Ganymede Flyby - PJ34, June 7, 2021 Options

[TrappistPlanets]

mcaplinger,
many juno jupiter images look like this https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/03/jupiter-pe...83360265305.png, and that is a lot of distortion to fix
juno did fly close enough for some of that to be happening

[mcaplinger]

mcaplinger,
and that is a lot of distortion to fix

I'm not sure I'd call that distortion, when you fly close to something that's roundish you're pretty much stuck with a view like that.

I think you should simply wait for the data and then see what you and others can do with it.

[Kevin Gill]

mcaplinger,
many juno jupiter images look like this https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/03/jupiter-pe...83360265305.png, and that is a lot of distortion to fix
juno did fly close enough for some of that to be happening

Those images are composites of multiple images and are intentionally reprojected by me (in this case) into a simulated Fisheye Equisolid lens ("Little Planet" effect). From some of the simulated images, it doesn't look like Juno flew so close to Ganymede where this effect would be so pronounced

[TrappistPlanets]

Those images are composites of multiple images and are intentionally reprojected by me (in this case) into a simulated Fisheye Equisolid lens ("Little Planet" effect). From some of the simulated images, it doesn't look like Juno flew so close to Ganymede where this effect would be so pronounced

so i should be able to reproject the Ganymede images one we get them tomorrow morning (my time zone) with little to no distortion related issues as long i know where the poles and the equator is located and the angle/axis of the object in the images?

[Hungry4info]

It depends on the level of imagery you're using. The raw data has significant distortions caused by the motion of the spacecraft, but certainly people here will be able to re-project them correctly.

[Guest_Steve5304_*]

ETA on imagery?

[djellison]

little to no distortion related issues

You are talking about push frame images from a spinning spacecraft travelling at 19km/sec just 1,038km from the surface that will have moved nearly 600km in a single rotation.

It's nothing BUT distortion related issues.

The images will be here when they're here.

Some of the gurus of Junocam work will figure out some nice reprojections I'm sure.

[mcaplinger]

ETA on imagery?

Per post #16 in this thread: "All that adds up to the data showing up on missionjuno no earlier than 8 June and hopefully no later than the day after".

[JRehling]

Ganymede, in regional views, gives us one thing that Jupiter doesn't – a bonanza of well-known control points that have already been identified. Even without knowing a bit about the motion of Juno, it seems that someone could stretch and fit whatever images we get to existing maps.

[nprev]

ADMIN MODE: The ETA on end of tolerance for people badgering others about this flyby has long since passed. In fact it's passed for badgering of ALL kinds.

Stop. Now. Right now.

/ADMIN MODE

[antipode]

While we are waiting, I think this is timely and relevant, for this encounter and certainly for JUICE.

Is it a collisional atmosphere? Maybe some of the time, in some places?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.03570.pdf

P

[Ian R]

Goldstone is currently receiving a downlink from Juno.

[TrappistPlanets]

can't wait to see juno's new images of ganymede
what rayleighs did juno image ganymede in during the flyby?

[TrappistPlanets]

Ganymede, in regional views, gives us one thing that Jupiter doesn't – a bonanza of well-known control points that have already been identified. Even without knowing a bit about the motion of Juno, it seems that someone could stretch and fit whatever images we get to existing maps.

yeah, Ganymede is so well mapped that if you know enough or seen enough already existing Ganymede maps, you can easily recognize a curtain crater or fault
as for Jupiter, it changes so much that you struggle to tell what the offset of that particular image should be after you reproject it...

[owlsyme]

This allows for JunoCAM images with resolutions between 0.71 and 3.82 km. The best imaging opportunity in my opinion is centered at +01:45 when Juno is 1,515 km above Ganymede. This allows for imaging at around 1 km/pixel

Here's a comparison with Voyager and Galileo images -



The frame at left was taken by the Voyager 2 spacecraft when it flew by in 1979, with a resolution of about 1.3 kilometers (0.8 mile) per pixel. The frame at right showing the same area was captured by Galileo during its first flyby of Ganymede on June 27, 1996; it has a resolution of about 74 meters (243 feet) per pixel, more than 17 times better than that of the Voyager image.

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/ganymede-co...ileo-resolution