Arsia Mons Anomaly?, Recent Mars Express Imagery shows odd feature Options

[Hungry4info]

Is that a Plume on Arsia Mons?
https://scilogs.spektrum.de/go-for-launch/i...-on-arsia-mons/

Images of the Tharsis region show the emergence of a new prolonged feature that appears to cast a long shadow. It is not visible in this attached image from 06 August 2018.


Then we can see something newish near Arsia Mons (the vertical streak) in this image from 19 Sep 2018.


And then most striking is this image from 23 Sep 2018, where it appears that a significant shadow is cast (in the direction of the streak in the last image, admittedly).


I'm not familiar enough with Martian meteorology to know if this is just a normal occurrence, but it does look weird, at least to me. Hopefully someone will have ideas. If the answer to this is obvious then feel free to lock and/or delete the thread.

[nprev]

ADMIN MODE: This thread is right on the knife edge of being closed. Arsia Mons is not erupting or otherwise venting, and further speculation of that nature WILL result in permanent closure. Posts hidden. Please refrain from any further speculation of that nature.

[ectoterrestrial]

Changing course...

Is there a limitation on conventional landings with chutes happening near one of the Tharsis 4? Atmosphere must be extra thin up there.

The huge flat caldera on Arsia seems to beckon for a lander or rover. The "spiral cloud" (caldera confined circulating aerosol suspension) might make things interesting as an engineering challenge.

What use is there for a high altitude station on Mars?

[mcaplinger]

Is there a limitation on conventional landings with chutes happening near one of the Tharsis 4?

https://marsnext.jpl.nasa.gov/scieng_eng.cfm says that the Mars2020 landing site, for example, has to be below -0.5 km MOLA elevation, with respect to the MOLA geoid. So you can forget about landing on the volcanoes unless you are using purely propulsive landing (no parachutes.)

[Guest_mcmcmc_*]

https://marsnext.jpl.nasa.gov/scieng_eng.cfm says that the Mars2020 landing site, for example, has to be below -0.5 km MOLA elevation, with respect to the MOLA geoid. So you can forget about landing on the volcanoes unless you are using purely propulsive landing (no parachutes.)

why don't landers make aerobraking in orbit rather than landing directly? There would be much less energy to dissipate (just potential energy from 100km altitude rather than all the energy produced by the launcher).

[mcaplinger]

why don't landers make aerobraking in orbit rather than landing directly?

It would require a large engine and a lot of fuel to get into orbit first, but Viking did do that. You still need a parachute.

If you're talking about aerocapture to get into orbit, I'm not sure why you think it would help landing.

[atomoid]

...If you're talking about aerocapture to get into orbit, I'm not sure why you think it would help landing.

aerocapture orbits take quite an extended time to slow the velocity and round out the orbit (adding operations cost to the budget), when that energy can be dispersed much quicker via the well-proven heatsheild method. I'd assume the orbital speed will still be high enough that you'd have use a heatshield for the orbital-to-atmopspheric entry anyways but i am only guessing... I was curious to find the relative velocities of direct atmospheric entry modes vs the slowest possible option for orbital insertion trajectories but ran out of time, here are some starter resources though.