IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

51 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Rev 49 - Aug 9-Sep 14, 2007 - Iapetus I1, The only close flyby of Iapetus
belleraphon1
post Sep 11 2007, 10:40 PM
Post #181


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 813
Joined: 29-December 05
From: NE Oh, USA
Member No.: 627



Sunspot..

this has certainly not been a disaster.... let us count our blessings. The hit could have happened a few hours earlier... that would have been bad.

We have an invaluable set of observations. We need to be patient.

The up side is that perhaps this will convince the mission planners to add another Iapetus flyby at the end of the extended mission.

But can't wait for the Voyager mountains in high res.

Craig
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Sep 11 2007, 10:42 PM
Post #182





Guests






QUOTE (ugordan @ Sep 11 2007, 12:36 PM) *
That's funny, Alex, but I was really looking forward to some nice low phase global views.

Given the difficulty of targeting Iapetus in any tour, yes, it would have been nice to have a flawless flyby. However, just imagine if the C/A observations had gotten hosed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OWW
post Sep 11 2007, 10:43 PM
Post #183


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 710
Joined: 28-September 04
Member No.: 99



Does this mean we will have no global images of the sunlit side AT ALL? That's a disaster for the mapping gurus I would think.... mad.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Sep 11 2007, 10:46 PM
Post #184





Guests






You know, you "this-has-been-a-disaster" guys all need to calm down and get some perspective. I don't know how you would have survived the last several Io flybys during the final Galileo mission extension, when safe mode seemed to be the normal state of the spacecraft.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ugordan
post Sep 11 2007, 10:50 PM
Post #185


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3648
Joined: 1-October 05
From: Croatia
Member No.: 523



Far from me saying this was a disaster, but your analogy with Io flybys is a little off. You always had the next Io flyby if the current one failed biggrin.gif Besides, I'm sure everyone understood the risks of flying by Io.
This was a one-shot thing. It was supposed to be a routine flyby, more or less. Stupid cosmic ray power trip...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OWW
post Sep 11 2007, 10:50 PM
Post #186


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 710
Joined: 28-September 04
Member No.: 99



Ok, compared to I33 this has been a success. This situation is similar to what happened with Galileo on E19.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ian R
post Sep 11 2007, 10:52 PM
Post #187


Lord Of The Uranian Rings
***

Group: Members
Posts: 798
Joined: 18-July 05
From: Plymouth, UK
Member No.: 437



Typical - the first safe mode event for four years had to occur just after the Iapetus flyby... mad.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Sep 11 2007, 10:53 PM
Post #188





Guests






QUOTE (ugordan @ Sep 11 2007, 12:50 PM) *
It was supposed to be a routine flyby, more or less.

In this business, it would be a good idea to eliminate "routine flyby" from one's vocabulary.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ugordan
post Sep 11 2007, 10:54 PM
Post #189


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3648
Joined: 1-October 05
From: Croatia
Member No.: 523



Ian - what? Solid state power switch trips occur several times a year, each time safing the s/c. We don't always hear about them, they're mostly mentioned in Cassini weekly reports.

Alex, point taken.

No raws yet, I'm calling it a day... and a flyby.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scalbers
post Sep 11 2007, 10:54 PM
Post #190


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1624
Joined: 5-March 05
From: Boulder, CO
Member No.: 184



Yes the thrill of spaceflight. I'm looking to see if we'll get either of the 250m resolution outbound images that would be just before the downlink in question:

http://www.geoinf.fu-berlin.de/projekte/ca...us013_vims.html

http://www.geoinf.fu-berlin.de/projekte/ca...3_vims_img.html

I'm curious as well about what this might mean for the extended mission(s).


--------------------
Steve [ my home page and planetary maps page ]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Roby72
post Sep 11 2007, 10:57 PM
Post #191


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 26-June 04
From: Austria
Member No.: 89



QUOTE (elakdawalla @ Sep 11 2007, 10:37 PM) *
Far from it. All the highest-res observations were successful and are going to be downlinked. The sequence was halted about 6 hours after closest approach, so the outbound full disk stuff got scrapped, which is a bummer, but there is more than enough amazing data to keep everyone busy for a long time. It's just not going to be quite as much as they had planned for.

We're lucky we even know how much data acquisition was planned.

--Emily


6 hours after C/A - that means that this sequence (and also the following six ! ) are lost:

link

unsure.gif

Robert
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OWW
post Sep 11 2007, 10:58 PM
Post #192


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 710
Joined: 28-September 04
Member No.: 99



Was the WAC snapping pictures just before the downlink?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
volcanopele
post Sep 11 2007, 11:01 PM
Post #193


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3231
Joined: 11-February 04
From: Tucson, AZ
Member No.: 23



QUOTE (SFJCody @ Sep 11 2007, 03:37 PM) *
Odd that the press release says 'no impact on Iapetus Science data return'
sad.gif Of all the major icy satellites, Iapetus has the biggest 'terra incognita' patch in the global maps, and this flyby would have more or less filled it...

??? We will fill that gap, don't worry! Just not tonight...

It certainly has not been a disaster. Aggravating, but not a disaster. We will get nearly all the high-resolution science we planned on.

By the way, the REGMAPTRL001 images are just fine! Most of that just won't get played back until tomorrow.


--------------------
&@^^!% Jim! I'm a geologist, not a physicist!
The Gish Bar Times - A Blog all about Jupiter's Moon Io
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Juramike
post Sep 11 2007, 11:04 PM
Post #194


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2785
Joined: 10-November 06
From: Pasadena, CA
Member No.: 1345



QUOTE (OWW @ Sep 11 2007, 06:43 PM) *
Does this mean we will have no global images of the sunlit side AT ALL? That's a disaster for the mapping gurus I would think.... mad.gif


On one hand, it's a bummer. On the other hand, it gives us another chunk of "Here there be tygers" terrain in the solar system to look forward to discovering in the futue.


"Some see the glass as half full,
some see the glass half empty,
and some see it as time for another round."

-Mike


--------------------
Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rob Pinnegar
post Sep 11 2007, 11:08 PM
Post #195


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 509
Joined: 2-July 05
From: Calgary, Alberta
Member No.: 426



That is really too bad about the full-disk sequence. It would have been nice to see all of Roncevaux Terra at much-improved resolution. I do hope that at least some of the images of the large basin come through. [Edit: I didn't see Jason's above post before saying this.]

The important thing is the high-resolution stuff, though, and that seems to be safe.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

51 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 10:45 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.