MSL "Drive, drive, drive" toward Glenelg, The scientists (mostly) get the keys - sols 38-56 |
MSL "Drive, drive, drive" toward Glenelg, The scientists (mostly) get the keys - sols 38-56 |
Sep 13 2012, 09:33 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
Matt Heverly tweeted earlier today that they're "on the road again," planning the seventh drive. So sol 39 will be a driving day, and it's time to start a new thread! In yesterday's press briefing, Joy Crisp said the plan was to "drive, drive, drive," though they will probably stop again before getting to Glenelg if they spot a good rock to use for the testing of drilling and sample acquisition and delivery.
As usual, keep conversation of the events and images of sols 30 through 37 in the appropriate thread. -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Sep 14 2012, 07:39 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 4256 Joined: 17-January 05 Member No.: 152 |
I thought the main advantage for MSL over MER in terms of drive distance per sol was the height of the mast cameras (as akuo mentioned) and also the resolution of MC100. Both mean potential obstacles can be spotted farther away, and so longer non-blind drives can be planned. (Also there's power, which can negatively affect MER drives in times of very low solar array output).
Of course we'll just have to see what they can do with MSL. |
|
|
Sep 14 2012, 11:00 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Admin Posts: 976 Joined: 29-September 06 From: Pasadena, CA - USA Member No.: 1200 |
I thought the main advantage for MSL over MER in terms of drive distance per sol was the height of the mast cameras (as akuo mentioned) and also the resolution of MC100. Both mean potential obstacles can be spotted farther away, and so longer non-blind drives can be planned. (Also there's power, which can negatively affect MER drives in times of very low solar array output). Of course we'll just have to see what they can do with MSL. NAVCAMs have a higher vantage point and wider baseline and they yield good range data to 30-40 meters. MASTCAMs are yet to be used for driving. They have a narrow field of view so we would need more frames to cover an area similar to PANCAMs. Moreover, the foreshortening would still limit our visibility of potential obstacles. I doubt we will be able to extend MSL blind driving much beyond what MER did. The real advantage on MSL is the more powerful processor that should speed up VO and AutoNav driving. 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: 27th September 2024 - 03:46 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. |