Talk:List of active Solar System probes

Proposal to rename page and change scope

Having a list of active probes separate from that at List of Solar System probes and Timeline of Solar System exploration may be a good idea, but I think that the currently unpopulated sections "inactive probes" and "destroyed probes" may duplicate what's at List of Solar System probes to an unnecessary extent. I therefore suggest that we rename this article to "List of active space probes", and remove said sections. What are your thoughts? Matt 01:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC).

Hm, well I created this page because I wanted to know what probes were currently operating in the solar system, and it occurs to me that someone else may similarly seek information on which dead probes now litter our system. This would provide a useful resource in that case...if it contained any data, that is =)

Anyways, perhaps we could 'hide' those categories for now, if no one has the inclination to populate them; I won't object to their outright removal & article renaming if that's the consensus, but I think my vote would probably be 'nay'. --Xiaphias 07:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, for now I've just commented out the unpopulated section to make the page look a bit neater. Matt 17:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.130.228 (talk)

Looks good to me, it was too barren before. Someday I'll get around to filling out that section, if no one else does. --Xiaphias (talk) 03:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Dawn

someone add DAWN, then —Preceding unsigned comment added by SquallLeonhart ITA (talk • contribs) 16:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Good point. Done. Matt 17:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC).

Proposal to rename Venucian to Venusian

Under "Active Probes", under "Mission in Progress", it says:

"Venus Express, modeled after the Mars Express, is currently undertaking its thousand-day mission to Venus. During this time, it will collect data on Venucian atmosphere and cloud conditions.",

and although "Venucian" has been used (http://www.raw360.com/item/265), according to the Wikipedia "Venus" page, (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Venus):

"The adjective Venusian is commonly used for items related to Venus, though the Latin adjective is the rarely used Venerean; the now-archaic Cytherean is still occasionally encountered."

and in the Wikipedia "Venusian" page, (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Venusian) we find:

"Etymology

The word "Venusian" is simply a combination of the name of the planet Venus and the suffix -ian, formed on the analogy of "Martian" (as if = "Marsian"). It is usually pronounced [vɪˈnu.ʒən] or [vɪˈnu.ʃən]. Based on the latter pronunciation, the spelling "Venutian" is sometimes found.

The classically correct form of the word should be "Venerean" or "Venerian" (cf. Latin: venereus, venerius "belonging to the goddess Venus"), but these forms were only used by a few authors (e.g. Robert A. Heinlein). Scientists sometimes use the adjective "Cytherean" to describe Venus, from the goddess' epithet Cytherea."

My spell checker flags "Venucian" and a Wikipedia search for "Venucian" yields only this ("http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/List_of_probes_by_operational_status") page, so I conclude the spelling "Venucian" is simply an expedient oversight by the author, more concerned with matters of fact in the fluid and scantily documented field of space. Still, in light of the "Venucian" usage elsewhere, I post the suggestion that it be changed to the commonly used and more accessible "Venusian" rather than correcting it myself. --SalineBrain 13:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

As I'm typing this reply, I notice that Firefox's spellcheck program backs you up. I'll make the change myself, thanks for the suggestion. --Xiaphias (talk) 03:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

A Digression...

Can I just comment that this article epitomizes everything I love about Wikipedia? I created it because I was curious about what man-made objects are currently drifting out in the distant reaches of our solar system. It's very cool to come back a few months to find the current missions updated and the latest missions added. If I'd published this material to a personal website, it would quickly have become outdated and obsolete; but instead, this resource that I created became self-sustaining, self-perpetuating. Now *I* can use this page as a resource.

So, thanks guys. --Xiaphias (talk) 03:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion of lunar probes

To me, the main raison d'être of this article is the list of missions in progress, and personally I think that lunar probes should be included there (as they currently are, though I didn't add them myself). I'm not so sure about the merits of including lunar probes in the other sections: there are quite a few of them. (But then I don't totally see the point of those other sections anyway, since there are already many other lists of all probes that have ever been launched.) To reflect the article's current contents, I have for now reinstated the "which for these purposes includes lunar probes" text in the intro. If the consensus decision is that lunar probes should not be included under "missions in progress" (which, as I say, I wouldn't personally support) then the SELENE and Chang'e 1 entries need to be deleted along with this text. Matt 14:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC).

(EC) I copyedited the lede, and noticed that there was some disagreement over the contents of this list. The lede indicated that lunar probes are included, and I see that some are on the list (including SELENE). So, I'd recommend leaving that section of the lede in place while those probes remain on the list. If they're removed, I'd recommend adding a See Also: Lunar Probes, so that the information is easily found. The soviet union had at least two dozen lunar probes, and (in theory) those would need to be included here, as well as the Viking landers and others. We should mention them, even if only to add that see also link. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 14:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Discussion on a defenitive definition on what should and shouldn't be listed here

Well, first of all, Very good job on this... Exactly what I've been trying to create myself on the side (the "Active" section of the article)... This ressource is great! I believe that destroyed probes, dead probes or any other inactive probes should be listed on a new page titled "Interstellar trash" or something similar. However, I have nothing against being listed on this same page.

The rule for a probe to deserve the right to be listed here, is it's position being beyond earth orbit or planned to be beyond it... In the hypothetical case of a sattelite designed solely to orbit earth but having it's mission changed to another destination (ex : Going to the moon, requiring only a little push when using a low energy transfer), it should't be listed until the mission it's mission is approved.

In this context, spacecraft at lagrange points would be included... Who knows, it's possible that an interplanetary object like a comet or an asteroid migh pass close and the probe be redirected to it, as it was the case before. Spacecraft at the moon would also be included, etc... In fact, probably everything beyond earth's geostationnary orbit!

The goal would be to list every man-made object currently operationnal and transmitting data have left our orbit.

For example, SOHO should be included in this list because a spacecraft observing the sun, from beyond earth's orbit, is in fact a spacecraft exploring our solar system, the sun being part of it. More important, it's position is away from the earth, and there's a precedent : ISEE-3 was at a lagrange point observing the sun before being redirected to observe comets.

P.S. Everything I talked about mainly concers the "Active" section, but could be considered too, for the other sections! --Jerem © 2002-2006 (talk) 19:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

So this comment is 3 years old (almost to the day!) but I just wanted to voice my support for this set of inclusion criteria. This sounds like exactly what I had in mind way back when I created the article 5 years ago: a list of every device that's reporting to us from any alien (i.e. non-Earth) part of the Universe. --Xiaphias (talk) 08:24, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

This is THE go-to page of the Internet to find out what active spacecraft humans have in operation aside from the many in Earth orbit. I am new to this subject matter and have found this page invaluable to my research. As such, I also have some observations and suggestions to share:

1)The restriction of excluding craft at lagrange points seems very arbitrary and makes research more complicated. As noted above by both the discussion OP and the page creator: they are active non Earth-orbiting craft. Why can they not be included here on what should be (and almost is) the simple, definitive list of ALL active spacecraft not in Earth orbit?

2)The page is unnecessarily complex and questionable regarding the often ambiguous mission status of craft. I would suggest that a craft that is on a "Mission In Progress" is defined as one which is (a) in communication with Earth (includes craft which are merely in sleep mode) and (b) en route to a mission destination and/or performing research functions. That would eliminate any ambiguity about "first missions" and "new missions", etc. The two classes of active probes would then be: those actively researching or en route, and those that can still transmit to us but aren't researching at the moment. The practical effect on the page would be to eliminate the following two subcategories:

- En route (which presents an ambiguity if probes are actively researching while en route but not yet at their "first mission" destination)

- New mission in progress (again, a very ambiguous category that makes a simple list page of low-level information needlessly complex)

Folding the contents of those headings into the main "Mission In Progress" category would leave two major categories: "Mission in progress" consisting of all craft actually doing something constructive and, "Mission complete" consisting of all craft doddling around and waiting for whatever.

A simple, unambiguous and complete list - that's what this page needs to be. Bron6669 (talk) 09:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed change of name and scope

I propose renaming this article to "List of active Solar System probes" and deleting the sections "Inactive Probes" and "Recalled / Destroyed Probes", which have been unstarted or incomplete for two years and show no sign of ever being completed. For people interested in lists of historic probes there are at least four other articles they can look at (List of Solar System probes, Timeline of Solar System exploration, Timeline of artificial satellites and space probes and List of interplanetary voyages). 86.134.9.89 (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC).

• Since no one has objected I have done this. Another Matt (talk) 21:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC).

Yeah, good call on that. I guess no one (myself included) really cares much about interstellar trash: if it ain't active, it ain't nothin. Active Probes it is. --Xiaphias (talk) 08:30, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Dawn and 2001 mars oddesy

Dawn has now reached vesta so it should be moved from the en route section, after it leaves for Ceres perhaps it should be re added?

Also 2001 mars is listed as lasting untill at least sept. 2010, it is now well into 2011 so if it is still operational (as i believe it is)some update should be added, if it has ceased functioning it should change to mission complete 71.195.122.131 (talk) 08:28, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I have moved Dawn from 'En route' to 'Mission in progress' since it has began its study of Vesta. 7sagan (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

What about others?

Military, GPS, and other probes with extra instruments - e.g. "double use"? Especially ex-Soviet - American archives about this maybe now opening, so would be interesting... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.75.70.254 (talk) 05:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

This is a list of space probes i.e. robotic spacecraft which have escaped Earth orbit, including lunar probes, but excluding probes orbiting at the Sun-Earth Lagrangian points. Military satellites, comsats etc. can carry scientific instruments. It would be interesting to see how many active magnetometers, solar wind detectors etc. there are, but it is beyond this article's objectives. Feel free to form a new wikiarticle concerning "active scientific instruments on board non-scientific satellites" or something. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Kepler

Should Kepler telescope be listed here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.108.207 (talk) 01:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Not quite: Kepler is an Earth-orbiter, and those fellas don't make the cut for this particular page. --Xiaphias (talk) 08:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, Kepler and a few others not yet listed on this page are NOT Earth-orbiters, they are heliocentric orbiters independently orbiting the sun. Known as an "Earth-trailing" orbit, craft in such an orbit slowly fall further behind Earth. The fact that they happen to be using the same heliocentric orbital path as Earth is irrelevant: they do not orbit the Earth and thus belong on this page. Bron6669 (talk) 07:28, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Chang'e 2 is mission complete

Needs to be moved to completed missions. Its got the extended misson now SpaceDaily. Feel free to remove this comment.

IMO its worth checking if these pages can be consolidated: List of current and future lunar missions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.58.153 (talk) 21:13, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

CE-2 is not complete [1] . Also there is CE-5t1 currently in progress which this page again fails to mention, whereas its mentioned in multiple other pages related to solar system probes, currently active lunar probes, chinese launch program etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.254.216 (talk) 00:26, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

updates

• Mars express extended to end of 2016 [2]
• Chang'e 3 might still be alive. Probably worth giving it another month or so.©Geni (talk) 03:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Akatsuki is now orbiting venus but full status not yet known.©Geni (talk) 00:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Akatsuki dealt with. Venus Express I'm going to remove entirely soon and we need to keep an eye on funding for the NH 2014 MU69 mission. Chinese saying Chang'e 3 is still alive.©Geni (talk) 05:41, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Move Akatsuki

Akatsuki should no longer be in the "new mission under consideration" category, it should be moved to mission in progress with an updated description. Quadrplax (talk) 04:53, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

done.©Geni (talk) 05:38, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Is there a reason why BepiColombo is not on this list?

Just wondering about the ESA/JAXA Mercury mission BepiColombo. Is there a reason why it is not on the list? Should I include it? Jogundas Armaitis (talk) 21:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Suggest deleting category paragraph in intro

Intro is currently incorrect. It says: 'The craft are further grouped by mission status – "en route", "mission in progress" or "mission complete"', however there is no such grouping. Moreover there is only one mention 'en route' and no mentions at all of 'mission complete' anywhere in the article (outside of this paragraph), therefore suggest deleting. 194.62.210.160 (talk) 14:31, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Cassini-Huygens is listed despite being destroyed?

Just noting that the Cassini probe was deliberately destroyed on Saturn, and Huygens completed its mission on Titan and is no longer operational. Should it be listed on an article about active probes? 135.180.66.38 (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)