Search

So far no designated mission to either of the two ice giants, Uranus and Neptune, exists. Almost all of our gathered information on these planets comes from remote sensing. In recent years, NASA and ESA have started planning for future mission to Uranus and Neptune, with both agencies focusing their attention on orbiters and atmospheric probes. Whereas information provided by remote sensing is undoubtedly highly valuable, remote sensing of planetary atmospheres also presents some shortcomings, most of which can be overcome by mass spectrometers. In most studies presented to date a mass spectrometer experiment is thus a favored science instrument for in situ composition measurements on an atmospheric probe. Mass spectrometric measurements can provide unique scientific data, i.e., sensitive and quantitative measurements of the chemical composition of the atmosphere, including isotopic, elemental, and molecular abundances. In this review paper we present the technical aspects of mass spectrometry relevant to atmospheric probes. This includes the individual components that make up mass spectrometers and possible implementation choices for each of these components. We then give an overview of mass spectrometers that were sent to space with the intent of probing planetary atmospheres, and discuss three instruments, the heritage of which is especially relevant to Uranus and Neptune probes, in detail. The main part of this paper presents the current state-of-art in mass spectrometry intended for atmospheric probe. Finally, we present a possible descent probe implementation in detail, including measurement phases and associated expected accuracies for selected species.

The main objective of this chapter is to present an overview of the different areas of key technologies that will be needed to fly the technically most challenging of the representative missions identified in chapter 4 (the Pillar 2 Horizon 2061 report). It starts with a description of the future scientific instruments which will address the key questions of Horizon 2061 described in chapter 3 (the Pillar 1 Horizon 2061 report) and the new technologies that the next generations of space instruments will require (section 2). From there, the chapter follows the line of logical development and implementation of a planetary mission: section 3 describes some of the novel mission architectures that will be needed and how they will articulate interplanetary spacecraft and science platforms; section 4 summarizes the system-level technologies needed: power, propulsion, navigation, communication, advanced autonomy on board planetary spacecraft; section 5 describes the diversity of specialized science platforms that will be needed to survive, operate and return scientific data from the extreme environments that future missions will target; section 6 describes the new technology developments that will be needed for long-duration missions and semi-permanent settlements; finally, section 7 attempts to anticipate on the disruptive technologies that should emerge and progressively prevail in the decades to come to meet the long-term needs of future planetary missions., Comment: 100 pages, 23 figures, Horizon 2061 is a science-driven, foresight exercise, for future scientific investigations

Oxygen is the most common element after hydrogen and helium in Jupiter's atmosphere, and may have been the primary condensable (as water ice) in the protoplanetary disk. Prior to the Juno mission, in situ measurements of Jupiter's water abundance were obtained from the Galileo Probe, which dropped into a meteorologically anomalous site. The findings of the Galileo Probe were inconclusive because the concentration of water was still increasing when the probe died. Here, we initially report on the water abundance in the equatorial region, from 0 to 4 degrees north latitude, based on 1.25 to 22 GHz data from Juno Microwave radiometer probing approximately 0.7 to 30 bars pressure. Because Juno discovered the deep atmosphere to be surprisingly variable as a function of latitude, it remains to confirm whether the equatorial abundance represents Jupiter's global water abundance. The water abundance at the equatorial region is inferred to be $2.5_{-1.6}^{+2.2}\times10^3$ ppm, or $2.7_{-1.7}^{+2.4}$ times the protosolar oxygen elemental ratio to H (1$\sigma$ uncertainties). If reflective of the global water abundance, the result suggests that the planetesimals formed Jupiter are unlikely to be water-rich clathrate hydrates., Comment: 27 pages, 7 figures

Observational data from the Cassini spacecraft are used to obtain a chemical model of ocean water on Enceladus. The model indicates that Enceladus' ocean is a Na-Cl-CO3 solution with an alkaline pH of ~11-12. The dominance of aqueous NaCl is a feature that Enceladus' ocean shares with terrestrial seawater, but the ubiquity of dissolved Na2CO3 suggests that soda lakes are more analogous to the Enceladus ocean. The high pH implies that the hydroxide ion should be relatively abundant, while divalent metals should be present at low concentrations owing to buffering by clays and carbonates on the ocean floor. The high pH is interpreted to be a key consequence of serpentinization of chondritic rock, as predicted by prior geochemical reaction path models; although degassing of CO2 from the ocean may also play a role depending on the efficiency of mixing processes in the ocean. Serpentinization leads to the generation of H2, a geochemical fuel that can support both abiotic and biological synthesis of organic molecules such as those that have been detected in Enceladus' plume. Serpentinization and H2 generation should have occurred on Enceladus, like on the parent bodies of aqueously altered meteorites; but it is unknown whether these critical processes are still taking place, or if Enceladus' rocky core has been completely altered by past hydrothermal activity. The high pH also suggests that the delivery of oxidants from the surface to the ocean has not been significant, and the rocky core did not experience partial melting and igneous differentiation. On the other hand, the pH is compatible with life as we know it; life on Earth may have begun under similar conditions, and serpentinites on Earth support microbial communities that are centered on H2 that is provided by water-rock reactions.

With the advent of sophisticated X-ray observatories, viz., Chandra and XMM-Newton, the field of planetary X-ray astronomy is advancing at a faster pace. Several new solar system objects are now know to shine in X-rays at energies generally below 2 keV. Jupiter, Saturn, and Earth, all three magnetized planets, have been observed by Chandra and XMM-Newton. At Jupiter, both auroral and non-auroral disk X-ray emissions have been observed. The first soft X-ray observation of Earth's aurora by Chandra shows that it is highly variable. X-rays have been detected from Saturn's disk, but no convincing evidence of X-ray aurora has been seen. Several comets have been observed in X-rays by Chandra and XMM-Newton. Cometary X-rays are produced due to change exchange of solar wind ions with cold cometary neutrals. Soft X-rays have also been observed from Venus, Mars, Moon, Io, Europa, Io plasma torus, and heliosphere. The non-auroral X-ray emissions from Jupiter, Saturn, and Earth, and those from sunlit disk of Mars, Venus, and Moon are produced due to scattering of solar X-rays. The spectral characteristics of X-ray emission from comets, heliosphere, darkside of Moon, and Martian halo are quite similar, but they appear to be quite different from those of Jovian auroral X-rays. The X- ray aurora on Earth is generated by electron bremsstrahlung and on Jupiter by precipitation of highly-ionized energetic heavy ions. In this paper we will present a comparative overview of X-ray emission from different solar system objects and make an attempt to synthesize a coherent picture.

ION is a system of ground support software for the ion and neutral mass spectrometer (INMS) instrument aboard the Cassini spacecraft. By incorporating commercial off-the-shelf database, Web server, and Java application components, ION offers considerably more ground-support-service capability than was available previously. A member of the team that operates the INMS or a scientist who uses the data collected by the INMS can gain access to most of the services provided by ION via a standard pointand click hyperlink interface generated by almost any Web-browser program running in almost any operating system on almost any computer. Data are stored in one central location in a relational database in a non-proprietary format, are accessible in many combinations and formats, and can be combined with data from other instruments and spacecraft. The use of the Java programming language as a system-interface language offers numerous capabilities for object-oriented programming and for making the database accessible to participants using a variety of computer hardware and software.

Jovian X-rays can be broadly classified into two categories: (1) auroral emission, which is confined to high-latitudes (approximately greater than 60 deg.) at both polar regions, and (2) dayglow emission, which originates from the sunlit low-latitude (approximately less than 50 deg.) regions of the disk (hereafter called disk emissions). Recent X-ray observations of Jupiter by chandra and XMM-Newton have shown that these two types of X-ray emission from Jupiter have different morphological, temporal, and spectral characteristics. In particular: 1) contrary to the auroral X-rays, which are concentrated in a spot in the north and in a band that runs half-way across the planet in the south, the low-latitude X-ray disk is almost uniform; 2) unlike the approximately 40 plus or minus 20-min periodic oscillations seen in the auroral X-ray emissions, the disk emissions do not show any periodic oscillations; 3) the disk emission is harder and extends to higher energies than the auroral spectrum; and 4) the disk X-ray emission show time variability similar to that seen in solar X-rays. These differences and features imply that the processes producing X-rays are different at these two latitude regions on Jupiter. We will present the details of these and other features that suggest the differences between these two classes of X-ray emissions from Jupiter, and discuss the current scenario of the production mechanism of them.