InSight Surface Operations, 26 Nov 2018- 21 Dec 2022 |
  |
InSight Surface Operations, 26 Nov 2018- 21 Dec 2022 |
 Dec 2 2018, 01:09 AM
Post
#136
|
|
|
Member  Group: Members Posts: 507 Joined: 10-September 08 Member No.: 4338  |
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0545M_.PNG
This image from the IDC camera is more obscured than from the other cameras. Is the dust cover still on for this one? Is the lens cloudy? Note the rainbow-like artifact on the left side of the image, and a bright disc-like artifact near the center. |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 01:15 AM
Post
#137
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 910 Joined: 4-September 06 From: Boston Member No.: 1102 |
Having the Sun in the corner of the frame often does bad things...
-------------------- |
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 01:22 AM
Post
#138
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2511 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
QUOTE (marsophile @ Dec 1 2018, 05:09 PM)  This image from the IDC camera is more obscured than from the other cameras. There are only two cameras, ICC and IDC. This is an image with the sun near the FOV. I assumed they moved the arm and this is the sky. I'm not sure if the IDC had a cover (website says there is one, but I'm not sure if that's true) or if it's been removed. https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2018/pdf/2764.pdf -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 01:41 AM
Post
#139
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 290 Joined: 29-December 05 From: Ottawa, ON Member No.: 624 |
Great work! The equirectangular projection really helps to characterize the landing site. Definitely looks like it lander close to a good sized impact crater with ejecta around the crater rim.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 01:59 AM
Post
#140
|
||
 Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 4246 Joined: 17-January 05 Member No.: 152 |
Phil-o-vision, 3x vertical, of Ant's reprojection:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 02:28 AM
Post
#141
|
|
|
Forum Contributor Group: Members Posts: 1372 Joined: 8-February 04 From: North East Florida, USA. Member No.: 11 |
QUOTE (Ant103 @ Dec 1 2018, 11:25 PM) I did a little something on the last ICC image. Yet dusty but I hope it'll get better in the next few weeks  In equirectangular projection, I think we can have a clearer view of a part of the landing site. That is truly awesome work. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 03:13 AM
Post
#142
|
||
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 32 Joined: 17-April 05 Member No.: 235 |
Mars.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 09:02 AM
Post
#143
|
|
 Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2428 Joined: 30-January 13 From: Penang, Malaysia. Member No.: 6853 |
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Dec 2 2018, 09:22 AM) There are only two cameras, ICC and IDC. This is an image with the sun near the FOV. I assumed they moved the arm and this is the sky. https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2018/pdf/2764.pdf Does anyone have Figure 2 & Figure 3 from that PDF in larger format? They would all be nice to have, especially 2c for sizing pebbles etc near the lander
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 03:20 PM
Post
#144
|
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14432 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
The IDC moves. That range data would only be valid for that pose, pointed at that terrain in the test bed.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 05:30 PM
Post
#145
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 4246 Joined: 17-January 05 Member No.: 152 |
QUOTE (PaulH51 @ Dec 2 2018, 10:02 AM) Does anyone have Figure 2 & Figure 3 from that PDF in larger format? They would all be nice to have, especially 2c for sizing pebbles etc near the lander You could get rough pebble sizes from Fig 3, knowing the sizes of SEIS and the cable, and assuming level ground and lander in test bed and on Mars. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2018, 07:21 PM
Post
#146
|
||
 Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1619 Joined: 12-February 06 From: Bergerac - FR Member No.: 678 |
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Dec 2 2018, 02:22 AM) I'm not sure if the IDC had a cover (website says there is one, but I'm not sure if that's true) or if it's been removed. https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2018/pdf/2764.pdf IDC is having a cover, as this image seems to show. I guess…
-------------------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2018, 02:17 AM
Post
#147
|
||
 Member Group: Members Posts: 808 Joined: 10-October 06 From: Maynard Mass USA Member No.: 1241 |
I cleaned up all the fisheye 'lens cover' images and then the 'cover removed' images and put them in a gif
observations and impressions: * the 'grayed out section' in the lower left was to get rid of a 'residual arm shadow' (that moved between images) and made the ground to left look like a rock(!) * the 'big rock' has a very circular pattern on top (multiple?) that looks to these aging eyes that it was cleaned off by a blast from a propulsion nozzle * there appears to an engine blast pattern to the left of the big rock * there appears to be 'straight lines' leading up to the right side landing pad, left to right, at an angle that parallels the outboard strut ... blast patterns or skid marks(?) * the whole left side of the image appears to be 'cleaned out' of pebbles and small rocks, as opposed the right side of the image (blast effect? or just plain old luck?) as always, your mileage may vary... Cheers! -------------------- CLA CLL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2018, 03:03 AM
Post
#148
|
|
 Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2530 Joined: 20-April 05 Member No.: 321 |
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Dec 1 2018, 02:30 PM) If you say that something weighs X kilograms, you really mean that it has a mass of X kilograms. I've never heard anyone in aerospace try to use some other verb than weigh in this context. Using "mass" as a verb ala Heinlein has never caught on. That's how I've interpreted it when hardware is discussed. The sentence that caught my eye was "InSight's robotic arm also has a bucket with a capacity of roughly 500 g of soil." Since soil isn't hardware, it seemed ambiguous to me whether that indicated soil that would weigh 500 g on Earth or whether the arm can lift 500 g of soil, which on Mars will be more like 1250 g (if it were weighed on Earth). [It's moreover ambiguous whether weight or volume is the actual bottleneck.] I guess to be consistent, the mass is what one should use for samples, too. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2018, 04:59 AM
Post
#149
|
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10150 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
Because 'weight' is ambiguous - might refer to Earth or Mars - the planet has to be specified whenever it is used. If it's not specified, assume mass is intended.
Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2018, 06:25 AM
Post
#150
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1043 Joined: 17-February 09 Member No.: 4605 |
Mass is a constant. Weight is a locational variable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th April 2024 - 04:59 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. |
|
