, as Randy Boddam put it, “socialize new norms” to make our organization more welcoming to different cultures, ethnic groups, and all genders.
The board did a serious inventory of our organization at present, focusing on the following