Why didn't Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 crash on into Jupiter or Uranus when they approached near to these massive...












3












$begingroup$


I was reading about gravity assist and I read that both the Voyagers used gravitational force of these planets to speed up.



But I wanted to know why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?



One thing I thought about it was that the escape velocity of these planets were known to NASA and these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape but how did NASA calculated escape velocity?



$$v_{escape} = sqrt{frac{2GM}{R}}$$



But how could they predict mass?



Radius I guess can be predicted by parallax method.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 16




    $begingroup$
    I kind of feel like we should have some kind of a canonical "how does gravity work?" question that we could link to whenever these kinds of questions based on a fundamental misunderstanding of orbital mechanics come up. Unfortunately, searching for that phrase only turns up questions about zero-gravity cat litter boxes and other random stuff like that. :P
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    That said, searching for "gravity assist" instead does turn up this question, which I highly recommend the OP should read.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I have a question that branches off this one... How do you kind of crash into something????
    $endgroup$
    – Happy Koala
    19 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Never mind these unhelpful/unkind comments above, it's a good question! You've taken the time to find out that escape velocity is important and added the equation (I converted it to MathJax for you). Your question has certainly attracted several great answers below. Welcome to Space!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    13 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @IlmariKaronen: suggest that would be titled "How does gravity work, for orbital mechanics?" to exclude the crazies.
    $endgroup$
    – smci
    11 hours ago


















3












$begingroup$


I was reading about gravity assist and I read that both the Voyagers used gravitational force of these planets to speed up.



But I wanted to know why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?



One thing I thought about it was that the escape velocity of these planets were known to NASA and these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape but how did NASA calculated escape velocity?



$$v_{escape} = sqrt{frac{2GM}{R}}$$



But how could they predict mass?



Radius I guess can be predicted by parallax method.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 16




    $begingroup$
    I kind of feel like we should have some kind of a canonical "how does gravity work?" question that we could link to whenever these kinds of questions based on a fundamental misunderstanding of orbital mechanics come up. Unfortunately, searching for that phrase only turns up questions about zero-gravity cat litter boxes and other random stuff like that. :P
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    That said, searching for "gravity assist" instead does turn up this question, which I highly recommend the OP should read.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I have a question that branches off this one... How do you kind of crash into something????
    $endgroup$
    – Happy Koala
    19 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Never mind these unhelpful/unkind comments above, it's a good question! You've taken the time to find out that escape velocity is important and added the equation (I converted it to MathJax for you). Your question has certainly attracted several great answers below. Welcome to Space!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    13 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @IlmariKaronen: suggest that would be titled "How does gravity work, for orbital mechanics?" to exclude the crazies.
    $endgroup$
    – smci
    11 hours ago
















3












3








3


1



$begingroup$


I was reading about gravity assist and I read that both the Voyagers used gravitational force of these planets to speed up.



But I wanted to know why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?



One thing I thought about it was that the escape velocity of these planets were known to NASA and these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape but how did NASA calculated escape velocity?



$$v_{escape} = sqrt{frac{2GM}{R}}$$



But how could they predict mass?



Radius I guess can be predicted by parallax method.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I was reading about gravity assist and I read that both the Voyagers used gravitational force of these planets to speed up.



But I wanted to know why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?



One thing I thought about it was that the escape velocity of these planets were known to NASA and these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape but how did NASA calculated escape velocity?



$$v_{escape} = sqrt{frac{2GM}{R}}$$



But how could they predict mass?



Radius I guess can be predicted by parallax method.







voyager gravity-assist flyby escape-velocity






share|improve this question









New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 20 mins ago









Glorfindel

1771110




1771110






New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 22 hours ago









GarimaGarima

242




242




New contributor




Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Garima is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 16




    $begingroup$
    I kind of feel like we should have some kind of a canonical "how does gravity work?" question that we could link to whenever these kinds of questions based on a fundamental misunderstanding of orbital mechanics come up. Unfortunately, searching for that phrase only turns up questions about zero-gravity cat litter boxes and other random stuff like that. :P
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    That said, searching for "gravity assist" instead does turn up this question, which I highly recommend the OP should read.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I have a question that branches off this one... How do you kind of crash into something????
    $endgroup$
    – Happy Koala
    19 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Never mind these unhelpful/unkind comments above, it's a good question! You've taken the time to find out that escape velocity is important and added the equation (I converted it to MathJax for you). Your question has certainly attracted several great answers below. Welcome to Space!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    13 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @IlmariKaronen: suggest that would be titled "How does gravity work, for orbital mechanics?" to exclude the crazies.
    $endgroup$
    – smci
    11 hours ago
















  • 16




    $begingroup$
    I kind of feel like we should have some kind of a canonical "how does gravity work?" question that we could link to whenever these kinds of questions based on a fundamental misunderstanding of orbital mechanics come up. Unfortunately, searching for that phrase only turns up questions about zero-gravity cat litter boxes and other random stuff like that. :P
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    That said, searching for "gravity assist" instead does turn up this question, which I highly recommend the OP should read.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I have a question that branches off this one... How do you kind of crash into something????
    $endgroup$
    – Happy Koala
    19 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Never mind these unhelpful/unkind comments above, it's a good question! You've taken the time to find out that escape velocity is important and added the equation (I converted it to MathJax for you). Your question has certainly attracted several great answers below. Welcome to Space!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    13 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @IlmariKaronen: suggest that would be titled "How does gravity work, for orbital mechanics?" to exclude the crazies.
    $endgroup$
    – smci
    11 hours ago










16




16




$begingroup$
I kind of feel like we should have some kind of a canonical "how does gravity work?" question that we could link to whenever these kinds of questions based on a fundamental misunderstanding of orbital mechanics come up. Unfortunately, searching for that phrase only turns up questions about zero-gravity cat litter boxes and other random stuff like that. :P
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
20 hours ago




$begingroup$
I kind of feel like we should have some kind of a canonical "how does gravity work?" question that we could link to whenever these kinds of questions based on a fundamental misunderstanding of orbital mechanics come up. Unfortunately, searching for that phrase only turns up questions about zero-gravity cat litter boxes and other random stuff like that. :P
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
20 hours ago












$begingroup$
That said, searching for "gravity assist" instead does turn up this question, which I highly recommend the OP should read.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
20 hours ago




$begingroup$
That said, searching for "gravity assist" instead does turn up this question, which I highly recommend the OP should read.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
20 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
I have a question that branches off this one... How do you kind of crash into something????
$endgroup$
– Happy Koala
19 hours ago




$begingroup$
I have a question that branches off this one... How do you kind of crash into something????
$endgroup$
– Happy Koala
19 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Never mind these unhelpful/unkind comments above, it's a good question! You've taken the time to find out that escape velocity is important and added the equation (I converted it to MathJax for you). Your question has certainly attracted several great answers below. Welcome to Space!
$endgroup$
– uhoh
13 hours ago






$begingroup$
Never mind these unhelpful/unkind comments above, it's a good question! You've taken the time to find out that escape velocity is important and added the equation (I converted it to MathJax for you). Your question has certainly attracted several great answers below. Welcome to Space!
$endgroup$
– uhoh
13 hours ago














$begingroup$
@IlmariKaronen: suggest that would be titled "How does gravity work, for orbital mechanics?" to exclude the crazies.
$endgroup$
– smci
11 hours ago






$begingroup$
@IlmariKaronen: suggest that would be titled "How does gravity work, for orbital mechanics?" to exclude the crazies.
$endgroup$
– smci
11 hours ago












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















15












$begingroup$


why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?




How much a trajectory is changed, depends on 3 factors:




  1. the mass of the planet,

  2. the speed of the spacecraft,

  3. the distance between spacecraft and planet


Voyager's speed and distance were chosen to make sure Voyager wouldn't enter orbit around the planet. Voyager's speed before approaching Jupiter was higher than Jupiter's escape speed.



In fact, as long as your trajectory doesn't touch the planet's atmosphere, you're good: because you're arriving from another planet your speed is always higher than escape speed.




But how could they predict mass?




When a planet has moons, you can calculate the planet's mass to a good degree of accuracy. This uses Kepler's third law:



$$ M = frac{4pi^2r^3}{GT^2}$$



G is the universal gravitational constant, 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2 /kg2

r = orbital radius of the moon

T = orbital period of the moon



So you only need r and T, both of which you can observe from Earth pretty well.




these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape




No. When Voyager 1 was launched from Earth, the last stage of the rocket put it on an escape trajectory, then the stage was jettisonned. That was the last time a rocket was used to significantly change Voyager's speed.
It traveled to Jupiter without further propulsion, so its speed slowly decreased as it got further away from the Sun.



Here's a plot of Voyager 2's speed:



enter image description here



Then as it got close to Jupiter, Voyager's speed increased drastically as it was pulled in by Jupiter's gravity. At Voyager's closest approach, Voyager's trajectory was bent. This put the spacecraft on course to Saturn.
As Voyager sped away from Jupiter, Jupiter's gravity slowed it down. All without using rocket propulsion.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 4




    $begingroup$
    +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
    $endgroup$
    – notovny
    21 hours ago








  • 8




    $begingroup$
    While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
    $endgroup$
    – Nathan Tuggy
    20 hours ago



















10












$begingroup$

To add to the answers @Hobbes & @Steve Linton posted, the mission designers indeed knew Jupiter's gravity field quite well from the orbits of Jupiter's moons. But before the Voyagers arrived they got additional measurements from the close flybys of two other spacecraft, Pioneers 10 and 11.



@Steve Linton correctly describes the effect of the "sideways" part of a spacecraft's velocity with respect to the planet it's approaching. If the sideways component is large enough, the probe will miss the planet. To increase that sideways component, on approach you aim the spacecraft [via trajectory adjustment maneuvers, where you use the spacecraft's rocket engine(s)] to precisely tune the components of velocity, one straight toward the planet and one sideways. That combination sets the "aim point", the point to the side of the planet where the spacecraft would go if the planet had no gravity. Trajectory designers call that miss distance "b", a part of the b-plane aim point.



This diagram helps to see the effect of increasing b if the approach velocity is held constant. For typical interplanetary trajectories the approach velocity doesn't depend on the chosen b. [Sorry for the pixellation—this is a very old diagram I pulled out of my presentation archives]



enter image description here



The brownish-tan (in the original file it was orange!) circle represents the planet, and the different colors of curves represent the trajectories followed by spacecraft with different b, all coming in at the same approach velocity and parallel to the black dashed line through the center of the planet. The thinner, dot-dashed lines represent what the spacecrafts' trajectories would be if the planet had no gravity. If b isn't large enough, as with the red and brownish-tan (formerly orange!) trajectories, they impact the planet. The thick, dashed red and brownish-tan lines show how those two trajectories would continue if they didn't run into anything, as would be the case if the planet were the same mass but a lot smaller in size (i.e., a lot denser).



The green and blue lines are for trajectories whose b are large enough that they miss the planet. They point out a couple of characteristics of these hyperbolic orbits: 1) the larger the b, the farther from the planet is the closest-approach distance; and 2) the larger the b, the smaller is the angle the planet "bends" the trajectory. Again, this is for a fixed approach velocity. The red trajectory is bent by almost 180°, while the blue one is bent only ~135-140°.



This bend is key to making gravity assists so useful.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    7












    $begingroup$

    Let's try and understand how gravity works in space. This is kind of key idea to understanding lots of issues in space travel and astronomy.



    So imagine a space probe, or rock, which is heading in from deep space, aimed almost, but not quite towards a planet. We can break that motion into two parts -- the part towards the planet and the "sideways" part. The planet's gravity accelerates the part towards the planet, but it does nothing to the sideways part, so the space probe is still not heading quite towards the planet. This keeps on happening, so the probe is moving increasingly fast, still almost but not quite heading at the planet.



    After a while the probe whizzes past the side of the planet, going very fast. It can't hit it because it has never lost the "sideways" part of its motion (called angular momentum, more or less). It is still being pulled towards the planet but still moving around it, due to all the speed it has picked up. Then that speed starts to carry it away from the planet again (possibly with its course having been bent around to a greater or lesser extent). Now the gravity is slowing it down. However it is slowing it down just exactly as much as it speeded it up coming in so if it came in from far away at a certain speed, it will eventually escape equally far away at the same speed.



    If someone can add some diagrams to this, that would be great.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
      $endgroup$
      – Ed999
      10 mins ago











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "508"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Garima is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33896%2fwhy-didnt-voyager-1-and-voyager-2-crash-on-into-jupiter-or-uranus-when-they-app%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    15












    $begingroup$


    why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?




    How much a trajectory is changed, depends on 3 factors:




    1. the mass of the planet,

    2. the speed of the spacecraft,

    3. the distance between spacecraft and planet


    Voyager's speed and distance were chosen to make sure Voyager wouldn't enter orbit around the planet. Voyager's speed before approaching Jupiter was higher than Jupiter's escape speed.



    In fact, as long as your trajectory doesn't touch the planet's atmosphere, you're good: because you're arriving from another planet your speed is always higher than escape speed.




    But how could they predict mass?




    When a planet has moons, you can calculate the planet's mass to a good degree of accuracy. This uses Kepler's third law:



    $$ M = frac{4pi^2r^3}{GT^2}$$



    G is the universal gravitational constant, 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2 /kg2

    r = orbital radius of the moon

    T = orbital period of the moon



    So you only need r and T, both of which you can observe from Earth pretty well.




    these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape




    No. When Voyager 1 was launched from Earth, the last stage of the rocket put it on an escape trajectory, then the stage was jettisonned. That was the last time a rocket was used to significantly change Voyager's speed.
    It traveled to Jupiter without further propulsion, so its speed slowly decreased as it got further away from the Sun.



    Here's a plot of Voyager 2's speed:



    enter image description here



    Then as it got close to Jupiter, Voyager's speed increased drastically as it was pulled in by Jupiter's gravity. At Voyager's closest approach, Voyager's trajectory was bent. This put the spacecraft on course to Saturn.
    As Voyager sped away from Jupiter, Jupiter's gravity slowed it down. All without using rocket propulsion.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 4




      $begingroup$
      +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
      $endgroup$
      – notovny
      21 hours ago








    • 8




      $begingroup$
      While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      20 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
      $endgroup$
      – Nathan Tuggy
      20 hours ago
















    15












    $begingroup$


    why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?




    How much a trajectory is changed, depends on 3 factors:




    1. the mass of the planet,

    2. the speed of the spacecraft,

    3. the distance between spacecraft and planet


    Voyager's speed and distance were chosen to make sure Voyager wouldn't enter orbit around the planet. Voyager's speed before approaching Jupiter was higher than Jupiter's escape speed.



    In fact, as long as your trajectory doesn't touch the planet's atmosphere, you're good: because you're arriving from another planet your speed is always higher than escape speed.




    But how could they predict mass?




    When a planet has moons, you can calculate the planet's mass to a good degree of accuracy. This uses Kepler's third law:



    $$ M = frac{4pi^2r^3}{GT^2}$$



    G is the universal gravitational constant, 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2 /kg2

    r = orbital radius of the moon

    T = orbital period of the moon



    So you only need r and T, both of which you can observe from Earth pretty well.




    these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape




    No. When Voyager 1 was launched from Earth, the last stage of the rocket put it on an escape trajectory, then the stage was jettisonned. That was the last time a rocket was used to significantly change Voyager's speed.
    It traveled to Jupiter without further propulsion, so its speed slowly decreased as it got further away from the Sun.



    Here's a plot of Voyager 2's speed:



    enter image description here



    Then as it got close to Jupiter, Voyager's speed increased drastically as it was pulled in by Jupiter's gravity. At Voyager's closest approach, Voyager's trajectory was bent. This put the spacecraft on course to Saturn.
    As Voyager sped away from Jupiter, Jupiter's gravity slowed it down. All without using rocket propulsion.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 4




      $begingroup$
      +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
      $endgroup$
      – notovny
      21 hours ago








    • 8




      $begingroup$
      While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      20 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
      $endgroup$
      – Nathan Tuggy
      20 hours ago














    15












    15








    15





    $begingroup$


    why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?




    How much a trajectory is changed, depends on 3 factors:




    1. the mass of the planet,

    2. the speed of the spacecraft,

    3. the distance between spacecraft and planet


    Voyager's speed and distance were chosen to make sure Voyager wouldn't enter orbit around the planet. Voyager's speed before approaching Jupiter was higher than Jupiter's escape speed.



    In fact, as long as your trajectory doesn't touch the planet's atmosphere, you're good: because you're arriving from another planet your speed is always higher than escape speed.




    But how could they predict mass?




    When a planet has moons, you can calculate the planet's mass to a good degree of accuracy. This uses Kepler's third law:



    $$ M = frac{4pi^2r^3}{GT^2}$$



    G is the universal gravitational constant, 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2 /kg2

    r = orbital radius of the moon

    T = orbital period of the moon



    So you only need r and T, both of which you can observe from Earth pretty well.




    these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape




    No. When Voyager 1 was launched from Earth, the last stage of the rocket put it on an escape trajectory, then the stage was jettisonned. That was the last time a rocket was used to significantly change Voyager's speed.
    It traveled to Jupiter without further propulsion, so its speed slowly decreased as it got further away from the Sun.



    Here's a plot of Voyager 2's speed:



    enter image description here



    Then as it got close to Jupiter, Voyager's speed increased drastically as it was pulled in by Jupiter's gravity. At Voyager's closest approach, Voyager's trajectory was bent. This put the spacecraft on course to Saturn.
    As Voyager sped away from Jupiter, Jupiter's gravity slowed it down. All without using rocket propulsion.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$




    why weren't they completely attracted by their gravitational field?




    How much a trajectory is changed, depends on 3 factors:




    1. the mass of the planet,

    2. the speed of the spacecraft,

    3. the distance between spacecraft and planet


    Voyager's speed and distance were chosen to make sure Voyager wouldn't enter orbit around the planet. Voyager's speed before approaching Jupiter was higher than Jupiter's escape speed.



    In fact, as long as your trajectory doesn't touch the planet's atmosphere, you're good: because you're arriving from another planet your speed is always higher than escape speed.




    But how could they predict mass?




    When a planet has moons, you can calculate the planet's mass to a good degree of accuracy. This uses Kepler's third law:



    $$ M = frac{4pi^2r^3}{GT^2}$$



    G is the universal gravitational constant, 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2 /kg2

    r = orbital radius of the moon

    T = orbital period of the moon



    So you only need r and T, both of which you can observe from Earth pretty well.




    these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape




    No. When Voyager 1 was launched from Earth, the last stage of the rocket put it on an escape trajectory, then the stage was jettisonned. That was the last time a rocket was used to significantly change Voyager's speed.
    It traveled to Jupiter without further propulsion, so its speed slowly decreased as it got further away from the Sun.



    Here's a plot of Voyager 2's speed:



    enter image description here



    Then as it got close to Jupiter, Voyager's speed increased drastically as it was pulled in by Jupiter's gravity. At Voyager's closest approach, Voyager's trajectory was bent. This put the spacecraft on course to Saturn.
    As Voyager sped away from Jupiter, Jupiter's gravity slowed it down. All without using rocket propulsion.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 14 mins ago

























    answered 21 hours ago









    HobbesHobbes

    89.2k2253403




    89.2k2253403








    • 4




      $begingroup$
      +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
      $endgroup$
      – notovny
      21 hours ago








    • 8




      $begingroup$
      While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      20 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
      $endgroup$
      – Nathan Tuggy
      20 hours ago














    • 4




      $begingroup$
      +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
      $endgroup$
      – notovny
      21 hours ago








    • 8




      $begingroup$
      While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      20 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
      $endgroup$
      – Nathan Tuggy
      20 hours ago








    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
    $endgroup$
    – notovny
    21 hours ago






    $begingroup$
    +1. Heck, exact mass value isn't really that important for orbital mechanics . Gravitational Parameter (GM) is what the orbital equations generally care about and can be measured easily from observations to better accuracy than G or M individually.
    $endgroup$
    – notovny
    21 hours ago






    8




    8




    $begingroup$
    While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    While accurate as far as it goes, I kind of feel like this answer fails to fully address some of the OP's deeper misconceptions, such as that "these space crafts used the propeller fuel to escape". It seems like the OP imagines gravity as some kind of a dissipative "suction" force that would capture incoming spacecraft unless they actively used their engines to escape it, rather than as the conservative force that it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    20 hours ago




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
    $endgroup$
    – Nathan Tuggy
    20 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    The gravity assist did not change velocity relative to the planet, only to the sun, so it had nothing to do with escape velocity.
    $endgroup$
    – Nathan Tuggy
    20 hours ago











    10












    $begingroup$

    To add to the answers @Hobbes & @Steve Linton posted, the mission designers indeed knew Jupiter's gravity field quite well from the orbits of Jupiter's moons. But before the Voyagers arrived they got additional measurements from the close flybys of two other spacecraft, Pioneers 10 and 11.



    @Steve Linton correctly describes the effect of the "sideways" part of a spacecraft's velocity with respect to the planet it's approaching. If the sideways component is large enough, the probe will miss the planet. To increase that sideways component, on approach you aim the spacecraft [via trajectory adjustment maneuvers, where you use the spacecraft's rocket engine(s)] to precisely tune the components of velocity, one straight toward the planet and one sideways. That combination sets the "aim point", the point to the side of the planet where the spacecraft would go if the planet had no gravity. Trajectory designers call that miss distance "b", a part of the b-plane aim point.



    This diagram helps to see the effect of increasing b if the approach velocity is held constant. For typical interplanetary trajectories the approach velocity doesn't depend on the chosen b. [Sorry for the pixellation—this is a very old diagram I pulled out of my presentation archives]



    enter image description here



    The brownish-tan (in the original file it was orange!) circle represents the planet, and the different colors of curves represent the trajectories followed by spacecraft with different b, all coming in at the same approach velocity and parallel to the black dashed line through the center of the planet. The thinner, dot-dashed lines represent what the spacecrafts' trajectories would be if the planet had no gravity. If b isn't large enough, as with the red and brownish-tan (formerly orange!) trajectories, they impact the planet. The thick, dashed red and brownish-tan lines show how those two trajectories would continue if they didn't run into anything, as would be the case if the planet were the same mass but a lot smaller in size (i.e., a lot denser).



    The green and blue lines are for trajectories whose b are large enough that they miss the planet. They point out a couple of characteristics of these hyperbolic orbits: 1) the larger the b, the farther from the planet is the closest-approach distance; and 2) the larger the b, the smaller is the angle the planet "bends" the trajectory. Again, this is for a fixed approach velocity. The red trajectory is bent by almost 180°, while the blue one is bent only ~135-140°.



    This bend is key to making gravity assists so useful.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      10












      $begingroup$

      To add to the answers @Hobbes & @Steve Linton posted, the mission designers indeed knew Jupiter's gravity field quite well from the orbits of Jupiter's moons. But before the Voyagers arrived they got additional measurements from the close flybys of two other spacecraft, Pioneers 10 and 11.



      @Steve Linton correctly describes the effect of the "sideways" part of a spacecraft's velocity with respect to the planet it's approaching. If the sideways component is large enough, the probe will miss the planet. To increase that sideways component, on approach you aim the spacecraft [via trajectory adjustment maneuvers, where you use the spacecraft's rocket engine(s)] to precisely tune the components of velocity, one straight toward the planet and one sideways. That combination sets the "aim point", the point to the side of the planet where the spacecraft would go if the planet had no gravity. Trajectory designers call that miss distance "b", a part of the b-plane aim point.



      This diagram helps to see the effect of increasing b if the approach velocity is held constant. For typical interplanetary trajectories the approach velocity doesn't depend on the chosen b. [Sorry for the pixellation—this is a very old diagram I pulled out of my presentation archives]



      enter image description here



      The brownish-tan (in the original file it was orange!) circle represents the planet, and the different colors of curves represent the trajectories followed by spacecraft with different b, all coming in at the same approach velocity and parallel to the black dashed line through the center of the planet. The thinner, dot-dashed lines represent what the spacecrafts' trajectories would be if the planet had no gravity. If b isn't large enough, as with the red and brownish-tan (formerly orange!) trajectories, they impact the planet. The thick, dashed red and brownish-tan lines show how those two trajectories would continue if they didn't run into anything, as would be the case if the planet were the same mass but a lot smaller in size (i.e., a lot denser).



      The green and blue lines are for trajectories whose b are large enough that they miss the planet. They point out a couple of characteristics of these hyperbolic orbits: 1) the larger the b, the farther from the planet is the closest-approach distance; and 2) the larger the b, the smaller is the angle the planet "bends" the trajectory. Again, this is for a fixed approach velocity. The red trajectory is bent by almost 180°, while the blue one is bent only ~135-140°.



      This bend is key to making gravity assists so useful.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        10












        10








        10





        $begingroup$

        To add to the answers @Hobbes & @Steve Linton posted, the mission designers indeed knew Jupiter's gravity field quite well from the orbits of Jupiter's moons. But before the Voyagers arrived they got additional measurements from the close flybys of two other spacecraft, Pioneers 10 and 11.



        @Steve Linton correctly describes the effect of the "sideways" part of a spacecraft's velocity with respect to the planet it's approaching. If the sideways component is large enough, the probe will miss the planet. To increase that sideways component, on approach you aim the spacecraft [via trajectory adjustment maneuvers, where you use the spacecraft's rocket engine(s)] to precisely tune the components of velocity, one straight toward the planet and one sideways. That combination sets the "aim point", the point to the side of the planet where the spacecraft would go if the planet had no gravity. Trajectory designers call that miss distance "b", a part of the b-plane aim point.



        This diagram helps to see the effect of increasing b if the approach velocity is held constant. For typical interplanetary trajectories the approach velocity doesn't depend on the chosen b. [Sorry for the pixellation—this is a very old diagram I pulled out of my presentation archives]



        enter image description here



        The brownish-tan (in the original file it was orange!) circle represents the planet, and the different colors of curves represent the trajectories followed by spacecraft with different b, all coming in at the same approach velocity and parallel to the black dashed line through the center of the planet. The thinner, dot-dashed lines represent what the spacecrafts' trajectories would be if the planet had no gravity. If b isn't large enough, as with the red and brownish-tan (formerly orange!) trajectories, they impact the planet. The thick, dashed red and brownish-tan lines show how those two trajectories would continue if they didn't run into anything, as would be the case if the planet were the same mass but a lot smaller in size (i.e., a lot denser).



        The green and blue lines are for trajectories whose b are large enough that they miss the planet. They point out a couple of characteristics of these hyperbolic orbits: 1) the larger the b, the farther from the planet is the closest-approach distance; and 2) the larger the b, the smaller is the angle the planet "bends" the trajectory. Again, this is for a fixed approach velocity. The red trajectory is bent by almost 180°, while the blue one is bent only ~135-140°.



        This bend is key to making gravity assists so useful.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        To add to the answers @Hobbes & @Steve Linton posted, the mission designers indeed knew Jupiter's gravity field quite well from the orbits of Jupiter's moons. But before the Voyagers arrived they got additional measurements from the close flybys of two other spacecraft, Pioneers 10 and 11.



        @Steve Linton correctly describes the effect of the "sideways" part of a spacecraft's velocity with respect to the planet it's approaching. If the sideways component is large enough, the probe will miss the planet. To increase that sideways component, on approach you aim the spacecraft [via trajectory adjustment maneuvers, where you use the spacecraft's rocket engine(s)] to precisely tune the components of velocity, one straight toward the planet and one sideways. That combination sets the "aim point", the point to the side of the planet where the spacecraft would go if the planet had no gravity. Trajectory designers call that miss distance "b", a part of the b-plane aim point.



        This diagram helps to see the effect of increasing b if the approach velocity is held constant. For typical interplanetary trajectories the approach velocity doesn't depend on the chosen b. [Sorry for the pixellation—this is a very old diagram I pulled out of my presentation archives]



        enter image description here



        The brownish-tan (in the original file it was orange!) circle represents the planet, and the different colors of curves represent the trajectories followed by spacecraft with different b, all coming in at the same approach velocity and parallel to the black dashed line through the center of the planet. The thinner, dot-dashed lines represent what the spacecrafts' trajectories would be if the planet had no gravity. If b isn't large enough, as with the red and brownish-tan (formerly orange!) trajectories, they impact the planet. The thick, dashed red and brownish-tan lines show how those two trajectories would continue if they didn't run into anything, as would be the case if the planet were the same mass but a lot smaller in size (i.e., a lot denser).



        The green and blue lines are for trajectories whose b are large enough that they miss the planet. They point out a couple of characteristics of these hyperbolic orbits: 1) the larger the b, the farther from the planet is the closest-approach distance; and 2) the larger the b, the smaller is the angle the planet "bends" the trajectory. Again, this is for a fixed approach velocity. The red trajectory is bent by almost 180°, while the blue one is bent only ~135-140°.



        This bend is key to making gravity assists so useful.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 17 hours ago









        Tom SpilkerTom Spilker

        8,8911950




        8,8911950























            7












            $begingroup$

            Let's try and understand how gravity works in space. This is kind of key idea to understanding lots of issues in space travel and astronomy.



            So imagine a space probe, or rock, which is heading in from deep space, aimed almost, but not quite towards a planet. We can break that motion into two parts -- the part towards the planet and the "sideways" part. The planet's gravity accelerates the part towards the planet, but it does nothing to the sideways part, so the space probe is still not heading quite towards the planet. This keeps on happening, so the probe is moving increasingly fast, still almost but not quite heading at the planet.



            After a while the probe whizzes past the side of the planet, going very fast. It can't hit it because it has never lost the "sideways" part of its motion (called angular momentum, more or less). It is still being pulled towards the planet but still moving around it, due to all the speed it has picked up. Then that speed starts to carry it away from the planet again (possibly with its course having been bent around to a greater or lesser extent). Now the gravity is slowing it down. However it is slowing it down just exactly as much as it speeded it up coming in so if it came in from far away at a certain speed, it will eventually escape equally far away at the same speed.



            If someone can add some diagrams to this, that would be great.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
              $endgroup$
              – Ed999
              10 mins ago
















            7












            $begingroup$

            Let's try and understand how gravity works in space. This is kind of key idea to understanding lots of issues in space travel and astronomy.



            So imagine a space probe, or rock, which is heading in from deep space, aimed almost, but not quite towards a planet. We can break that motion into two parts -- the part towards the planet and the "sideways" part. The planet's gravity accelerates the part towards the planet, but it does nothing to the sideways part, so the space probe is still not heading quite towards the planet. This keeps on happening, so the probe is moving increasingly fast, still almost but not quite heading at the planet.



            After a while the probe whizzes past the side of the planet, going very fast. It can't hit it because it has never lost the "sideways" part of its motion (called angular momentum, more or less). It is still being pulled towards the planet but still moving around it, due to all the speed it has picked up. Then that speed starts to carry it away from the planet again (possibly with its course having been bent around to a greater or lesser extent). Now the gravity is slowing it down. However it is slowing it down just exactly as much as it speeded it up coming in so if it came in from far away at a certain speed, it will eventually escape equally far away at the same speed.



            If someone can add some diagrams to this, that would be great.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
              $endgroup$
              – Ed999
              10 mins ago














            7












            7








            7





            $begingroup$

            Let's try and understand how gravity works in space. This is kind of key idea to understanding lots of issues in space travel and astronomy.



            So imagine a space probe, or rock, which is heading in from deep space, aimed almost, but not quite towards a planet. We can break that motion into two parts -- the part towards the planet and the "sideways" part. The planet's gravity accelerates the part towards the planet, but it does nothing to the sideways part, so the space probe is still not heading quite towards the planet. This keeps on happening, so the probe is moving increasingly fast, still almost but not quite heading at the planet.



            After a while the probe whizzes past the side of the planet, going very fast. It can't hit it because it has never lost the "sideways" part of its motion (called angular momentum, more or less). It is still being pulled towards the planet but still moving around it, due to all the speed it has picked up. Then that speed starts to carry it away from the planet again (possibly with its course having been bent around to a greater or lesser extent). Now the gravity is slowing it down. However it is slowing it down just exactly as much as it speeded it up coming in so if it came in from far away at a certain speed, it will eventually escape equally far away at the same speed.



            If someone can add some diagrams to this, that would be great.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            Let's try and understand how gravity works in space. This is kind of key idea to understanding lots of issues in space travel and astronomy.



            So imagine a space probe, or rock, which is heading in from deep space, aimed almost, but not quite towards a planet. We can break that motion into two parts -- the part towards the planet and the "sideways" part. The planet's gravity accelerates the part towards the planet, but it does nothing to the sideways part, so the space probe is still not heading quite towards the planet. This keeps on happening, so the probe is moving increasingly fast, still almost but not quite heading at the planet.



            After a while the probe whizzes past the side of the planet, going very fast. It can't hit it because it has never lost the "sideways" part of its motion (called angular momentum, more or less). It is still being pulled towards the planet but still moving around it, due to all the speed it has picked up. Then that speed starts to carry it away from the planet again (possibly with its course having been bent around to a greater or lesser extent). Now the gravity is slowing it down. However it is slowing it down just exactly as much as it speeded it up coming in so if it came in from far away at a certain speed, it will eventually escape equally far away at the same speed.



            If someone can add some diagrams to this, that would be great.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 18 hours ago









            Steve LintonSteve Linton

            7,15311741




            7,15311741












            • $begingroup$
              Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
              $endgroup$
              – Ed999
              10 mins ago


















            • $begingroup$
              Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
              $endgroup$
              – Ed999
              10 mins ago
















            $begingroup$
            Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
            $endgroup$
            – Ed999
            10 mins ago




            $begingroup$
            Lucidly explained, certainly. It does leave me wondering whether you've been quite clear as to how the spacecraft is speeded up, though, as you seem to have it departing the planet at the same speed it had when it arrived?
            $endgroup$
            – Ed999
            10 mins ago










            Garima is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Garima is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Garima is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Garima is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33896%2fwhy-didnt-voyager-1-and-voyager-2-crash-on-into-jupiter-or-uranus-when-they-app%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Olav Thon

            Waikiki

            Tårekanal