Rosetta - Post Separation Ops at Comet 67P C-G, November 14, 2014 - |
Rosetta - Post Separation Ops at Comet 67P C-G, November 14, 2014 - |
![]()
Post
#301
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2091 Joined: 13-February 10 From: Ontario Member No.: 5221 ![]() |
I think I heard it mentioned during the press conference today, (I can't find it now), about Rosetta itself possibly landing eventually, similar to what NEAR did at the end of the main mission at Eros? Since it's not like there's anywhere else to go with the remaining delta-v left by the end of 2015, and sunlight levels and activity starting to drop after perihelion, and the low gravity makes the difference between orbiting and 'landing' trivial. The whole thing would weigh a kilo or two, right?
Obviously there's a few more pressing concerns right now, but it's something to eventually think about. |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#302
|
|
Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 915 Joined: 4-September 06 From: Boston Member No.: 1102 ![]() |
I'm assuming some of the fuzziness compared to other stunning images is the camera system was not meant to focus on nearby objects, but rather essentially infinity??
-------------------- |
|
|
![]()
Post
#303
|
|
![]() Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 445 Joined: 1-July 05 From: New York City Member No.: 424 ![]() |
I'm assuming some of the fuzziness compared to other stunning images is the camera system was not meant to focus on nearby objects, but rather essentially infinity?? The OSIRIS reference paper, posted here, says this about the wide angle camera: QUOTE The optical performance is maintained essentially unchanged from infinity down to almost 500 m, so that no refocusing system is required. On <ahem> April 1 of this year, the OSIRIS team posted an image of the principal investigator taken by the wide angle camera’s ground reference unit at a distance of 15 meters: https://planetgate.mps.mpg.de/Image_of_the_...016-04-01a.html To my eye the test image looks less fuzzy than the actual final image, but the test image might not have been compressed, and of course the conditions and subject matter were different. Congratulations and thanks to the team, and to the people who wrote about the mission for us. This post has been edited by Tom Tamlyn: Sep 30 2016, 10:51 PM |
|
|
![]()
Post
#304
|
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2519 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 ![]() |
To my eye the test image looks less fuzzy than the actual final image... There's no reason to think that their ground unit is focused identically to the flight unit, especially for distances well inside the requirements. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th June 2024 - 06:33 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. |
![]() |