Apollo to Venus

[qube_TA]

Apparently considered in 1973

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.g...

Would have been something quite special.

[jmorgan]

Thought it was earlier?

It crops up here and there in the various books. Seems a tad risky I thought given the duration. But then I am not a rocket scientist.

Edit. Thought I read sommit about it
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/...

From
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4205/cover.html

Edited by jmorgan on Wednesday 28th March 20:06

[Eric Mc]

I think the fact that the report was published mere days after the fire which killed the three Apollo 1 astronauts would have knocked this plan on the head pretty much instantly.

We now know that such a mission would not have achieved much, apart from spectacularness, which, in 1967, might have seemed a good enough reason for attempting it.

[qube_TA]

I'm all for the odd spectacularness.

I found the level of detail and all the calcs in the report quite interesting though. I wonder how often someone at NASA (or similar) is commissioned to plan for a program that's almost no chance of ever happening.

[Eric Mc]

qube_TA said:

I'm all for the odd spectacularness.

I found the level of detail and all the calcs in the report quite interesting though. I wonder how often someone at NASA (or similar) is commissioned to plan for a program that's almost no chance of ever happening.

In 1967, there would have been a higher chance of a mission like this going ahead than later.

At this time, NASA were looking at possible post Apollo Applications - in other words - post lunar landing programmes that would make use of Apollo technology. There were all sorts of suggestions. Only two projects actually happened - Skylab in 1973/74 and the Apollo/Soyuz mission in 1975.

[qube_TA]

Yeah, and both were a bit tame by comparison.

More politically significant I guess but that's never much interested me.

Could have had a cloud city on Venus.

[jmorgan]

qube_TA said:

Could have had a cloud city on Venus.

Wouldn't want the window washer job.

[qube_TA]

Wouldn't be much to see out of any window though.

[Eric Mc]

I think Venus would always have been (and still is) a non-starter for a manned flight - even for a fly by or orbit only mission.

By 1967 we had enough information to know that no one was going to see anything and the atmospheric and surface conditions were far too hostile for any sort of descent into teh atmosphere.

NASA did some very good Venus work with Pioneer Venus 1 and 2 and with Magellan in 1986.

The Russians also found out a lot with various Venera probes starting in 1967.

All unmanned, of course.

[qube_TA]

Isn't the upper atmosphere of Venus fairly temperate by comparison to the heat/high pressure on the surface?

if you could float on top of that pressure where it's not silly hot then instant Lando Calrissian

[Eric Mc]

It's still pretty hostile though. Lando's cloud city would dissolve over the course of a few weeks.

[jmorgan]

Not nice there for certain. Acid clouds and hellish pressures etc. Reading on theory somewhere that even if you could build on the surface, you would not want to be around for long as it may resurface itself every now and then.

[qube_TA]

As long as it lasted long enough for the rebels to visit without suspecting Vader was there then it would serve it's purpose.

[Eric Mc]

About ten minutes then.