HiRISE and Mars Polar Lander |
HiRISE and Mars Polar Lander |
Jan 10 2010, 10:48 PM
Post
#121
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6-January 10 From: Toronto, ON Member No.: 5163 |
If you want to expand your search beyond the MPL landing ellipse, you might try looking at CTX images as well, as the Phoenix hardware is all visible in CTX.
-------------------- Twitter: @tanyaofmars
Web: http://www.tanyaofmars.com |
|
|
Guest_Sunspot_* |
Jan 11 2010, 01:32 PM
Post
#122
|
Guests |
Has the entire landing ellipse been covered by HiRISE now? If the hardware were as obvious on the surface as those of phoenix/MER etc, I would have thought something would have been seen by now. Im wondering if we will ever find it now. Or perhaps something else went wrong in the early decent and it was destroyed in the atmosphere.
|
|
|
Jan 11 2010, 04:34 PM
Post
#123
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10226 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
The last comment I saw from Tim Parker was that a small spot in a CTX image outside the HiRISE coverage would be looked at in HiRISE as the season became favorable again.
Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Jan 12 2010, 02:51 AM
Post
#124
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6-January 10 From: Toronto, ON Member No.: 5163 |
Has the entire landing ellipse been covered by HiRISE now? If the hardware were as obvious on the surface as those of phoenix/MER etc, I would have thought something would have been seen by now. Im wondering if we will ever find it now. Or perhaps something else went wrong in the early decent and it was destroyed in the atmosphere. Yes, it has, and CTX acquired continuous coverage of a good area outside of the ellipse as well. As one of the CTX science operations team members, I can tell you that we've looked at all of the CTX and MOC images in and around the ellipse and haven't found anything particularly promising. I'll be interested to see what the spot is that Tim Parker is referring to. -------------------- Twitter: @tanyaofmars
Web: http://www.tanyaofmars.com |
|
|
Jan 12 2010, 03:08 AM
Post
#125
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
Tanya, let me be the first to welcome you to unmannedspaceflight.com! I'm sure I can speak for all the members when I say I'm looking forward to your perspective on stuff in space! CTX doesn't get nearly enough love -- just by posting here you'll help to get it a little more attention.
[But ewww, a Wesleyan grad. Go Ephs.] -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Jan 12 2010, 06:34 AM
Post
#126
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2542 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
Has the entire landing ellipse been covered by HiRISE now? I think that may depend on your definition of "entire landing ellipse"; there were several based on various assumptions of atmospheric conditions and entry state, some larger than others. See http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/1_24_0...nder/index.html though I am not sure what current thinking about this is. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Jan 13 2010, 01:36 AM
Post
#127
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6-January 10 From: Toronto, ON Member No.: 5163 |
Tanya, let me be the first to welcome you to unmannedspaceflight.com! I'm sure I can speak for all the members when I say I'm looking forward to your perspective on stuff in space! CTX doesn't get nearly enough love -- just by posting here you'll help to get it a little more attention. [But ewww, a Wesleyan grad. Go Ephs.] Thanks! CTX is definitely under-appreciated by both the public and the scientific community. It is an AMAZING dataset, and the images are simply stunning. Part of my job is to look at every image that comes back from CTX each day, and I never get tired of it. Here is a CTX image (P22_009725_2484_XI_68N125W) of Phoenix from back in August 2008; admittedly, this doesn't showcase the CTX at its best as the image is a bit murky, but that's hard to avoid at the Phoenix landing site: -------------------- Twitter: @tanyaofmars
Web: http://www.tanyaofmars.com |
|
|
Jan 13 2010, 03:03 AM
Post
#128
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
That's cool, it certainly stands out! -- and an advantage of lower resolution is that the image doesn't look as cruddy as the HiRISE images from the same time period
To get to the full CTX frame knowing any image number, append "http://viewer.mars.asu.edu/planetview/inst/ctx/" to the front, so this one is http://viewer.mars.asu.edu/planetview/inst...2484_XI_68N125W -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Nov 10 2011, 06:48 PM
Post
#129
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 656 Joined: 20-April 05 From: League City, Texas Member No.: 285 |
I was just reading this article on the difficulties of finding/identifying non-human artifacts around the solar system (http://news.discovery.com/space/our-solar-system-might-be-littered-with-alien-artifacts-111109.html), which included this picture of the 14 ft wide Lunar Surveyor 6 lander, as seen by the LRO:
http://blogs.discovery.com/.a/6a00d8341bf6...15b68970d-800wi The low sun angle really makes this lander stand-out clearly as a spike of shadow. Certainly it could be confused with a boulder, but at least in this case there're not a lot of boulders around to confuse the issue. This leads me to wonder whether the search for the Mars Polar Lander might be revisited using low sun angle images from MRO. Or was this an aspect of the existing search? |
|
|
Nov 10 2011, 07:11 PM
Post
#130
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
Given the latitude of the MPL landing site - the sun is always at a low angle.
|
|
|
Nov 10 2011, 08:01 PM
Post
#131
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 656 Joined: 20-April 05 From: League City, Texas Member No.: 285 |
...the sun is always at a low angle. I estimate that it could range from about 0 to 50 degrees depending on season and time of day. I would consider low sun angle to be less than approximately 15 degrees to yield a real benefit in feature recognition. If the terrain is as flat as what Phoenix observed, MPL should leave a very prominent spike of shadow at such a low sun angle. Obviously this would be less-so in rocky or high-relief terrain. Scattering from dust in the atmosphere would weaken the contrast of the shadow at all sun angles, so images during times when there is little dust in the atmosphere would be optimal. |
|
|
Nov 10 2011, 10:01 PM
Post
#132
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I would consider low sun angle to be less than approximately 15 degrees to yield a real benefit in feature recognition. When the SNR will be poor because it's so dark. QUOTE If the terrain is as flat as what Phoenix observed, It isn't. QUOTE MPL should leave a very prominent spike of shadow at such a low sun angle. After a decade of seasonal frost crushing? If you didn't know where PHX was....could you find it in the pictures taken a martian year after landing? Now make that 5x worse. I doubt it'd be visible at all. |
|
|
Nov 11 2011, 02:33 AM
Post
#133
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 656 Joined: 20-April 05 From: League City, Texas Member No.: 285 |
When the SNR will be poor because it's so dark. Clearly there would be some optimal balance between solar angle and optimal shadow SNR, as a function of atmospheric dust load. It seemed to work rather well on the low albedo lunar surface, I'm not sure how that compares with the lower insolation on the higher albedo Mars in combination with scattering from atmospheric dust. It isn't. Clearly there is a blend of topography, some regions rather flat, others less so. After a decade of seasonal frost crushing? Good question. I don't know. Possibly this completely invalidates the notion. Has it been modeled? could you find it in the pictures taken a martian year after landing? Definitely more challenging considering the additional dust cover and crushing. On the other hand, the combination of a suggestive spike of shadow from a recent low solar incidence angle image, with a clearer image from the original search campaign, might be sufficient to firm-up an identification. I don't have all the answers. It may or may not be worth doing, which I why I put it out there for (ideally, constructive) discussion. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th September 2024 - 10:22 PM |
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. |