Version 2 of MER MI Self Portrait simulation. I forgot to un-flat-field the MI in the first one

I've wanted one or other rover to use the IDD turret and wrist actuation to get the best self portrait possible. A really REALLY bad simulation using the model that is in MMB, and a 33 deg FOV.

http://zeus.nascom.nasa.gov/~bfleck/SOHO/SaDeg.pdf

In deep space - closer to the sun - 13% in 6 years. I'm not sure what the contributing factors are. MER arrays are 50% further from the sun, and exposed to that sun only 50% of the time - so if sun-bathing (i.e. radiation effects) are the primary cause, then with a similar performance drop off, MER arrays would be be <5% of initial performance.

I would imagine, however, it would be impossible to separate array degradation (however small) from dust obstruction (significantly larger)

At the summit of Husband hill - so after >500 sols - Spirit was generating more electricity than the day it landed.

The dust factor changing is the key - that's the ammount of sun getting thru the dust onto the arrays. It's gone up significantly

This is one purgatory-like-event I am NOT minding

It could...but the other 5 wheels don't have good traction at the moment

Oooo - no - we're not close yet. Spirit had > 800 Whrs last summer...and JUST, JUST made it through on a perfect slope.

by way of revision - I dug out my rover suspension animation.

http://dougellison.com/dougstuff/rov_susp.mov

This is roughly accurate to demonstrate the range of movements available to the rover - but of course, it has limits on this angles that will stop driving if the vehicle is in danger of self contact.

The rear left is visible, if a little caked in dust.

the rear right is pulling some big deflection on the right rocker though - I think it's gone low, so the right middle wheel could well be off the surface. That would give us a situation a bit like Tartarus - where we were down to like, 3 wheel drive.

Incidentally, the Exploratorium is now flushing through - and has out-done itself, with 5 hrs from image taking to being posted. That's the best for quite a while.

1:6 says that the first wheel to get trouble will be the same on both rovers.

Yup - the Thanksgiving Pan (sol 300ish?) shows the interrupted drag tracks from doing just that.

Actually - the season will be starting now. Phoenix landing site just hit 24hr dark, thus Polar Lander will be in 24hr Sun

Mark Sims told me that about half the ellipse has been covered by HiRISE - and that people are looking.

Essentially a macro-scale equivalent to the vent hole in the top of the MER design?

I wish I could just copy and paste the whole section out of 'The Guide to Beagle 2' - I'll paraphrase the parachute section...

The design was changed after establishing that the airbags would have to be going at less than 60kph. So they shifted to this 10m diameter ring-sail. The finished 'chute had 9 rings of 28 panels making 252 in total. The sails are sewn together in the vertical direction, but only at the corners to the next rows.

Tests seemed to include drop tests in Nevada, drop tests from a Hot Air Balloon near Oswestry, England, A pulley-fed extraction test, and a lorry-pulled test at one of the old airship hangers in Bedfordshire.

Tests predicted the terminal velocity with a lander of 57kg would be 16m/sec (35.8 mph)

Direct quote

"The material which was originally intended for spinnakers, used by racing yachts, is nylon, uncoated by any plasticiser. Instead has been calendared (rolled) to flatten the fibres thus reducing porosity. The fabric weights only 22.8g/m^2"

To a very tiny degree it already happens in some respects, with some of the ham radio sats that have been built and launched.

Beyond that - for example a government funded spacecraft - no - I don't think it's going to happen.

They've done both of those

The Beagle 2 book I have is out in the Shed, so I'll double check tomorrow - BUT - ballpark figures...

The parachute, at 10m across, and the lander, at something more like 60kg, combine to give a MUCH lower terminal velocity than MER. More like 40-50mph, than the 150+ that MER would have had without RAD's.

I'll pull out proper numbers tomorrow.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechn...ed-on-Mars.html

The amount of fail in this article hurts. I'll leave you to enjoy them yourself, but meanwhile...

We have images taken of the back of this thing - Sol 1367

Dan's calib Pancam
http://www.lyle.org/~markoff/pds/257/2P247...P2415L257C1.JPG

a raw frame
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...CCP2415L7M1.JPG

Normally I don't mind kooky articles like this one - but it doesn't even describe the rover, its mission, its achievements. It just copies and pastes from a paradolia infested forum and makes a 'story' out of a rock.

If this was The Express or The Mail or The Sun....I'd have expected it. But THE TELEGRAPH?

Yup - probably - they features on Space.com a long LONG time ago

Better quality version - http://vimeo.com/4432230

They released a version some years ago with Mars '96 ( I think )

Just being around any sort of complex terrain I think is going to work wonders. Consider the biggest cleaning event of all - that was up near Larrys Lookout. Other BIG cleans were on the opposite side of HP from here.

Consider this. This takes the maybe 25 whrs of 'useable' energy above survival - and makes it 6x bigger

Remember - we're driving backwards - so if you wanted to rotate the 'back' around (which is the front) - you've only got one wheel to do it with.

I know what I might try. Just a backward (same direction we're already going) drive of, say, 5m - but with NEITHER front wheel turning. Drag both of them, the bust one, and the working FL wheel. If you look at the trenches they're digging, it might suggest that the FL churning up could be part of the problem. The rear wheels are damn close to some good terrain I think. Just a little pop up there and we're off again

That really is rather transparent isn't it. Does it have much of a reflective kick to it, a shine of any sort?