HiRise Imagery of Opportunity's trek, ...or, a blast from the past |
HiRise Imagery of Opportunity's trek, ...or, a blast from the past |
Dec 5 2006, 08:52 PM
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 866 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Santa Cruz, CA Member No.: 196 |
...The general bright splotch in the MOC image that encompasses both parachute and backshell fits well with a spray of sand ejected in the first impact of the backshell. Notice how the light-coloured area begins at impact point and then radiates leftward from that point. Now, years later, the colour of the general area is back to the uniform surface colour due to the wind. As with the airbag bounce marks, a light colour indicates a disturbance in the top layer, exposing lower material. At least, that's how I see it. Other opinions? I'd assumed that too, then from looking at the airbag bounces, it would be expected that they too would become dimmed substantially, yet they appear pretty fresh as in the picture in post #28, unless they too are substantially dimmed. Although its hard to see any rover tracks in the latest MRO image, i cant even see where Oppy left the crater, i remember being even able to see the rocket firing traces on the sand in the old MOC image, they seem gon enow, perhaps you're right, they really are blown into obscurity now.. |
|
|
Dec 5 2006, 08:57 PM
Post
#32
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14431 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
Not THAT much - you can still see the three airbag lobes at the point where it dropped into eagle
Doug |
|
|
Dec 6 2006, 06:28 AM
Post
#33
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2228 Joined: 1-December 04 From: Marble Falls, Texas, USA Member No.: 116 |
Look at the third bounce in that image. It catches the edge of a very small crater which then deflects the direction of motion off to the left a bit..just enough to put her down in Eagle. In makes me think that if that first bounce had been just a half meter farther south, it would have missed that little crater and bounced on up to the northeast of Eagle Crater, missing it entirely. Great catch. I think you are right. In the CEPSAR lecture, right after he says "bounce, bounce, bounce, bounce, bounce," SS says, "reading the green perfectly, the trajectory bends to the left, and goes right into this little 20 meter impact crater." What luck.I find myself replaying that presentation as I frantically load MRO and MOC imagery, and MMB panoramas. This is an amazing time in the Exploration of Mars. -------------------- ...Tom
I'm not a Space Fan, I'm a Space Exploration Enthusiast. |
|
|
Guest_jumpjack_* |
Jan 12 2007, 09:31 PM
Post
#34
|
Guests |
The backshell is really getting my attention. The immediate thought from MOC was that the backshell was on the left with the parachute to the right. What appeared to be the parachute it now seems was just the surface disturbance from a very high speed impact of the backshell.....let the gif load for a while, it shows both. It's like dressing up glasses! I'd like to see more gifs like this! Or, at least, image couples which show both MOC and HIRISE images. Is it possible? Where coudl I find MOC and HIRISE images for knwon landing sites? I'll do animated gifs or image couples by myself, if somebody can address me to the proper resources! |
|
|
Guest_jumpjack_* |
Jan 12 2007, 09:36 PM
Post
#35
|
Guests |
funny image. it looks like... well, lander was not the only "bouncing & rolling" thing outh there!!! Anyway, apart from this, any clue about scale of this image? How much are the bounce prints away one from the other? |
|
|
Guest_jumpjack_* |
Jan 12 2007, 09:40 PM
Post
#36
|
Guests |
|
|
|
Jan 12 2007, 10:28 PM
Post
#37
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2488 Joined: 17-April 05 From: Glasgow, Scotland, UK Member No.: 239 |
Bouncey bouncey.... Doug Doug: You want to go upstairs? Bob Shaw -------------------- Remember: Time Flies like the wind - but Fruit Flies like bananas!
|
|
|
Jan 13 2007, 04:10 AM
Post
#38
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
Doug: You want to go upstairs? Bob Shaw Pardon me -- I came here to arrange a holiday! -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Jan 13 2007, 05:38 AM
Post
#39
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2228 Joined: 1-December 04 From: Marble Falls, Texas, USA Member No.: 116 |
could you kindly post an excel95-compatible file? That's easy to do.
Vertical_Exaggeration_from_aerial_imagery_Excel95_version.xls ( 377K )
Number of downloads: 729edit: Well, I guess it will not be that easy. Apparently the conversion to Excel95 screwed up some of the formatting. But you can correct that by changing the size of some of the cells and the dimensions of the image. -------------------- ...Tom
I'm not a Space Fan, I'm a Space Exploration Enthusiast. |
|
|
Guest_jumpjack_* |
Jan 13 2007, 12:56 PM
Post
#40
|
Guests |
That's easy to do.
Vertical_Exaggeration_from_aerial_imagery_Excel95_version.xls ( 377K )
Number of downloads: 729 edit: Well, I guess it will not be that easy. Apparently the conversion to Excel95 screwed up some of the formatting. who cares? I need formulas, not formatting! Thanks for uploading the new version. |
|
|
Guest_jumpjack_* |
Jan 14 2007, 04:33 PM
Post
#41
|
Guests |
That's easy to do.
Vertical_Exaggeration_from_aerial_imagery_Excel95_version.xls ( 377K )
Number of downloads: 729 edit: Well, I guess it will not be that easy. Apparently the conversion to Excel95 screwed up some of the formatting. But you can correct that by changing the size of some of the cells and the dimensions of the image. I created this page attempting to explain what vertical exaggeration depends on, but I have some problems: - can't know if page actually works on your PC Sometimes on mine itself I get "invalid bytecode" or a not-working applet; anyway it's a 1.5 MB applet, please wait till download completes - can't understand how V.E. formula can be obtained by my images/applets. - looks like V.E. can be calculated from a single point of view (first applet), and it's quite confusing! |
|
|
Jan 14 2007, 06:09 PM
Post
#42
|
|
Interplanetary Dumpster Diver Group: Admin Posts: 4404 Joined: 17-February 04 From: Powell, TN Member No.: 33 |
Put simply, if the stereo pair are taken from farther apart than human eyes, the 3-d effect is exaggerated. This is an issue with the Viking landers, and some of the foreground pairs are unviewable without processing. Fortunately, as far as calculating distnaces, one simply needs to know the distance between the two "eyes" and the angle of the line between them relative to the object in question.
-------------------- |
|
|
Guest_jumpjack_* |
Jan 14 2007, 08:17 PM
Post
#43
|
Guests |
Put simply, if the stereo pair are taken from farther apart than human eyes, the 3-d effect is exaggerated. This is an issue with the Viking landers, and some of the foreground pairs are unviewable without processing. Fortunately, as far as calculating distnaces, one simply needs to know the distance between the two "eyes" and the angle of the line between them relative to the object in question. I understood the "easy version". I was trying to understand the "hard version" , i.e. the geometric deomonstration. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 10:17 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. |