InSight mission |
InSight mission |
Jan 7 2012, 08:29 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
the GEMS Discovery finalist has been renamed InSight and now has its own website: http://insight.jpl.nasa.gov/
|
|
|
Jan 8 2012, 01:47 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8789 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
Hmm. I read through the site & the poster, and saw no mention at all of any sort of cameras.
-------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Jan 8 2012, 07:07 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 718 Joined: 22-April 05 Member No.: 351 |
I read through the site & the poster, and saw no mention at all of any sort of cameras. I believe the only camera is on the arm that deploys two of the instruments. It might also be able to be used for a panorama, but its primary use is to examine the area within reach and to determine where to place the seismometer and heat probe. This is a stripped down mission carrying only the instruments essential to the geophysical questions. If they were to do an added capability for outreach, my vote would be to carry the duplicate of the Sojourner rover (with new CCDs for the cameras). -------------------- |
|
|
Jan 8 2012, 05:11 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14448 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
If they were to do an added capability for outreach, my vote would be to carry the duplicate of the Sojourner rover (with new CCDs for the cameras). New CCD's means new backend electronics, new storage, new CPU, new radios.....basically, a new rover. It would cost a fortune. I adore Marie Curie - but bolting it onto InSight and deploying it 2001 style would be a bad idea. Moreover - without a stereo camera onboard InSight itself - you don't have the 3D terrain data on which to plan the driving. |
|
|
Jan 8 2012, 06:08 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 718 Joined: 22-April 05 Member No.: 351 |
I adore Marie Curie - but bolting it onto InSight and deploying it 2001 style would be a bad idea. And there would be the cost of requalifying now 'ancient' parts for flight for which spares may be hard to find. So I mentioned it as a what if day dream, not as a realistic proposal. Also, I've heard that the goal is to put the lander down in flat, boring landscape to ensure a safe landing, so there is likely to be relatively little to see or for a small rover to poke around in. Still, it would have been nice for Marie Curie to eventually make it to Mars. As for the question of how InSight compares to the cancelled ExoMars geophysical station, a quick search on Google didn't bring up the latter's instrument list. However, as I remember, it was fairly extensive, more so than InSight. InSight is a tightly focused proposal that does less than most proposals for Mars geophysical stations/networks. That focus gives probably gives it a better shot at flying than previous proposals, none of which flew. -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:44 PM |
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. |