Since the Europeans have had recent successes smashing expensive equipment into other planets, it comes as no surprise to me that the ESA is now planning a “smash expensive equipment on the moon” mission:
Scientists are plotting out a “crash course” in learning what happens when a European lunar probe slams into the Moon.
The European Space Agency’s (ESA) SMART-1 spacecraft–now circling the Moon–is headed for a planned early September impact with Earth’s celestial neighbor.
The ESA probe would plow into the lunar surface, giving it a glancing blow as it speeds in at nearly 5,000 miles per hour (2 kilometers per second).
No word if Frank J. managed to sneak “that special package” aboard SMART-1 before it launched. I guess we’ll find out when we see a huge mushroom cloud afro on the Man In The Moon.
What I want to know is what has SMART-1 been doing all this time? It’s not like you hear about it i nthe news with “SMART-1 discovered this” and “SMART-1 discovered that” like we were hearing about the Mars Rovers 24/7.
Outfitted with miniaturized instruments, SMART-1’s goal has been to gauge key chemical elements in the lunar surface, as well as look into the theory that the Moon was formed following the violent collision of a smaller planet with Earth long ago.
ESA’s lunar probe completes a loop around the Moon every five hours–but that’s about to end later this year.
Aha. Now I see. I forgot that SMART-1 is a European probe. As we all know, just like Kansas, Science takes a backseat to Politics when it comes to Europe. So there can be only one conclusion: It’s been scanning the lunar surface for a McDonalds to slam into and destroy.
“Do McDonalds burn in the lunar atmosphere?” will finally be answered. Bully for the ESA!
I think the spacecraft was more of a technological test bed for an ion thruster. I think it went from low earth orbit to a lunar orbit on something like 70kg of propellant – an impressive feat.
It’s ESA, which menas its French. They were testing for chease. Of course, Wallance and Grombit had already prooven this (good Brits they) but determined it to be sub-standard. Which actually may be more in keeping with the local palete.
You can not get cheddar at the local shop. I crap you not.
It’s been 44 years since the US first smashed a spacecraft into the moon…it’s about time ESA caught up.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1962-012A
heh…the russians even beat the US into destroying expensive hardware on moon in 1959.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1959-014A
And the japanese did it in 1990
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1990-007A
It could only be partially French; if it were a full-on french project, the probe would have retreated into space by now. In European terms, SMART pertains to just reaching the moon. Does the probe have crash test dummies aboard?
Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. Nasa has augered two spacecraft into Mars (by accident) and recently put one into a comet on purpose. In fact, I suspect Nasa wanted to cash in on their experience slamming spacecraft into stuff when they put that probe out of its misery.
But cheer up: asteroids are small and hard to hit, so we are studs for doing it. The French hit an object so gigantic and close you can see with the naked eye. Sissies.
Is Kanses the plural of Kansas?
The French always steal Frank’s ideas.
(Fun facts about the French #11?)
The Europeons call a probe that runs into the moon “SMART”? How hard can that be?
“Scientists are plotting out a “crash course” in learning what happens when a European lunar probe slams into the Moon.”
Call me crazy, but I think it will break. There, I just saved you a boatload of money.
The good news is: they just saved a bunch of money by switching their lunar probe insurance to Geico!
Have a nice day