ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Slingshots in space

Posted: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 8:28 PM by Alan Boyle

NASA’s New Horizons probe is zooming past Jupiter to pick up speed on its way to Pluto, becoming just the latest spacecraft to get a slingshot boost from a planetary flyby. It won’t be the last. Mission planners are increasingly taking advantage of celestial mechanics to speed up interplanetary trips.

This year is prime time for gravitational slingshotting: Just last Sunday, the European Space Agency's Rosetta probe got a gravity assist from Mars on its way to a comet encounter in 2014. New Horizons' encounter, which reaches its climax on Wednesday, will speed the probe toward a visit to Pluto in 2015. In June, NASA's Messenger probe to Mercury gets a boost from Venus, while the Dawn probe will be launched on a Mars-assisted mission to the asteroids Ceres and Vesta.

The reason for such assists is obvious: If a well-chosen course through the planets saves on a spacecraft's fuel requirements, that precious mass can instead be used for things like a bigger rover or an extra camera. The gravity-assist technique was developed back in the 1960s by Michael Minovitch, a student working at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and has been used extensively since then. The Cassini orbiter, for example, went through four gravity assists during its seven-year journey to Saturn (two with Venus, and one each with Earth and Jupiter).

NBC News space analyst James Oberg says a similar strategy could someday be used to carry human crews on a "cycling" trajectory to Mars and back. "Buzz Aldrin and I published an article in Scientific American about that in March 2000," he wrote in an e-mail.

How does it work? It turns out that a slingshot isn't the best analogy. In a sense, the spacecraft is stealing some of the angular momentum from the planet. As the probe zooms toward the planet from behind, the two bodies exert gravitational force on each other. The planet, which is much larger, is slowed ever so slightly in its orbit - while the probe is pulled ahead, benefiting from the transfer of momentum.

Some have compared the phenomenon to lobbing a ping-pong ball at the blades of an electric fan. When the ball hits the fan, the blade slows down ever so slightly, while the ball careens off at a much faster speed.

Oberg took his own stab at an explanation:

"The best analogy to explaining 'gravity assist' - how a probe can pass near a planet and exchange momentum with it, either speeding up or slowing down - is the 'ball-off-a-wall' model. Like a planetary flyby, the bounce is 'elastic': Total energy is conserved. Bounce a ball off a wall and it comes back more or less at the same speed (as long as you ignore friction).

"But bounce a ball off a wall that is moving toward or away from you, and the ball comes back either faster or slower - it either gains energy or loses it, and the wall does the opposite. And if the wall is also moving sideways, the direction of the resulting bounce is also changed, just as with interplanetary spacecraft.

"It's not magic, but it sure seems like it. And this year, it's going to become very, very 'ordinary.'"

Oberg wrote a much more detailed explanation for Astronomy magazine back in 1999, when it was swing time for Cassini. Wikipedia also delves into the gravity-assist concept - noting that the technique played a part in multiple "Star Trek" plots, usually with a time-travel twist.

Although that last part may seem weird, gravity-assist maneuvers have been proposed as a test of general relativity - and theoretically, slingshotting around a massive object should slow down your spaceship's clock. Am I right on that? Feel free to set me straight in the comments section.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Hi, Alan -- I never really liked the image evoked by the word.'slingshot.' I could understand the use of gravity to increase the momentum of the probe, but I wished for a better description; 'carom' like a billiard ball implied actual contact, which wasn't the case. 'Gravity-assisted' seemed like too many letters. 'Cycling' implies repeating the maneuver. Oberg says it best with 'bounce' I guess. Maybe somebody else will come up with the exact word that adequately describes the trajectory that swings a probe on another body's gravity and imparts a new trajectory to the probe. Maybe 'levering' or 'leverage'? Was it Galileo who said, "Give me a place to stand, and a lever long enough, and I shall move the Moon."
Speaking of gravity, New Horizons is planned to figure in the study of the Pioneer Anomaly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly)a possible deviation from general relativity predicted by the MOND theory. If all known factors are counted, all long-duration probes are experiencing a small but detectable drag pulling them back towards the sun. First detected with the Pioneer spacecraft, it has also been seen in Cassini and Ulysses as well. Further study of New Horizons may shed further light on the effect, and settle once and for all if it is a measurement error, some overlooked normal explanation, or the first glimmer of new physics in gravitational study.
Alfred K. - Are those long-duration probes being monitored all the time for gravitational influences? Sol's gravity may have diminished to a point of 'no essential presence' and have been discounted in the measurements. But since gravity between objects always exists, maybe it should still be counted.
I believe the "sling-shot" terminology comes from a technique skaters use to "sling" the last guy in a line of folks going around a rink. Each person in line pulls the one behind (with, say, their right hand and arm). This speeds up the rear skater and slows down the lead skater. The overall effect on the last skater can be fairly dramatic.
If you substitute the two thongs of the ancient sling for the "Y"shaped "slingshot of more modern origin, it still applies.

The operator or slinger has to put energy into the sling and the slung object.  Everything is conserved.  Originally the Pioneer or Voyager mission was to use a series of gravity assists for course changes and velocity increases.  There was an original plan for a "Grand Tour" that was supposed to include Pluto, but took different courses.

When you do your gravitational experiments out of a gravity well, who knows?  Seems to me The Mote in God's Eye (based on Robert Forward's theory) and some of Larry Niven's Known Space series forwards that idea.

Actually, Des, I believe I heard Archimedes say that!
this is the first time i have come in this website and i read this interesting topic  of the slingshot project. i study physics and i mean if this project was taken seriously by a group of young physicians who knows that in the future there will be our race living there. i have always dreamt of this and this inspires my wildest wishes to become the best physician ever. please tell me more on this slingshot anyone.

gladly appreciate it...

thanks...
How about planetary gravitational push? It is the massive attraction of a large body that is then converted into a push, isn't it? As long as the spacecraft is above escape velocity and does not aim directly for the planet, it will be slung around the planet and propelled away at a higher speed.
I don't know about the relativity question, but the "slingshot" doesn't sound right to me either. How about comparing it to a vane or impeller pump? The water (space probe) is drawn in by the pump suction (gravity) and accelerated out the other side with greater pressure (force/speed/velocity)? Or, maybe a baseball pitching machine? Something that works radially or tangentially.
i would like to see ones, the speed the are traveling and how much faster the travel after the slingshot effect??? thank you baja uwe!
Gravity assist is obviously an oxymoron. Why don't they just refer to it as it is rather than pander to the general population. If you say "angular momentum transfer or assist" I suppose you'd burst too many bubbles perhaps?
I'd call it a "flyby". The craft is, of course, not actually flying but on a trajectory, but its a simple term that is accessible to a layman. It also explains the opportunity to take some pictures during the "flyby". If someone asks, you can say "it picks up speed, in a new direction, from the flyby."
Everybody talks about the speed gained as the rocket move toward the slingshot mass. But nobody explains how that same mass does not take away the speed as the rocket (or spacecraft) passes by and moves away from the slingshot mass. Where is the net gain in speed?
Everybody talks about the speed gained as the rocket move toward the slingshot mass. But nobody explains how that same mass does not take away the speed as the rocket (or spacecraft) passes by and moves away from the slingshot mass. Where is the net gain in speed?
Don't think of the word as "slingshot". Think of it as "sling shot".
.

not related with New Horizons but interesting...

I think that ALL versions of Orion (standard or TBS, small or big SM) must have its TPS firmly joined to the capsule an that a jettisoned TPS is a BAD design and a (possible) BIG risk, as explained in my new article:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/022orionTPS.html

in my opinion the BEST solution is to firmly join the TPS to the Orion's main body and locate the parachutes/airbags outlets on the Orion's sidewalls

.
How about just "pulling" or "pushing?" The spaceship is simply pulled or pushed by the planet's gravity, depending on the direction the planet is moving, relative to the spacecraft.
It would appear that the english and scientific explinations are not acceptable. I propose following the advertising industry and forming new words describing the phenomenon. Like "gravacc" and "gravdec". Maybe just abbreviations like "GA" or "GD" would reduce typing even more? Maybe new words in our language will allow more poetry rhymes to be developed?
Des, it was Archimedes, not Galileo, who is generally credited with saying "Give me a place to stand and a lever long enough and I will move the world." Given that the attribution goes back to 220 BC, many versions have evolved.
Dear Alan, I also never liked the slingshot description for gravity assist. As an analagous effect for light is called gravitational lensing, why don't we call this angular lensing.
When I looked at the Wikipedia site that described Cassini's velocity changes as a result of the gravity assist, I was somewhat surprised to the see the decrease in the speed of Cassini over it's long flight.

I had thought that space, since it has no air, would not experience friction, thereby causing any object to continue in its original speed.  I suppose then that there is something then that is causing the friction, would that be because of minuscule levels of "air" (for lack of a better word) that would cause the friction?
Well, I've always looked at the 'gravity-assist' maneuver like a space probe being 'grabbed' by the planet's gravitational field and then using that 'force' or momentum gained from entering a planet's gravitational pull like a game of tether ball to speed it up.
Writing as a non-scientist, science geek, I would call it “The Carousel Effect” or the less scientific sounding “Merry-Go-Round Effect.” A stationary or slow moving object that is placed on a carousel will quickly begin traveling at the same speed as the carousel. When the object exits the carousel, it will do so more or less at the speed at which it was traveling while on the carousel (less the deceleration resulting from the carousel’s gravitational pull). How do you like them Newton’s apples?
Not that anyone wants to compare astronomy with auto racing, but the closest thing for comparison would be what is known as "drafting" where a lead car is followed closely by a trailing one. The rear of the lead car creates an area of low pressure and if the second car can place itself within this area, the low intensity vacuum-effect will exert a pulling force on it, allowing it to gain at the expense of the lead car's forward aerodynamics.
Actually, I had the same thought as Avery. The trick for a gravity-assisted speed-up is that the small spacecraft comes up from behind in the planet's orbit. The planet thus "pulls" the spacecraft more quickly, then veers off in its orbit, going along its merry way (just a bit more slowly, because of the transfer of angular momentum).

A gravity-assist will slow down the spacecraft if it passes in front of the planet in its orbit. In a sense, it's being "pulled back," while the planet is being pushed forward in its orbit by a very small amount.

Maybe this will make Jim Oberg's reference to the "ball off a wall" analogy a little clearer.
At the expense of not being very scientific--how about "Flingshot?" Sounds like a nerf toy...oh well.
I think a better analogy for gravitational slingshot is “drafting” such as a biker riding in front of another biker to reduce the energy expenditure of the rider behind. Clearly there is no turbulent effect in this gravitational drafting but the spacecraft in essence uses the orbital speed of the planet to boost its speed. Please feel free to use the term “gravitational drafting” for this interplanetary speed boost technique!
To: Danny Walsh

I think you are completely right; as I understand it- there is *no* net gain in speed relative to the planet providing the gravitational assist.  "relative to the planet" is an important distinction because the planet is moving relative to the sun which is the kind of relative motion we're concerned about (and is the kind of relative motion we're increasing).  Anyone- please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

BTW: I agree with Ron Phelps.  We need some sort of catchy acronym or something.  Perhaps "SPAM Injection" (for Supplemental Planetary Angular Momentum Injection).  ;-)
Jeez..if we keep this up long enough, we'll start crashing planets into the sun!
It certainly must be magic.I appreciate the gain in speed from the gravitational pull , but why isnt this equally lost as the object is going away ?
To answer Loren about the Cassini's velocity change, or slowing after the gravity assist... I think that space is not a perfect vacuum, but comes closer to a "perfect vacuum" than anything else in nature. Quantum mechanic's and gases found in space are some of the reasons for the decreasing speed of Cassini after the 'gravitational assist'
So in theory, I'm not talking about anytime in the near future but one day could one change the orbit of a planet by using this method. Take a large asteroid and keep swinging it by a planet like Venus and move it to a farther out orbit? Thus cooling the planet? or one day millions of years from now when the sun swells to a red giant (if were still around) could our sentimental descendants move the earth to an orbit where it would not burn up? This just gets me thinking.
It's a whip. Like in 'crack the whip' The person standing still is the planet, the spacecraft is the person at the end. Who picks up speed?
Wade W. from Aberdeen and Jim M. from Washington, I swear I knew it was Archimedes, I just didn't recognize him with his clothes on after seeing him leap from his bathtub and run through the streets, screaming 'Eureka!' Galileo was a much more formal person. Well, they both moved the Earth, I guess.

After reading all the suggestions given, I myself will think of that move as a 'grass boost' (GRavity ASSisted).  After all, the probe is probably bored and tired and needs something to pick it up before it is sent on its way, re-invigorated and with a new vision of its purpose.

I still think it's the gravity of the situation, Loren Umbertis, or rather, Sol's gravity reaching out to Cassini and the other long-gone probes and slowly pulling them back.  Remember that gravity is a very weak force, but it has a constancy about it that gives it a power beyond compare to attract.  Which is also one of the reasons that probes use grass to maneuver into a velocity and trajectory computed beforehand by their launchers.

Uwe Freundt - each probe will have a different speed and angle of inclination as it approaches the planet, and another, higher speed and change of angle after the maneuver; plotting out the various positions, speeds, angles, and time elapse until the probe receives its instructions from the launchers.  Indeed, the original launch from Earth would not even be toward the eventual destination.

Elvis S. you will have fun exploring Alan's blogging here so come back again.    
Des, The bare truth!
I believe that the skating maneuver mentioned by Rick P. is also called "Crack the Whip", and it's the best analog to what's happening - a line of skaters holds hands, one end of the line moves in a slow circle while the other end swings around faster and faster. A single skater approaches the "fast" end of the line and grabs the hand of the end skater, and this keeps up until the speed (and centrifugal force felt by the last skater) gets so high that the end skater has to let go, and goes flying off at a higher speed than any single skater could achieve. The spacecraft does get pulled back and slowed down as it leaves, of course, but since the force of gravity is related to the square distance between the two bodies, the speeded-up spacecraft leaves the planet's vicinity much more quickly, taking a most of its momentum gain with it. Any body moving away from a larger body will continue to slow down until some larger mass(es) exert a stronger influence - which is why Galileo, etc. would continue to slow down. Within the solar system, I believe that this effect far exceeds any friction with dust, gas, and solar wind particles, unless your spacecraft has small mass and large surface area, as in a solar sail.
Stephen Swanstrom's "whip" analogy is a good one. The rocket closes in on the planet at a very high rate. The closer it gets the stronger the gravitaional pull and the faster the rocket moves. By positioning the rocket perfectly and hitting the engines at just the right times it "whips" off into space at very extreme speeds - just like the "crack" of that whip. Pulled and thrown is another favorite of mine.

This is the most clever way to travel in space. It saves money while being free, preserving resources and maintanence. I feel that with the perfect success of this technology it will lead us to much deeper space travel.
Judging from several of the comments in the blog, it is obvious that high schools and colleges have stopped teaching about conservation of momentum.

It is just like bouncing steel balls against each other.  One assumes the velocity imparted into it by the other, while the other one loses what is given away.  Observed velocities differ after impact if there is a difference in the masses of the objects.  In the case of Pluto Express vs. Jupiter, PE gains about 9000 km/h while jupiter loses about .0000001 nm/hour because of the differences in mass

Here's a couple links to basic explanations of the concepts involved:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_momentum
http://www.physics.lsa.umich.edu/demolab/demo.asp?id=686
Alan S.  The concept has been very well covered. My comment about crashing planets into the sun was a joke. But you did add one small piece that explains it totally when you speak of the relative masses.

Also, next time I am at the bar at the pool table, I'll see it for myself.
After reading all of the above comments, I think the name that best describes the maneuver would be "whiplash", as in whiplashing around the planet to gain speed or momentum. Water skiers use this whiplash effect to ski completely around the ski boat pulling them in a maneuver called "360 Around the Boat".
Well, I was at the bar tonight on the pool table.  I came to the conclusion that simple grade 11 or 12 collision "experiments" do not describe the story...at all.  How can it?  The masses are equal!!

SO..you have to picture what is really happening.

Gravity accelerates Horizon obviously. And at an enormous rate in the case of Jupiter... the REAL velocity of Horizon at some point is many thousands of kms/hr above the resultant 9000 kms/hr gain.

Somehow a transfer of Jupiters' momentum of orbital velocity is imparted to Horizon at some Specific point.  It is the mechanism of the transfer that is the problem.  Where does it happen and in what way?   We are speaking of gravity vs. "speed" or velocity. Somehow all this energy of gravity, mass and velocity (momentum) is mixed up and transmitted.
Imagine a tetherball attached to a whirlling pole... Except we can control the string :)
Another way I picture this is that in collision experiments where momentum is conserved, there is physical contact. A space craft that experiences a "slingshot" increase in energy must make some kind of contact with the planets frame of reference without touching it! If it was just gravity, then the craft would slow down by an equal amount as it proceeded. So what am I missing here?
Imagine if this were performed on a black hole. If we could get a rocket out to the nearest black hole picture how far into space we can send a probe.
I would call it a course correction. Drag and friction slows a object down.However if you are only going to one planet a strait line is best with little loss of speed because of less drag from a larger body
So, I think it should be called "swoosh," except then Nike might file a Jovan lawsuit for trademark sound infringement.

By the way, the probe accelerating has a reverse effect on Jupiter via transfer of momentum, therefore Jupiter slows ever so slightly.  Jeez, what if we throw it off its orbit ... (lighten up, space junkies, that was a joke).
I’m no physicist but how about merry-go-rounded? You start out slow jump on the merry-go-round; it speeds you up and then throws/pushes you off. Doesn’t that sound simple enough? It does sound of corny though.
in school i am talking about space if you find any more stuff tell me i am very interesed
I'm all for calling it a G-boost. Two syllables. Doesn't there have to be some net change in the distance between the two objects in order for the velocity to increase? Or are they purely relying on the relative motion of the planet "moving away" from the craft as it orbits to gain velocity?
It's hard to wrap my brain around gaining or loosing momentum or velocity. I can visualize a change in trajectory. Anyone who has toyed with magnets should. In the exit trajectory, the gravity field pulls against the satellite with as much force as it did in the entry trajectory. Is it due to the speed the satellite is travelling? Is it on its escape trajectory before the effects of its entry into the gravitational field are effected?
But what really troubles me is how can one theorize about a perspective if no one has had the benifit of experiencing that perspective?

Apollo 13 used the Moons gravity in its return trip to Earth. Was there so much going on that there was no relativity data collected? I mean Neil and Buzz didn't notice they were just a few minutes younger than they ought to have been?
Maybe it is due to the 'relative' strength of the gravitational field.
If flying in space is your dream, then check out EvE-Online. It's a MMO video game that may just suprise you. Is it 100% accurate? No. But if you check into the detail that these men and women from Iceland have put into it, I'm sure you'll be amazed. www.eve-online.com
Mankind needs to stop fighting and refocus our efforts on new types of propulsion systems for deepsapce travel. As we al know this planet has limited resources. It is paramount that we ensure the survival of mankind thru exploration and coloniztion of outer space.

Visc Baqtu
Universal Logistics


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=70820

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google