MARDI images and videos |
MARDI images and videos |
Aug 6 2012, 07:35 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Chief Assistant Group: Admin Posts: 1409 Joined: 5-January 05 From: Ierapetra, Greece Member No.: 136 |
Do we know what Image data Curiosity will be attempting to upload on the next flyover pass? More hazcams only, or do weexpect to have the mast up and taking pics and ready to send? in 1 or 2 days? -------------------- photographer, space imagery enthusiast, proud father and partner, and geek.
http://500px.com/sacred-photons & |
|
|
Aug 6 2012, 07:45 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 14-July 06 Member No.: 972 |
There is a low bandwidth ODY pass that will happen in about 10 minutes that may have a couple new HazCams. Does anyone know when the first MARDI images are expected to be downlinked? I saw that 18 had been assigned a (relatively) high priority, but the JPL Ustream was just saying that the current pass would have only a HazCam or two.
|
|
|
Aug 14 2012, 02:52 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2922 Joined: 14-February 06 From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France) Member No.: 682 |
I'm interested to know which frame of MARDI video would be the most urgent to download from Curiosity in order to help planning the begining of the route.
The frames can be blured by the movments during descent but pending they are looking strait down and the max definition is achieved, I was thinking of the following: 1- when quality equal HirIse (2 kms altitude) 2- twice better (1.320 km altitude) 3- 3 times better (660m altitude) I then calculate the FOV and get this: 1- 2400m x 1800m (it's what I found here: http://msl-scicorner.jpl.nasa.gov/Instruments/MARDI/) 2- 1584m x 1188m 3- 792m x 984m I'm wondering what do you think about this? My opinion is that, with such FOV, the terrain around where we landed look so benign that I don't think MARDI pictures will be of any (real) help for route planning to get to the base of Mt Sharp. Nevertheless MARDI will help for, say, the first 500m. -------------------- |
|
|
Aug 14 2012, 04:03 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Admin Posts: 976 Joined: 29-September 06 From: Pasadena, CA - USA Member No.: 1200 |
I'm interested to know which frame of MARDI video would be the most urgent to download from Curiosity in order to help planning the begining of the route. The frames can be blured by the movments during descent but pending they are looking strait down and the max definition is achieved, I was thinking of the following: 1- when quality equal HirIse (2 kms altitude) 2- twice better (1.320 km altitude) 3- 3 times better (660m altitude) I then calculate the FOV and get this: 1- 2400m x 1800m (it's what I found here: http://msl-scicorner.jpl.nasa.gov/Instruments/MARDI/) 2- 1584m x 1188m 3- 792m x 984m I'm wondering what do you think about this? My opinion is that, with such FOV, the terrain around where we landed look so benign that I don't think MARDI pictures will be of any (real) help for route planning to get to the base of Mt Sharp. Nevertheless MARDI will help for, say, the first 500m. You can gauge which MARDI image has the spatial resolution you are looking for by comparing easily discernible features and compare their size to HiRISE. There might be some distortion due to vehicle attitude, but you should be mostly OK. Looking at HiRISE and MARDI I could not find anything weird except a tiny, easily avoidable, scarp at about 200 m to the east of the rover. Slopes are pretty benign in this neighborhood as well. If anyone sees anything I missed, please smack me in the head and drop me a line Paolo -------------------- Disclaimer: all opinions, ideas and information included here are my own,and should not be intended to represent opinion or policy of my employer.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st June 2024 - 10:52 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. |