Discovery Program 2006 and Missions Of Opportunity |
Discovery Program 2006 and Missions Of Opportunity |
Oct 31 2006, 05:34 AM
Post
#76
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8785 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
Jim, I didn't understand your comment.
-------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 09:29 AM
Post
#77
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1870 Joined: 20-February 05 Member No.: 174 |
"...would return a sample of an enigmatic asteroid,..."
The <derogatory-scatalogical-term-deleted>-wits in the PR office were too stupid to indicate what asteroid or (equally important) what KIND of asteroid in the press release. morons. |
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 12:08 PM
Post
#78
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 599 Joined: 26-August 05 Member No.: 476 |
It's an E-type asteroid.
|
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 04:08 PM
Post
#79
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10226 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
nprev:
"This "EPOCh" mission for DI sounds intriguing: "The Extrasolar Planet Observations and Characterization (EPOCh) mission would use the high-resolution camera on the Deep Impact spacecraft to search for the first Earth-sized planets detected around other stars. L. Drake Deming of Goddard is EPOCh's principal investigator." ...what does DI have that Hubble doesn't? Are we just talking availability here, or does DI's HRC have better resolution for such a task?" ---------- I know nothing about EPOCH and was very surprised to see it here. The only thing Deep Impact can have that Hubble doesn't is time. It could stare at a transiting exoplanet for long periods, monitoring multiple eclipses - well, not stare presumably, but take lots of pics, or maybe do a deliberately blurred and offset image like Galileo with Comet SL9 - whereas Hubble time is far too valuable to deploy like that. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 06:41 PM
Post
#80
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 242 Joined: 21-December 04 Member No.: 127 |
Given the missions selected, I think the odds are HEAVILY slanted towards the next Discovery selection being VESPER.
|
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 06:44 PM
Post
#81
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 242 Joined: 21-December 04 Member No.: 127 |
Seven months and counting.... and the Discovery mission canidates are finally chosen. http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/oct/H...scovery_AO.html The moon mission seems somewhat lacking in scope.... a dedicated gravity mapping mission. I'm sure you can learn a lot doing that, but it also seems like it could be a rather limited payload, and cheap mission. I find myself wondering if the reason it made the cut is to have a fallback mission if the other two come back as too expensive or infeasable for some reason. I agree. It may also preserve ability to do Moon science needed for VSE if the robotic portion of that program gets axed. |
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 06:56 PM
Post
#82
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 688 Joined: 20-April 05 From: Sweden Member No.: 273 |
"Origins Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification and Security (OSIRIS)"
That must be some kind of a record for a contrived acronym. tty |
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 07:18 PM
Post
#83
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
I like the new missions for Deep Impact and Stardust, though. This "EPOCh" mission for DI sounds intriguing: "The Extrasolar Planet Observations and Characterization (EPOCh) mission would use the high-resolution camera on the Deep Impact spacecraft to search for the first Earth-sized planets detected around other stars. L. Drake Deming of Goddard is EPOCh's principal investigator." ...what does DI have that Hubble doesn't? Are we just talking availability here, or does DI's HRC have better resolution for such a task? I think it would be something like this proposal http://www.stelab.nagoya-u.ac.jp/hawaii/ha...ME_jan2004w.ppt Speaking of the new Stardust mission, this somewhat reinforces my belief that Deep Impact was a sort of job unfinished |
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 07:33 PM
Post
#84
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
|
|
|
Oct 31 2006, 11:36 PM
Post
#85
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 220 Joined: 13-October 05 Member No.: 528 |
"...would return a sample of an enigmatic asteroid,..." The halfwits in the PR office were too stupid to indicate what asteroid How about Asteroid 624 Victor? I found a scientific paper called: Trojan Asteroid 624 Hektor: Evolution of an Enigma by W.K. Hartmann. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980BAAS...12Q.837H The great thing about the internet, there is hardly a question that can't be answered (with tongue firmly planted in cheek) using Google. |
|
|
Nov 1 2006, 12:14 AM
Post
#86
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 710 Joined: 28-September 04 Member No.: 99 |
I don't understand why Deep Impact is considered for an extended mission when its High Res imager is Badly Blurred Beyond Belief. I remember a lot of talk about deconvolution, but a year later all I see on their website are these pictures:
http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/jpg...HRI_Impact1.jpg http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/jpg/goneinaflash.jpg http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/jpg/nucleus-516.jpg What's the point of flying this camera to another comet? |
|
|
Nov 1 2006, 12:37 AM
Post
#87
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 220 Joined: 13-October 05 Member No.: 528 |
There are a lot better pics out there than the ones you picked.
http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/jpg/HRI_937_1.jpg As I understand it, the idea is that we have only seen 4 comets close up, and each one looked very different from the last. As I recall, the best resolution on Deep Impact images were around 10 meters per pixel. Compare that to around 100 m at Halleys back in 1986, and over 30 m at Borelley (Deep Space 1), and you can appreciate the improvement. The Contour Discovery mission was funded at around 150 million to get a look at only 2 comets (maybe 3 if lucky, which it most definately was not). So NASA was willing to spend about 75 million dollars per comet on that mission. 30 million for the Deep Impact extended mission seems like a good bargain in comparision. |
|
|
Nov 1 2006, 01:41 AM
Post
#88
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8785 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
I think it would be something like this proposal http://www.stelab.nagoya-u.ac.jp/hawaii/ha...ME_jan2004w.ppt Okay, I think I get it now...long-parallax baseline imaging of nearby stars looking for Earth-sized object transits? Sounds interesting, but I have to wonder just how many extrasolar systems would happen to have ecliptic planes along our LOS for a given observation... -------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Nov 1 2006, 07:41 AM
Post
#89
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
What's the point of flying this camera to another comet? Because it's still the best camera for looking at Comets during a flyby we've ever had, and combined with its ability to take IR Spectra, it offers a very very cheap way of exploring another comet for something less than 10th the price of a new dedicated mission. And - when it comes to measuring transits with an out of focus camera....all you're doing is counting photons, and that can be done just as well with an out of focus instrument in actual fact...it's not ideal, but it will do the job (and if it couldn't, they wouldn't have been selected for the next study phase) Doug |
|
|
Nov 1 2006, 09:47 AM
Post
#90
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
all you're doing is counting photons, and that can be done just as well with an out of focus instrument in actual fact...it's not ideal, but it will do the job It may in fact be ideal because you don't want sharp images of the stars as the physical structure of the CCD pixels has discontinuities. If you had a very sharp, point-like star image, small attitude disturbances will project the image on different parts of the pixel region, possibly on the boundary between two pixels. This would make the brightness appear to oscillate. With an out-of-focus image, you sum up the smudged area which is less prone to such artifacts. A similar think is done in star scanners, AFAIK. -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd September 2024 - 10:08 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. |