Talk:List of artificial objects leaving the Solar System

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Horizons's upper stage[edit]

Should New Horizons's star48 upper-stage be included here? It is escaping the solar system. According to NASA NH and it's Star48 stage were the first object boosted directly to solar escape velocity. Ganesha 23:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes, I believe this is correct. however I am not sure if your second statement would be correct we should ask DR Stern.
The centaur upper stage is in an orbit that puts it in a orbit that reachs into the asteriod belt. I think the jupiter fly by put new horizens and its third stage into a solar system escape orbit.but if NASA is saying that then new horizens and third stage would be in a solar system escape trajectory with out jupiter then this may be the case with a longer flight time to pluto? --Infocat13 00:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Markings on escaping final solid fuel motors[edit]

As the rocket boosters on most of these probes were always expected to head out into the wide black yonder, did they mark them in any way to make them more interesting to our alien neighbours ? :)

I mean, it presumably would have been fairly easy to engrave copies of the Pioneer plaques, or a host of other tidbits, onto the structures of these things. But did they ? The Yeti (talk) 20:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Parts like that are mass-produced by contractors to exact specifications, any change would entail separate testing and certification and it's basically handled by a separate organization from the people who design and make the payload. The payload would be sent to be launched by the people who design and built it and until it's in orbit and they make radio contact they have little to no connection with it, the people responsible for the rocket launch will handle everything connected to that. This is my take on the situation as an observer, I have no first-hand experience. --DelftUser (talk) 09:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect use of "booster"[edit]

"Booster" as used here does not conform to the modern use of the term as we define it on our page Booster (rocketry). The booster is the first stage of a multistage rocket, not the last upper stage. Some people at the beginning of the Space Race (late 1950s and early 1960s) would sometimes call launch vehicles "boosters", but this was based on lack of technical knowledge, and sounds even more ignorant and unprofessional today. The terminology needs to be changed. JustinTime55 (talk) 12:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that a Space.com cited source calls it a "booster" proves nothing, other than that journalists don't know everything. The confusion caused by this use of the word was manifest by the fact that somebody added an incorrect photo of the Atlas V booster (acutally a first-stage booster), which fell into the ocean and is not the upper stage which follows the New Horizons probe. JustinTime55 (talk) 13:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Voyager 2 destination[edit]

V2 didn't have a destination listed like the other 4 so I copied it from the Voyager 2 page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:102D:7000:3960:E3B9:25B3:C512 (talk) 21:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Distance and speed from the Sun status table: Can we include escape velocities?[edit]

On the wikitable of escaping objects, I would really like to see the escape velocities (per heliocentric distance) in a separate column for direct comparison to each object's actual current velocity, perhaps for the next time the table is updated. However, the Heavens-Above and JPL sources apparently don't provide this additional detail. DWIII (talk) 01:14, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We can already calculate these from distances listed. Calculations are allowed as long as you do not invent a new formula/algorithm. Erkin Alp Güney 18:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Widespread Human-made Objects[edit]

Which two spacecraft are the most spread-out human-made objects ever created? It doesn't say on the page...--27 is my favorite number. You can ask me why here. 19:10, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does; you can answer your own question if you learn what an AU is, and then look at the List of artificial objects leaving the Solar System#Distance and speed from the Sun table. JustinTime55 (talk) 19:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Upper stages of launcher vs propulsion modules of the spacecraft[edit]

Article currently describes the final Star solid fuel motors as upper or third stages of the launch rocket but this not how they are procured or built. The final solid fuel kick motors are formally Propulsion Modules of the spacecraft rather than final stages of the launcher. I haven't changed the wording yet in case, or so, people can find sources on this issue, or comment here. - Rod57 (talk) 02:34, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Possible value in a rotatable 3d model of escaping probes.[edit]

Since we know the trajectories of the probes leaving the solar system, would it be possible for someone to make some sort of 3d interactive model of each of their escape paths, so as to provide a better understanding of how each of the probes is leaving the solar system relative to one another? Smoltran (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ulysses[edit]

I came here to add something on the Ulysses probe, and see someone added some stuff already. Unfortunately they did not add any refs, so it was tagged uncited. I added a ref, but this only partially supports the text that was added. Where the rest of the details come from I cannot Google find.

The ref I added is <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-space-solar-idINTRE5600A220090701> from Reuters. I did also find a forum page <http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?s=dd67c8dfbcb4a59262ae9cab0ad48f3e&showtopic=1468&st=30&p=109827> but forums don't count on wikipedia.

Further I received a weekly New Scientist email 'Launchpad' (3rd Sept 2021) which also mentions Ulysses leaving the solar system (but the reporter didn't add any refs in the article). (Which is why I came here in the first place.)

I also googled found different dates for the 2098 encounter - on 4th, 5th & 7th November.

So - Ulysses seems a likely, but not certain, candidate to leave. Given Ulysses is turned off and no longer has a power source, I guess we'll never know.

I should add that in nearly 80 years time, who knows how many other probes (or even humans) will be orbiting Jupiter. If anyone's still remembering it, they could re-aquire Ulysses (eg photographically or radar) and track it.

Finally, what happened to the final stage booster rocket motor that originally launched Ulsysses to Jupiter ? I presume it also encounted Jupiter and then slungshot somewhere. Most likely into heliocentric orbit, but there a slight possibility depending on the angle of its encounter (or even re-encounter if it also orbited like Ulysses did) that it too is now off into the wide black yonder. The Yeti (talk) 14:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speed and distance from the Sun[edit]

This edit caught my eye. Hmmm...

To minimize manual updates of the table, it seems to me that it might be useful to partially automate this, similarly to Template:Poptoday 1. Something like:

{{#expr: velocity in 1000mi/h * .0000107578<!-- convert to AU/h --> * 24 * {{age in days|base date}} + AU distance on base date}}

That should require only very occasional tweaks to the velocity in 1000mi/h parameter.

See here for current velocities, which should have remained pretty constant since reaching some distance from the solar system on a base date to be chosen.

I've probably screwed up some detail there, but the idea ought to be clear; just airing an idea in case someone here is motivated to implement it. (this has been tweaked a couple of times) Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 19:52, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with not having to manually update the distance. I made a similar topic on Talk:Voyager 1 about 2 weeks ago. – The Grid (talk) 19:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The image showing the trajectories is confusing.[edit]

Is there no better alt img for it? Why use complex words like annular to describe simple things? 2601:446:4300:FE90:B908:F57E:FFDB:110D (talk) 01:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Future" section[edit]

Today, I removed Interstellar Probe and Interstellar Express from the "Future" section of the article, as these have yet to be launched. While I was reverted, my deletion was endorsed by User:The Grid. I think we need to make it clear whether or not the list is only for artificial objects that have been launched, and are capable of leaving the Solar System. This is implied in the lead,an but we need to make it clear, if that's what we want to do. Also, we should probably retitle the "Future" heading, but I'm not sure what would ne better. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with removal of future probes, it's too early to call them "probes leaving the solar system". Artem.G (talk) 20:37, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BilCat, I agree. I think what the Future section is implying satellites in space that are leaving the solar system which is even more problematic. — – The Grid (talk) 20:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it problematic ?
Anyway, the Chinese probes are somewhat shrouded in their usual secrecy. If the original dates claimed are anywhere near true, then the probes must be well onto their way of being built ... these things usually take years. Nonetheless I can't find any new information on them, so who knows ? If they are proven to exist, I'm fine to have them in the article, as they would be 'real', whether yet launched or not. Even if they blew up on launch, or failed some other way, they would still be worth a mention (because thay would still have been notable).
As for NASA probes, there are usually dozens of 'proposed' space missions by various labs, universities, etc. (Check out the various proposed probes headed to Uranus or Neptune, for instance). Almost all of them never get off the ground (literally); so their deletion is fine by me.
The title 'Future' seems perfectly OK to me also. The Yeti (talk) 00:46, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically WP:CRYSTAL is the issue... – The Grid (talk) 14:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Description of this page[edit]

@195.5.3.58:: In my opinion it is incorrect to have Farthest human-made objects from Earth as the description of this page. This page is discussing about list of such objects, and description such as List of farthest human-made objects from Earth or similar will be more descriptive. What do you think? Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 08:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was no short description, that's why I added it. I don't know why short description should be "None in list articles. 195.5.3.58 (talk) 08:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is usually "none" if the title can describe the content properly. In my opinion, the title has described the content clearly enough, thus no description should be needed. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 08:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why the short description template should be on the list article if no short description is there. 195.5.3.58 (talk) 09:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SDNONE. BilCat (talk) 10:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the page title should still be 'List of ...', as its more detailed than a list now. And maybe the title should be something like 'Human artifacts leaving ...', rather then 'artifical objects leaving ...'. The Yeti (talk) 00:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun:In May Or July 2023?[edit]

In Planetary exploration probes section there's info that Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun this month (May 2023). Hoverer, when I checked distances using theskylive.com, I've seen that Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun on July 20, 2023, not in May 2023. In the distance to Earth hoverer, Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 on September 23, 2023. Here's the info which I got from theskylive.com (first table here is the distance to the Sun and the second table is the distance to Earth).

 Distance to the Sun as of July 20, 2023 Pioneer 10 Voyager 2
Distance from the Sun (km) 20034.91 Billion 20035.11 Billion
 Distance to Earth as of September 23, 2023 (km) Pioneer 10 Voyager 2
Distance To Earth (km) 20077.40 Billion 20077.72 Billion

Should we say that Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 in July 2023, not in May 2023, or not? 188.60.199.127 (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Using Pioneer 10 to Sun and Voyager II to Sun, Yes V2 overtakes P10 in July 2023. -- Kheider (talk)

Note than in distance to Earth, V2 overtakes P10 in September 2023, 2 months after V2 will overtake P10 in distance to the Sun. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.199.127 (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I recently made a new calculation when V2 will overtake Pioneer 10. See my new topic on Talk:Voyager 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.199.127 (talk) 15:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

178.95.99.242, I was interested in your your edit that cites https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov The links you used had a 1 month resolution. I changed "1 month" in the URL to "1 day" generating day by day data for Voyager 2 and Pioneer 10. Here are the results for Voyager 2, Pioneer 10, and the difference between them.
Date Voyager 2 Pioneer 10 Difference
2023-Jul-01 00:00 133.768156270484 133.800168114790 -0.032011844306
2023-Jul-02 00:00 133.776836866625 133.807024520857 -0.030187654232
2023-Jul-03 00:00 133.785517465019 133.813880906892 -0.028363441873
2023-Jul-04 00:00 133.794198065659 133.820737272909 -0.026539207250
2023-Jul-05 00:00 133.802878668531 133.827593618927 -0.024714950396
2023-Jul-06 00:00 133.811559273619 133.834449944966 -0.022890671347
2023-Jul-07 00:00 133.820239880900 133.841306251050 -0.021066370150
2023-Jul-08 00:00 133.828920490351 133.848162537203 -0.019242046852
2023-Jul-09 00:00 133.837601101944 133.855018803446 -0.017417701502
2023-Jul-10 00:00 133.846281715651 133.861875049801 -0.015593334150
2023-Jul-11 00:00 133.854962331444 133.868731276285 -0.013768944841
2023-Jul-12 00:00 133.863642949295 133.875587482914 -0.011944533619
2023-Jul-13 00:00 133.872323569176 133.882443669700 -0.010120100524
2023-Jul-14 00:00 133.881004191060 133.889299836652 -0.008295645592
2023-Jul-15 00:00 133.889684814924 133.896155983773 -0.006471168849
2023-Jul-16 00:00 133.898365440743 133.903012111065 -0.004646670322
2023-Jul-17 00:00 133.907046068498 133.909868218526 -0.002822150028
2023-Jul-18 00:00 133.915726698169 133.916724306149 -0.000997607980
2023-Jul-19 00:00 133.924407329740 133.923580373925 0.000826955815
2023-Jul-20 00:00 133.933087963196 133.930436421840 0.002651541356
2023-Jul-21 00:00 133.941768598526 133.937292449880 0.004476148646
2023-Jul-22 00:00 133.950449235719 133.944148458024 0.006300777695
2023-Jul-23 00:00 133.959129874768 133.951004446251 0.008125428517
2023-Jul-24 00:00 133.967810515667 133.957860414538 0.009950101129
2023-Jul-25 00:00 133.976491158411 133.964716362857 0.011774795554
2023-Jul-26 00:00 133.985171803001 133.971572291179 0.013599511822
2023-Jul-27 00:00 133.993852449434 133.978428199473 0.015424249961
2023-Jul-28 00:00 134.002533097715 133.985284087707 0.017249010008
2023-Jul-29 00:00 134.011213747845 133.992139955845 0.019073792000
2023-Jul-30 00:00 134.019894399832 133.998995803851 0.020898595981
2023-Jul-31 00:00 134.028575053681 134.005851631685 0.022723421996
2023-Aug-01 00:00 134.037255709401 134.012707439308 0.024548270093
According the NASA SSD simulator on 2023-Jul-18 00:00 Voyager 2 will be -0.000997607980 AU behind Pioneer 10.
24 hours later Voyager 2 will be 0.000826955815 AU further from the Sun than Pioneer 10.
That pins the crossing date to 2023-Jul-18. Granted, 12 digits of precision is likely overkill for something where I suspect NASA and the JPL only have a rough idea of where Pioneer 10 is located. I'm pinging The Grid as that editor has previously expressed interest in the topic.
It's semi related but I found this interesting web page that seems to be a cached copy of https://spaceprojects.arc.nasa.gov/Space_Projects/pioneer/PNStat.html and thus would be in the public domain. Of particular interest to me was the explanation of the Pioneer 10's CONSCAN (conical scan) precession maneuver. The CONSCAN maneuvers would have nudged the spacecraft's course ever so slightly while tracking Earth though it's possible successive nudges resulted in no net change to the course.
The same person who made the archive also took pictures of the Pioneer mission control room as they were tearing it down.[1] In the background of one of the pictures I see a plate labeled Pioneer 12 and so I suspect this room was mission control for most, if not all, of the Pioneer missions.[2] --Marc Kupper|talk 02:13, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I recently added a year when Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 to the article about Pioneer 10, but I didn't add a month when, per WP:OR. Because the overtake distance date is already calculated here, I think it's now time to add a month when Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10, to the article about Pioneer 10. 178.95.99.242 (talk) 08:15, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have recently measured distances between the Sun and Pioneer 10 using the similar method, and I think the current distance between the Sun and Pioneer 10, according to NASA SSD Simulator might be correct. Pioneer 10 was 82 AU from the Sun at last contact on January 23, 2003.
NASA SSD Simulator says that on 2003-Jan-23 00:00 Pioneer 10 was 82.1306924090689 AU from the Sun, so NASA SSD Simulator might show fully correct distance between the Sun and Pioneer 10.
Because of this I don't know is it needed to add the current distance between the Sun and Pioneer 10 to the article about Pioneer 10, or not, per WP:OR. I think this calculation isn't WP:OR, because distances between the Sun are shown on NASA SSD Simulator, which might be a reliable source. 2A02:2378:104D:6E72:0:0:0:1 (talk) 18:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to find overtake distance in miles, and time when Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun. According to my calculation, Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 at 4:13:31.2 AM (UTC), on July 18, 2023, at the distance 12 447 938 131.2 miles from the Sun. 95.132.186.233 (talk) 10:42, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this IP address has been blocked for disruptive editing, as of this message. Tfess up?or down? 00:40, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I was blocked because of pointless unprotection requests at RFPP, see my unblock request on my talk page. Also, this talk page is not to discuss about blocking a user. 95.132.186.233 (talk) 06:16, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds more and more of a LTA user. A lot of IP addresses come to these similar articles listed within the list...the coincidence is rather perplexing. – The Grid (talk) 14:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Despite those edits are similar, they are likely different (or the same people. I think that 95.132.186.233 is the same person as 95.134.110.141 93.72.29.12 (talk) 18:56, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Horizons spacecraft will overtake Pioneer 11 in 2143, not 2113, and will overtake Pioneer 10 in 2314, not 2187[edit]

I recently edited the article about List of artificial objects leaving the Solar System and using http://orbitsimulator.com/gravitySimulatorCloud/simulations/1511746688216_hyperbolic.html, I calculated that the New Horizons spacecraft will overtake Pioneer 10 in 2314, not in 2187. Also, I calculated that New Horizons spacecraft will overtake Pioneer 11 in 2143, not 2113. Will be this correct or not? Revert my edit on the article about List of artificial objects leaving the Solar System if this is incorrect calculation or not needed. 88.21.148.148 (talk) 06:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the calculation was correct. 80.134.150.173 (talk) 06:31, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_artificial_objects_leaving_the_Solar_System&oldid=1216445165"