IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

17 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Landing Site Imagery
ljk4-1
post Jan 16 2006, 04:02 PM
Post #31


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2454
Joined: 8-July 05
From: NGC 5907
Member No.: 430



QUOTE (gndonald @ Jan 15 2006, 11:06 PM)
Quite right, the science definitely be worth it, all of the previous surface level weather measurement has been done at the lower latitudes (47 deg N for Viking 1/2, 19 deg N for Pathfinder), thus a look at the high altitude weather patterns should hopefully provide a contrast to them.

I just find it a pity that NASA can't get funding to send a second lander to the South Polar region in the same year (even of the Pathfinder variety).
*


This is why NASA should be working on smaller probes that can be sent in bunches to numerous places all over a target world. With this kind of probe,
losing a few would not be the end of the entire mission.


--------------------
"After having some business dealings with men, I am occasionally chagrined,
and feel as if I had done some wrong, and it is hard to forget the ugly circumstance.
I see that such intercourse long continued would make one thoroughly prosaic, hard,
and coarse. But the longest intercourse with Nature, though in her rudest moods, does
not thus harden and make coarse. A hard, sensible man whom we liken to a rock is
indeed much harder than a rock. From hard, coarse, insensible men with whom I have
no sympathy, I go to commune with the rocks, whose hearts are comparatively soft."

- Henry David Thoreau, November 15, 1853

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gndonald
post Jan 17 2006, 01:47 AM
Post #32


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 212
Joined: 19-July 05
Member No.: 442



QUOTE (ljk4-1 @ Jan 17 2006, 12:02 AM)
This is why NASA should be working on smaller probes that can be sent in bunches to numerous places all over a target world.  With this kind of probe,
losing a few would not be the end of the entire mission.
*


The sad thing, is that this is what NASA had with the basic 'Pathfinder' lander, something that could carry out a fair amount of science, which would have been easier to 'mass produce' than the rovers or the upcoming Phoenix lander.

A good strategy would have been to do a 'High/Low' launch with each launch window, say one MRO/Phoenix style 'high complexity' mission and one or more Pathfinder 'low complexity' mission(s).

The actual Pathfinder mission lasted for 83 sols, which would nicely complement the 'main missions' reading during the initial phases.

The best instrument set would probably be a basic camera, Weather sensor and either a seismonitor or radiation detector.

Apologies for going a little off topic, but this is something I feel strongly about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ustrax
post Jun 8 2006, 10:08 AM
Post #33


Special Cookie
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2168
Joined: 6-April 05
From: Sintra | Portugal
Member No.: 228



I've just received an answer from Doug Lombardi, the Education and Public Outreach Manager for the PML mission regarding the discussion about the landing site choice and he told me that the team is working very hard on the selection. By now the proposed region for is between 65 and 72 deg N and 120 and 140 deg E, making a quick search that would put us on the vicinity of Panchaia Rupes...
By looking into the maps it looks like a quite plain area with some large craters here and there with some possible ice on it...
What might be their intention? Landing on one of this or go for a safer touchdown?


--------------------
"Ride, boldly ride," The shade replied, "If you seek for Eldorado!"
Edgar Alan Poe
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
climber
post Jun 8 2006, 10:18 AM
Post #34


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2824
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



[quote name='ustrax' date='Jun 8 2006, 12:08 PM' post='57527']
What might be their intention? Landing on one of this or go for a safer touchdown?


I have little doubts on this. "If you don't land safely, you've got nothing," said Matt Golombek
on a Space.com article I posted yesterday on MSL's topic.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ustrax
post Jun 8 2006, 10:33 AM
Post #35


Special Cookie
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2168
Joined: 6-April 05
From: Sintra | Portugal
Member No.: 228



Maybe it's better to start looking at this place...Maybe it will become familiar in the days to come...:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b14/ustr...chaiaRupes1.jpg

smile.gif


--------------------
"Ride, boldly ride," The shade replied, "If you seek for Eldorado!"
Edgar Alan Poe
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
climber
post Jun 8 2006, 11:10 AM
Post #36


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2824
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



[quote name='ustrax' date='Jun 8 2006, 12:33 PM' post='57533']
Maybe it's better to start looking at this place...Maybe it will become familiar in the days to come...:


Can we already put an elipse ? By the way, I guess that we'll have the same elipse size as Mer's ?
MSL's will be a lot smaller refering to the same source as above


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ustrax
post Jun 8 2006, 11:15 AM
Post #37


Special Cookie
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2168
Joined: 6-April 05
From: Sintra | Portugal
Member No.: 228



'Can we already put an elipse ?'

I don't think so... It is the current proposed landing site, not the definitive one...


--------------------
"Ride, boldly ride," The shade replied, "If you seek for Eldorado!"
Edgar Alan Poe
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Jun 9 2006, 02:09 AM
Post #38


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



The MSL landing ellipse would be much smaller than MER's one. I think that the longest (major axis) would be around 10 20 km versus 50 km of MERs.

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
climber
post Jun 9 2006, 05:37 AM
Post #39


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2824
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



[quote name='RNeuhaus' date='Jun 9 2006, 04:09 AM' post='57679']
The MSL landing ellipse would be much smaller than MER's one. I think that the longest (major axis) would be around 10 km versus 50 km of MERs.
Rodolfo


Yep, but as Phoenix will use basicaly the same EDL system as MER, it'll about 50 km, right ?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Jun 9 2006, 03:20 PM
Post #40


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



Climber, good question. I have still not found about the Phoenix EDL details but a brief ones. The best I know is from http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/the_mission/entry.php which does not mention about the elliptical landing. Maybe Bruce or Ustrax can jump into that! smile.gif

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ustrax
post Jun 9 2006, 03:52 PM
Post #41


Special Cookie
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2168
Joined: 6-April 05
From: Sintra | Portugal
Member No.: 228



QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Jun 9 2006, 04:20 PM) *
Climber, good question. I have still not found about the Phoenix EDL details but a brief ones. The best I know is from http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/the_mission/entry.php which does not mention about the elliptical landing. Maybe Bruce or Ustrax can jump into that! smile.gif

Rodolfo


I'm working on it... smile.gif


--------------------
"Ride, boldly ride," The shade replied, "If you seek for Eldorado!"
Edgar Alan Poe
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Jun 10 2006, 06:11 PM
Post #42


Solar System Cartographer
****

Group: Members
Posts: 8049
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



As I understand it, the following three locations (two of them appear to overlap, but they are diagonally oriented) are now being considered for Phoenix.

Area B, box 1 66º to 68º N 225º to 234º.
Area B, box 2 66º to 68º N 224º to 227º
Area B, box 3 70º to 71º N 220º to 227º

MOC images are being collected within each box.

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Jun 11 2006, 02:12 AM
Post #43


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



Using the tool: Jmars, I have snapshot the area of 229.90E to 239.30E (approx. 215 km) and 66.83N to 68.88 N (approx. 120 km).

Attached Image


That zone is not so flat like Meridiani Planum and Gusev Crater...then there is some risk during the EDL.

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aldo12xu
post Jun 13 2006, 04:25 PM
Post #44


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 19-June 04
Member No.: 85



Has anybody mentioned this MOC April 2006 imaging update?

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/guest/...17_phoenix.html


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ustrax
post Jun 13 2006, 04:43 PM
Post #45


Special Cookie
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2168
Joined: 6-April 05
From: Sintra | Portugal
Member No.: 228



QUOTE (aldo12xu @ Jun 13 2006, 05:25 PM) *
Has anybody mentioned this MOC April 2006 imaging update?

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/guest/...17_phoenix.html


Thank you aldo! biggrin.gif
Where can we see the coordinates for those captions?


--------------------
"Ride, boldly ride," The shade replied, "If you seek for Eldorado!"
Edgar Alan Poe
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

17 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th December 2019 - 02:23 PM
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 a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.