IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Opportunity Found By Moc, Backshell imaged by pancam
djellison
post Feb 9 2004, 05:36 PM
Post #1


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14431
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/2004/02/09/index.html

Again - awesome stuff - that possible backshell in the Navcam imagery WAS the backshell, pancam has nailed it since.

Doug
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DavidVicari
post Feb 9 2004, 06:02 PM
Post #2


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 9-February 04
Member No.: 14



All the images from these two rovers have been extremely good. Both from the rovers themselves and orbiter pictures of them.

They never got pictures that good of the other lander sites from orbit. This is probably because of dust buildup. Also, the clarity of the backshell/parachute in the pancam image is extremely good. Much better then what they could see from Pathfinder.

My distance estimate for the backshell was fairly close. I estimated 1300 feet in a previous post. They say it is 1444 feet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SickNick
post Feb 11 2004, 02:23 PM
Post #3


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 50
Joined: 8-February 04
From: Melbourne, Australia
Member No.: 5



One reason we didn't get such good pics of Pathfinder and Viking is that they are smaller. Also, the image people at Malin have got smarter and program aquisition to try to get sun reflection back off the bright parts of the lander, and they have their new method of rolling while acquiring to get better definition in the flight dierection.

Multiple reasons...

Everything helps


--------------------
- Nick

=====================================
Nick Hoffman Mars Specialist

3D-GEO Pty Ltd
Melbourne
Australia

http://whitemars.com

"First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
then you win."
- Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)
=====================================
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
volcanopele
post Feb 11 2004, 04:51 PM
Post #4


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3231
Joined: 11-February 04
From: Tucson, AZ
Member No.: 23



I'm just impressed that the backshell can be seen from that far away. The MOC image showed that the backshell was 450m away ohmy.gif


--------------------
&@^^!% Jim! I'm a geologist, not a physicist!
The Gish Bar Times - A Blog all about Jupiter's Moon Io
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gallen_53
post Feb 11 2004, 07:33 PM
Post #5


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 96
Joined: 11-February 04
Member No.: 24



Something that bothered me about that far off picture of MER-B's backshell was its color. The color of the backshell on the martian surface was tan/orange with bits of white. The photo of the backshell while MER was being constructed shows it as uniformly white:

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/spa..._aeroshell.html

The EDL Critical Design Review document shows the peak heat flux on the backshell to be under 2 watts/cm^2. I initially asked myself: Why did it discolor so much? Then I reread the JPL URL above and it said:

"Also, instead of being painted, the backshell will be covered with a very thin aluminized mylar blanket to protect it from the cold of deep space. The blanket will vaporize during Mars atmospheric entry."

This actually solves two mysteries at once. I know that the backshell TPS material is SLA-561S which is an orange colored spray on ablator. The mylar blanket must be the reason why the backshell was white instead of orange for the above URL. Mylar would have vaporaized at under 2 watts/cm^2. The bits of white are probably pieces of mylar that didn't vaporize away during entry. I hope they get a close look at the backshell.

Gary
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 11:09 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.