While for most people Pluto is the most distant planet in the Solar System, things get a lot more fuzzy once you pass Neptune and enter the realm of trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs). Pluto is probably the most well-known of these, but there are at least a dozen more of such dwarf planets among the TNOs, including 90377 Sedna.
This obviously invites the notion of sending an exploration mission to Sedna, much as was done with Pluto and a range of other TNOs through the New Horizons spacecraft. How practical this would be is investigated in a recent study by [Elena Ancona] and colleagues.
The focus is here on advanced propulsion methods, including nuclear propulsion and solar sails. Although it’s definitely possible to use a similar mission profile as with the New Horizons mission, this would make it another long-duration mission. Rather than a decades-long mission, using a minimally-equipped solar sail spacecraft could knock this down to about seven years, whereas the proposed Direct Fusion Drive (DFD) could do this in ten, but with a much larger payload and the ability do an orbital insertion which would obviously get much more science done.
As for the motivation for a mission to Sedna, its highly eccentric orbit that takes it past the heliopause means that it spends relatively little time being exposed to the Sun’s rays, which should have left much of the surface material intact that was present during the early formation of the Solar System. With our explorations of the Solar System taking us ever further beyond the means of traditional means of space travel, a mission to Sedna might not only expand our horizons, but also provide a tantalizing way to bring much more of the Solar System including the Kuiper belt within easy reach.
Funny thing is that Neptune was the most distant planet from the Sun until 1999: Pluto was closer. Then Pluto became the farthest planet until 2006, and after that Neptune became the farthest planet again.
Sorry Jerry but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIVOIaYxaTo
The line between science and science fiction tends to get quite blurry with proposed propulsion methods.
Good science fiction is a form of science, I’d say. :)
The main difference is that it is being excercised in the minds of people.
In a psychical environment, rather than a physical environment.
Right then. I’ll just get to work on the Infinite Improbability Drive.
Watch for incoming whales!
Not again!
+1
Any sort of controlled rocket was science fiction when proposed.
A rocket reaching the Moon was science fiction when proposed.
A rocket reaching Pluto was science fiction when proposed.
A rocket using ions instead of fire was science fiction when proposed.
Two things are universal in science: Every proposal is science fiction until someone makes it work, and people who can’t do anything useful with their lives discount proposals as science fiction.
I agree with you 100%. Think about something we see as a simple device or technology in the house like a TV. This was thought to be nothing more than a far fetched theory at one time. Most didn’t even attempt to make it come to life because they were too close minded. If you can think it then one day there is a chance for it to become reality. I have great admiration for those who test the limits in something that is conceived as science fiction because these are the individuals that change the world.
Yeah. They 1000% need to invest in and develop that direct fusion drive.
My only disappointment is that these craft blow past their targets giving a rather limited window of observation time. Such extreme speeds would mean even shorter windows.
From a budgetary perspective it shortens the mission operations from over a decade to a manner of years. These qualities give any proposed mission a much better chance at approval.
An orbital craft seems to offer more data. We could have a weather service for Pluto much like Jupiter and Saturn missions. Tradeoffs are tough, I waited a very long time for data from New Horizons, and as revolutionary as it was the window for photography was very short.
Not the fusion concept. It actually has the ability to do an orbital insertion, which is absolutely NUTS if you know anything about how difficult that is.
I must have just assumed its velocity wouldnt allow such a thing. That is bonkers really, I am assuming you reverse the engine orientation and apply equal thrust to brake?
Wait, Neptune was further away than Pluto I’m 1999? Hmmm… I don’t remember that… I have to check that out. Unless of course if you mean because the demotion of Pluto as a planet then the promotion back to planet again, the okay yeah that makes sense. That’s probably what you mean, got it!
No it is meant literally. Plutos elliptical orbit brings it closer to Earth than Neptune for about a fifth of its orbit.
Oops I mean “IN 1999” darn autocorrect.
I am not an astronomer, so whatever. But to my simple little mind, if the orbit is so eccentric that the major axis is outside the heliopause, then how can we assume that the object was from the original accretion disk that formed the solar system, and was not captured?
A larger object outside Sedna which orbits the Sun could also explain orbital perbutations. A satellite mission could help answer these questions.