HiRISE and Mars Polar Lander |
HiRISE and Mars Polar Lander |
Guest_Sunspot_* |
Dec 6 2006, 02:05 PM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
Looking at the images of the Spirit/Opportunity landing site, it seems many of the features such as tracks and rocket blast markings have faded considerably often to the point of being invisible in the nearly three years since landing.
This had me thinking about the MGS images taken in the hope of finding MPL. Initially it was reported that MGS had spotted the lander, one image had a white spot/streak interpreted as the parachute and a dark patch with a spot in the centre not too far off, taken to be the blast zone of the rockets with the lander in the centre. However another image taken 5 years later seemed to discount this theory - the features had faded or changed significantly. BUT, seeing how much the rover sites have changed in an even shorter time, wouldn't the same happen to the MPL site in 5 years - perhaps to an even greater degree with the more extreme seasonal changes at that location. Also, the latest HiRISE images show just how difficult it has been to spot the landers on the surface with MGS, the Viking sites in particular. I hope HiRISE takes another look at this spot. Mars Polar Lander NOT Found, MSSS article: http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/2005/10/17/ |
|
|
May 14 2008, 05:59 PM
Post
#61
|
|
Director of Galilean Photography Group: Members Posts: 896 Joined: 15-July 04 From: Austin, TX Member No.: 93 |
Remcook,
Yes, that's exactly what I'm thinking as well. I'll bet that reflective or not, the net effect would be to make a depression in ice. If it's not reflecting the light it absorbs heat would tend to make a hole, and since the sides of the hole would be more vertical than the surface, the sides would tend to enlarge over time. And if does reflect the light, said light would mostly impact nearby, making the surface around the lander slightly hotter due to the reflections. I'm betting MPL will be in a small depression, larger than the size of the lander, whether it landed correctly or not. To do this properly, I created a spreadsheet on the Yahoo groups site with picture names across the top, and ppl checking them going down vertically. Post here which photos you have searched and to how far (Y pixel number), and I'll try to update the file. This way efforts can be divided appropriately. Link here. BTW, as a suggestion for future futile searches, adding some false positives to the mix is a good idea. Maybe 25-100 every picture might cut out the boredom, and give ppl something to score each other on. -------------------- Space Enthusiast Richard Hendricks
-- "The engineers, as usual, made a tremendous fuss. Again as usual, they did the job in half the time they had dismissed as being absolutely impossible." --Rescue Party, Arthur C Clarke Mother Nature is the final inspector of all quality. |
|
|
May 15 2008, 08:36 PM
Post
#62
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
The image my gizmoid is in is PSP_005536_1030. The objects look similar to a "lander" and "backshell", but they're too big. Argh. I can't find a trace of your objects in the said image and that image is the most studied one by me yet. I also looked at the IRB version since you said there's color coverage, but found nothing remotely interesting. Would you mind showing us how your objects look (not necessarily giving locations) so we can see what they're supposed to look like? Plus, this is just driving me crazy -------------------- |
|
|
May 15 2008, 09:22 PM
Post
#63
|
|
Member Group: Senior Member Posts: 136 Joined: 8-August 06 Member No.: 1022 |
Argh. I can't find a trace of your objects in the said image and that image is the most studied one by me yet. I also looked at the IRB version since you said there's color coverage, but found nothing remotely interesting. Would you mind showing us how your objects look (not necessarily giving locations) so we can see what they're supposed to look like? Plus, this is just driving me crazy Okay, here ya go! They're in opposite corners of this cropped frame from that image. And they live near the north end of the image. In this case, north is toward the bottom of the scene. And remember, though the file is titled with MPL and backshell in the file name, it really can't be hardware, because of the things I noted above... ...unless it is. We'll see when the sun comes back around. But seriously, though I have looked at all the HiRISE images taken thus far, I might have missed something. I'd love to hear what all y'all might find! -Tim. |
|
|
May 16 2008, 12:05 AM
Post
#64
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 2785 Joined: 10-November 06 From: Pasadena, CA Member No.: 1345 |
Wow. I give up. I see nothing in that image even remotely out of place.
(Savagely beautiful, yes; out of the "ordinary", no.) Do you have an annotated image you could post? -Mike -------------------- Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
|
|
|
May 16 2008, 12:26 AM
Post
#65
|
|
Member Group: Senior Member Posts: 136 Joined: 8-August 06 Member No.: 1022 |
|
|
|
May 16 2008, 01:02 AM
Post
#66
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 2785 Joined: 10-November 06 From: Pasadena, CA Member No.: 1345 |
I've got to hit the freeways now, but maybe tomorrow I could do that. -Tim. Cool. That gives us all 24 hours to find the missing lander in the image.... -------------------- Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
|
|
|
May 16 2008, 08:48 AM
Post
#67
|
|
Rover Driver Group: Members Posts: 1015 Joined: 4-March 04 Member No.: 47 |
I'm glad I'm not in charge of these kinds of searches, because I also wouldn't have spotted anything 'unusual' in that figure...
|
|
|
May 16 2008, 03:13 PM
Post
#68
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 2785 Joined: 10-November 06 From: Pasadena, CA Member No.: 1345 |
(Has anyone else noticed that the deposit structure resembles a neuron?)
(I was kinda using that nomenclature to work my way down one axon then on to another during my search.) -Mike -------------------- Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
|
|
|
May 16 2008, 05:32 PM
Post
#69
|
|
Member Group: Senior Member Posts: 136 Joined: 8-August 06 Member No.: 1022 |
Wow. I give up. I see nothing in that image even remotely out of place. (Savagely beautiful, yes; out of the "ordinary", no.) Do you have an annotated image you could post? -Mike Actually, this is pretty straightforward, so no annotation should be needed. The object that I propose "might" be the lander (but probably isn't) is the "double-bump" looking feature near the upper left corner of that cropped image. The possible backshell object is in the lower right corner. In this region, there aren't many objects that look like this - though there are some. And this is the only case I've found where two suspicious objects are within a few hundred meters of one another. This is the simulated image I used to convince myself that this might be the lander. But again, there are problems with the lighting/shading. The fixed solar panels should shade most of the upper deck of the lander if it's in this orientation and more or less "level". Also, the "downsun" solar panel would be completely shaded with the sun geometry of this image, and the object doesn't match this expectation. |
|
|
May 16 2008, 09:05 PM
Post
#70
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
Well, it took me way too long to do this, but I have finally posted a page on the search:
http://www.planetary.org/explore/topics/ma...der_search.html There's more that I want to do, but I figured this was a good start. I, too, had had the idea of having people report which images they were searching, or ask to be assigned one, but hendric beat me to it. Still, if you want to let me know which images you are searching, do pop me a PM or an email and I'll maintain a tally. One thing I want to do is create my own base map and see where there are areas of overlap between images. One good test for the viability of a candidate is to see how it looks under different lighting geometry, which you can do if you are lucky enough to have found a candidate near the edge of an image where it may have overlapped another. --Emily -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
May 17 2008, 12:45 AM
Post
#71
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10184 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
-------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PD: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
May 17 2008, 05:04 AM
Post
#72
|
|
Member Group: Senior Member Posts: 136 Joined: 8-August 06 Member No.: 1022 |
|
|
|
May 17 2008, 01:28 PM
Post
#73
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10184 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
So perhaps we should call this place 'The Boneyard'...
Yes, I was struck, not by the paucity of candidates but by their profusion. if any little lump might be a spacecraft it really is a boneyard. And proving anything will be really hard. Color might do the trick, though, as you say. I liked it better in the old days when we were just comparing surface and orbital images! Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PD: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
May 17 2008, 04:39 PM
Post
#74
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2922 Joined: 14-February 06 From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France) Member No.: 682 |
I liked it better in the old days when we were just comparing surface and orbital images! Only another 10 more days and you'll do it again on the other pole -------------------- |
|
|
May 17 2008, 04:44 PM
Post
#75
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14433 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
That'll be much MUCH easier with the triangulation we'll get via UHF
Doug |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 5th June 2024 - 02:19 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |