3 Whisky Happy HourThe Ricochet PodcastGLoP CultureBeyond the Polls with Henry OlsenGray MattersDaily SignalThe Erick Erickson ShowGiving VenturesMom Wars3 Martini LunchChicks on The RightParsing Immigration PolicyFederalist Radio HourWhat the Hell Is Going OnFreedom to LearnThe Learning CurveThe Conservative Woman’s GuideHeritage ExplainsNot Dead YetWho Funds that?The Radio Free Hillsdale HourThe Glenn ShowFirst Things PodcastCall Me Back - with Dan SenorHillsdale DialoguesLaw Talk with Epstein, Yoo & CookeThe LibertarianThe Report Card with Nat MalkusThe Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’ConnorThe American IdeaMadison’s NotesConservative Crossroads with Henry OlsenThe Back of the BookMartini ShotThe Dave Carter ShowThe Powerline ShowIn DissentHeard at HeritageSmart Girl PoliticsJames Lileks’ The DinerCase in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and CultureJobMakersOne on One with Robert DoarHomeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeHubwonk

Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

  1. Main Feed/
  2. ‘Attempt no landing there.’
October 21, 2024 at 9:02 AM

‘Attempt no landing there.’

Henry Racette
@HenryRacette

To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

Join to bookmark23likesJoin to like12comments

Space and/or movie nerds will know that the one body in the solar system that we have been specifically instructed not to visit is the destination of the largest deep-space probe ever launched. Last week NASA, with the assistance of the now indispensable SpaceX, sent the eponymously named Europa Clipper spacecraft on its way to Jupiter. The six-ton wonder of astrophysical engineering will first visit Mars to steal a little energy from the red planet, then return to Earth for another theft of delta-V before making its long voyage out to Jupiter, where it's expected to arrive in 2030.

The spacecraft was originally planned to be flown on NASA's absurdly expensive Space Launch System (SLS), but delays in that program prompted NASA to come to its senses and contract with SpaceX to perform the launch. Launching on the increasingly irrelevant SLS platform would have cost something north of $2 billion, whereas SpaceX's Falcon Heavy, the world's most powerful operational rocket, did the job for less than a tenth of that.

Why visit Europa? Jupiter's moon (well, one of almost a hundred Jovian moons) is considered one of the best candidates in the solar system to be a site of extraterrestrial life. There's overwhelming evidence that the moon, despite being so far from the sun, has a large body of liquid saltwater below its icy surface. (Some estimates suggest that there's more liquid water on Europa than on Earth.) Jupiter's immense gravity imposes tidal stresses on the little moon that generate heat -- enough to keep water liquid, perhaps enough to give the moon a molten core.

The question everyone wants answered, of course, is whether this watery little world contains life. Europa Clipper is designed to collect evidence -- albeit circumstantial -- of life, if any can be found. The spacecraft won't actually land, since that was prohibited by extraterrestrial edict in 2010, but will be close enough to directly sample water from the moon if the craft is fortunate enough to fly through one of the water geysers that have been photographed by earlier spacecraft.


I like big rockets and small movies. By the latter of which I mean understated, low-budget flicks with unknown actors doing a lot of talking. The 2013 movie Europa Report is a small science fiction movie in the "found footage" vein that I've enjoyed watching a couple of times. It features one actor I recognize, Michael Nyqvist, who starred in John Wick, so I guess he isn't exactly unknown. I still think of him as the guy from the Dragon Tattoo movies. (I don't know much about cinema.)

This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.

Discussion (12)

Sign in to commentSign in
  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    kedavis@kedavis·1y
  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    kedavis@kedavis·1y

    Oh, and as Hugh Hewitt might remind us, don't annoy General Zod!

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    kedavis@kedavis·1y
    Henry Racette (View Post):
    The spacecraft was originally planned to be flown on NASA’s absurdly expensive Space Launch System (SLS), but delays in that program prompted NASA to come to its senses and contract with SpaceX to perform the launch. Launching on the increasingly irrelevant SLS platform would have cost something north of $2 billion, whereas SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, the world’s most powerful operational rocket, did the job for less than a tenth of that.

    I'm sure NASA also still spend the >$2 Billion.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Henry Racette@HenryRacette·1y
    Replyingtokedavis

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Post):

    Henry Racette (View Post):
    The spacecraft was originally planned to be flown on NASA’s absurdly expensive Space Launch System (SLS), but delays in that program prompted NASA to come to its senses and contract with SpaceX to perform the launch. Launching on the increasingly irrelevant SLS platform would have cost something north of $2 billion, whereas SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, the world’s most powerful operational rocket, did the job for less than a tenth of that.

    I’m sure NASA also still spend the >$2 Billion.

    Yes, but they'll spend it on something worthwhile... like their DEI program.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    kedavis@kedavis·1y
    ReplyingtoHenry Racette

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Post):

    Henry Racette (View Post):
    The spacecraft was originally planned to be flown on NASA’s absurdly expensive Space Launch System (SLS), but delays in that program prompted NASA to come to its senses and contract with SpaceX to perform the launch. Launching on the increasingly irrelevant SLS platform would have cost something north of $2 billion, whereas SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, the world’s most powerful operational rocket, did the job for less than a tenth of that.

    I’m sure NASA also still spend the >$2 Billion.

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Yes, but they’ll spend it on something worthwhile… like their DEI program.

    I'm thinking they probably still spent in on SLS, they just didn't launch one.

Scroll for later comments
+7 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of twelve comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.

Trending

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Join Ricochet

Get the Ricochet app

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play
  • •
  • •