Pathfinder site, for comparison with HIRISE Options

[tim53]

Yes, except that I prefer this slight adjustment, which I think gives a better match to the North Knob and other features.

Phil

[attachment=8174:attachment]

Interesting...

Sometime in the past few years, the locations for VL-1 and MPF on Malin's website changed. I wonder why?

I have a somewhat different location. When I've finalized my updated map, I'll crop a chunk and post it here.

That ain't MPF, and MOC didn't resolve Yogi, is my prediction.

It may have gotten the lander, though... ...now I'm looking for the backshell and heatshield, which ought to be the same size as for MER.

I'm betting we'll see Sojourner, too.

-Tim.

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Interesting...

Sometime in the past few years, the locations for VL-1 and MPF on Malin's website changed. I wonder why?

What do you mean, Tim? The annotated images themselves changed, or just their location on the web server?

[tim53]

What do you mean, Tim? The annotated images themselves changed, or just their location on the web server?

Their "best estimate" of the location of the lander changed. If you go to MSSS.com and get into the captioned releases, look under "landing sites". The release dated January 2000 has the correct location.

In the MOC C-PROTO, the lander is visible at that location (detected, but not resolved). So I won't need to post mine here, because it's the same.

-Tim.

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Their "best estimate" of the location of the lander changed. If you go to MSSS.com and get into the captioned releases, look under "landing sites". The release dated January 2000 has the correct location.

Interesting. So you're saying that, in this image, the "Present Best Estimate" annotation was changed?

[Phil Stooke]

Here's the comparison. I had not noticed their change before - thanks, Tim.

Phil

[Guest_Sunspot_*]

With Pathfinder being bigger than the rovers... i'm surprised MGS hasn't been able to provide a definitive location yet.

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Here's the comparison. I had not noticed their change before - thanks, Tim.

I guess I'm more confused. I was aware of the change in location between M11-2414 of January 2000 and the cPROTO image of May 2005. However, am I (mis?)reading Tim's post as saying that the latter has changed since it was originally posted?

[tim53]

I guess I'm more confused. I was aware of the change in location between M11-2414 of January 2000 and the cPROTO image of May 2005. However, am I (mis?)reading Tim's post as saying that the latter has changed since it was originally posted?

Sorry for the confusion.

The January 2000 position where the "present best estimate" arrow points is the location of the lander. The May 2005 location is incorrect. I can't get any of my azimuth vectors, nor the MPF-based topographic map, to line up with that location.

Phil:

Your circle is at the "previous estimate" location of MSSS'. My original location was based on the Viking Orbiter 40m/pixel images (there were 4 overlapping there, so I was able to do a "super resolution" composite - really a noise reduction composite - of those images). I think it corresponds to an area big enough to accomodate both the locations given in the MSSS 2000 release, but not the 2005 location. Maybe by only a bit though. I figured a precision of about 100 meters for that location.

The C-PROTO is good enough that I'd predict that the "present best estimate" location, which is similar to my latest estimate, is accurate to within a few meters. ...but we'll see when HiRISE images the site.

-Tim.

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

The January 2000 position where the "present best estimate" arrow points is the location of the lander. The May 2005 location is incorrect. I can't get any of my azimuth vectors, nor the MPF-based topographic map, to line up with that location.

Oh, okay. Now I get it. I suspected that's what you were saying, but thanks for spelling it out for me

[tim53]

Folks:

Here's my last pre-HiRISE plot of the location of MPF in MOC image R0501414. Slightly brighter dot at end of yellow line is the lander.

MSSS' January 2000 release had it right, but they changed their "best estimate" locations in the 2004 and 2005 releases.

I've searched until I'm nearly blind for anything that might be shouting "parachute" or "backshell", but I think the topography at this site is just too rough to identify them at MOC resolution.

-Tim.

[Guest_Sunspot_*]

Whats this? Image processing artefacts a hair on the lens or rover tracks?

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[djellison]

Folks:

I've searched until I'm nearly blind for anything that might be shouting "parachute" or "backshell",

That's two of us I was very suprised there's no sign of the MPF backshell UNTIL....I saw the HiRISE imagery of the MERB Backshell and realised that MOC never really showed us the MERB backshell but actually just a large swathe of light soil kicked up by its impact...it should have been obvious when comparing to rover views of the hardware, but it never quite clicked into perspective. I'm fairly sure HiRISE will pick it up easily though.

It's interestig to compare the backshells of all 4 spacecraft imaged so far. By virtue of their EDL timeline, the Viking backshells have floated softly to the ground and look just about perfect sat there. After bridle cut, it seems that the MERA chute reinflated thus letting the backshell land softly - but the same doesn't seem to be true of MERB, where the chute appears smaller on the ground and the backshell very obviously not intact suggesting no chute reinflation and thus a hard backshell landing. It will be interesting to see what Pathfinder did!

Doug

[tim53]

Whats this? Image processing artefacts a hair on the lens or rover tracks?

processing artifacts.

[Phil Stooke]

I like that location, Tim. I have labelled a few features seen in my circular pan (top of thread) - the long drifts north and east of the lander, and the big dark rock north of the lander on one of those drifts. A ridge extending off towards the SE shows up on mission topo maps, if I remember correctly.

Just to be ornery, and based on these few matches, I'll pick a neighboring little spot to be the lander and call your object Yogi...

Phil

[Guest_Sunspot_*]

Regarding the final position of Sojourner. The rover was designed to circle the lander if communications were broken with the lander. But lander communications with Earth were lost first....isn't it possible that the lander was still functioning and communicating with the rover for some time after that happened? If so, Sojourner "might" be in the same spot it was last seen in.