Juno Perijove 49, March 1, 2023 Options

[volcanopele]

I'm going to choose to be optimistic about PJ49, so with that in mind, I have added previews of JunoCAM's observations of Io for PJ49. Obviously, JunoCAM's real observation plan will likely differ but I added previews for the first and last opportunities to image Io on the pass, a preview of an image nearest closest approach, and one for when Io is near the center of the JIRAM FOV. The observation at closest approach also has the Marduk plume which has a good chance of being observed on this encounter, presuming it is active. The Volund plume might also be visible near the terminator.

The previews use the Voyager/Galileo basemap. The left images were originally projected at the same resolution as JunoCAM but were then enlarged by 5x while the image on the right is the basemap reprojected to 5x the JunoCAM pixel scale.

https://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~perry/Juno/pj49.htm

[Bjorn Jonsson]

Earlier in this thread I posted a plot showing the color correction multipliers I was using for each perijove. Here is an updated version where PJ50 has been added. It looked interesting to me and looks even more interesting after reading several of the preceding posts.



The images now appear to be getting *less* red after a more or less continuous reddening trend since ~PJ20. The PJ50 values are preliminary though and based on only a single image, image PJ50_53. I will be examining more images and this might result in slight changes to the PJ50 values here but I will be very surprised if there are any major changes.

I don't know if the red channel is now getting darker or if the blue channel (as well as green) is getting brighter but it should be possible to determine this.

Image PJ50_53 has a 3.2 msec exposure time whereas image PJ49_91 (a comparable image) has a 6.4 msec exposure time. I don't think this is a significant factor but cannot rule it out yet.