Forbidden Planet
We’ve been to the moon. Mars is easy. But landing on Venus? That’s tough.
- By Sam Kean
- Air & Space magazine, September 2010
Most pictures of the Venus surface are synthetic, like this view of a volcanic region called Eistla, created from Magellan orbital radar data. The SAGE lander would take actual photos from ground level.
NASA/JPL
(Page 4 of 4)
SAGE may not give us all the answers we want, but if its mission is approved, the spacecraft will literally die trying. The first bytes of data should arrive at mission control—causing the scientists and engineers to erupt in cheers—after the lander has finished its planned work and started to succumb on Mielikki Mons, 24 million miles away. Eventually heat will pierce its inner circuits, kinetic energy will rattle its molecules harder and harder, and hiccups will start to appear in the transmissions.
As Lori Glaze of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, envisions it based on work she’s done on other Venus mission concepts, the lander’s death will not be peaceful—no “Daai-sy, Daaaaai-sy” sign-off, followed by silence. After the batteries shut down, they will continue to bake in the 850-degree heat. Soon after, says Glaze, they will almost certainly explode, and the blast will probably breach the titanium pressure shield around the inner electronics. When the lander stops shuddering, the toxic air will go to work, eating any exposed wires down to the nubs, and the carbon dioxide will bleach any of the lander’s decorations (like American flags). All the metals will corrode, and the supercritical CO2 and acids and ocean-like pressure—all the hellish forces of Venus—will do what they do best, and destroy the lander piece by piece.
Sam Kean is the author of the New York Times bestseller The Disappearing Spoon: And Other True Tales of Madness, Love, and the History of the World from the Periodic Table of the Elements (Little, Brown, 2010).
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4





Comments (6)
I first read Velikovsky in 1972,and I agree with the thesis that venus IS a captured element of the solar system,called the destroyer by the ancients.
Posted by Htos1 on September 15,2010 | 02:27 AM
Like most other space missions, this proposed trip to Venus will present its technological challenges to our Science and Engineering communities. In my opinion, the most challenging aspect is to find a replacement technology for conventional silicon based semiconductors which cannot withstand temperatures in excess of 250 degrees. The article proposed a possible solution-USE VACUUM TUBES. In 1959, the Nuvistor vacuum tube was introduced by RCA. This was the smallest vacuum tube ever produced (not much larger than a nickel) and it found a home in television tuners of this era. The Nuvistor worked reasonably well as a VHF and UHF amplifier and was constructed of metal and ceramic. These materials may be just what is needed for survival in the extreme environments of the Venusian surface. My hope is that we re-examine this 50 plus year old technology and seriously consider its utilization to make this important mission to Venus a success.
Posted by Walt Bilous on September 20,2010 | 10:13 AM
Why would they want to send a ship that would only burn up on the planet in its boiling hot lava surface? It would be a waste of billions of dollars and we wouldn't get the information we wanted. They don't expect to actually land the ship on the planet do they? They're having enough trouble studying the sun without getting those instruments burn up by it if they get too close. They also feel that they can send something directly into the sun to study exactly what it's made up of. I don't believe anything can be created that wouldn't burn up in the intense heat of the sun.
Posted by Red Wolf on September 23,2010 | 09:44 AM
Two things are missing from this article:
Firstly, the US *has* landed a small probe on the surface which transmitted data back home, and has sent several other vehicles into the atmosphere. Try Googling 'Pioneer Venus'. Granted, it was a long time ago, but it shouldn't be forgotten!
Secondly, there have been a variety of orbital missions to Venus over the years, and there may well be more in the future. These can identify landing sites, meaning that a simple 'land anywhere' approach isn't the way forward - imagine finding an ancient relic of a non-volcanic surface...
...oh, and there's every chance that a lander might use a non-US orbiter for data relay, too - it's al;ready been tried on Mars.
Posted by Bob Shaw on October 16,2010 | 07:10 AM
"No one has sent a probe to the surface in 25 years, and NASA has never even tried".
This statement is a bit misleading.
NASA's Pioneer Venus spacecraft of 1978 did in fact succeed in conveying probes all the way to the surface of Venus. Designed as atmospheric probes, not landers, NASA realized and hoped that one or more might survive and transmit from the surface. One did, for about an hour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_Venus_project
Posted by Bill Davis on November 21,2010 | 07:31 PM
Venus has intense atmospheric pressure, why don't we use the pressure as a propulsion instead of relying on rocket engine in the planet atmosphere. Dino Kraspedon idea of ufo using cathode ray tube to create vacuum will be sufficient to move easily on the planet. The hull of the craft will be made of ceramic or improved glass that will withstand the sulferic acid atmosphere. I know that require hight voltage for breaking down the co2 to its etheric component but that will be sufficient enough. Nasa technician can create something like this. Rocket will send the probe on it journey until it reach planet Venus, then re-entry into the atmosphere the probe will be activated. It will be easy to map this planet using this method.
Kwame the seeker.
Posted by KWAME OKYERE on January 1,2011 | 04:36 AM