Juno, perijove 12, April 1, 2018 |
Juno, perijove 12, April 1, 2018 |
Mar 28 2018, 04:10 AM
Post
#1
|
||
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 12-December 16 Member No.: 8089 |
So, according to the voting page, apparently the spacecraft's being spun around to get the instruments pointed directly at the planet. Io and Ganymede will also be imaged during this pass, as they'll come into view of JunoCam two hours before and twelve hours after closest approach, respectively. For Io, the team are "planning to take two pictures - one exposed nominally and one that over-exposes Io to look for volcanic plumes extending above the surface." The Great Red Spot is also expected to come into view during the spacecraft's departure.
Here's a logo for Perijove 12 I threw together, by the way. |
|
|
||
May 12 2018, 11:09 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
Here is a europlanet press release about our ProAm Juno meeting a few days ago:
"New views of Jupiter" Of course my main talk has been only one among several contributions. But Anita Heward, who has written that excellent press release, was especially interested in highlighting Seán's and my JunoCam image products. So, I provided her some of my crazy attempts to infer a vector field of displacements from a pair of reprojected, cropped, contrast-normalized, and heavily enhanced PJ12 JunoCam images. Besides Seán's latest masterpiece of merging, cleaning, and enhancing some of my reprojections, you'll find an animation, together with a link to an according MP4, in the above article, if you scroll down a bit. It extrapolates one of the two images 100-fold into the past, and into the future, with respect to the time span between the two original images. The morph is an integration assuming a stable velocity field. It's calculated via numerical integration of the numerically given differential equation using probably the simplest-known method, called Euler method. I've subdivided either integration into 1,000 equal steps, such that I expected the numerical error being considerably smaller than the statistical and systematic errors, despite the slow convergence behavior of this method. In order to avoid artifacts induced by regular grids, I've applied Monte Carlo methods whenever I had a choice within the short preparation time. My full talk considered derivatives like curl, divergence, or the Laplacian, as well as the effect of statistical errors induced by the choice of the actual Monte Carlo samples for stereo correlation. I might be able to upload the according MP4 (without audio, 630 MB) next weekend, and provide an according link. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 2nd June 2024 - 03:29 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. |