IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

15 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Mars 3 (Various Topics Merged)
tedstryk
post May 2 2006, 10:23 AM
Post #31


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4383
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (djellison @ May 2 2006, 09:59 AM) *
Might it be a vertically oriented image, but with a cover or piece of structure blocking the first part thus giving the illusion of a horizon?

Doug



All these things are possible. Part of the problem, coupled with the small size, is the amount of noise. And, if one explaination I have heard, that being that it is some sort of prescan, it may be significantly horizontally compressed. The only possible ways to resolve what happened to Mars-3 are a) send and astronaut or rover to examine it (this will not happen any time soon, but perhaps, if it is something obvious enough, an eagle-eyed orbiter will spot it) or cool.gif if the original transmission tapes still exist, and they probably don't, use modern techniques to see if anything can be pulled from the noise beyond the 20 seconds.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4th rock from th...
post May 2 2006, 01:44 PM
Post #32


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 378
Joined: 21-April 05
From: Portugal
Member No.: 347



QUOTE (djellison @ May 2 2006, 10:59 AM) *
Might it be a vertically oriented image, but with a cover or piece of structure blocking the first part thus giving the illusion of a horizon?

Doug


If I'm not mistaken, the image was scanned using vertical lines, and from left to right, the same as with the other russian probes (Luna, Venera, etc), right? So the Mars 3 image we see coming out of the printer is in fact rotated 90.
Now the issue is to know the direction of the scanning: was it up->down? or down->up in each line?

Not knowing this, my judgement is that we are seeing a vertical image, horizontally compressed and perhaps with a flipped scaning direction. This can explain why the "sky" looks darker than the "horizon". The image might be is reversed ;-).

Here's my guess at the original image correct orientation:

Attached Image


White area at left is the start of the scan, with some sort of autogain feature going down until the image is correctely exposed.


And a processed version (just geometrical correction, rotation to the right and some noise reduction):

Attached Image


--------------------
_______________________
www.astrosurf.com/nunes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vikingmars
post May 3 2006, 08:57 AM
Post #33


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 811
Joined: 19-February 05
From: Close to Meudon Observatory in France
Member No.: 172



QUOTE (4th rock from the sun @ May 2 2006, 03:44 PM) *
Not knowing this, my judgement is that we are seeing a vertical image, horizontally compressed and perhaps with a flipped scaning direction. This can explain why the "sky" looks darker than the "horizon". The image might be is reversed ;-).


smile.gif Assuming that this is indeed a compressed vertical scan of a panoramic section : here is the 20:1 stretch with a quick contrast balance. If the atmosphere was still filled-up with dust (high opacity) the darkening of the atmosphere near the "horizon" is consistent with what was observed from VL1 (link herebelow to VL1 images before and during a dust storm)

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.p...indpost&p=23875
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4th rock from th...
post May 3 2006, 03:14 PM
Post #34


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 378
Joined: 21-April 05
From: Portugal
Member No.: 347



Just some data, to make things clearer:

The Mars 3 camera scanned vertically, and each scan line has 500 pixels at maximum.
A full 360 image had 6000 of this vertical lines at full sampling rate (1 line per second, 100 minutes for a full pan).

It's reported that the Mars 3 image was being scaned at 4 lines per second. At this rate, a full 360 pan image would be a 500x1500 pixel image.

Using the reported figure of 79 scanlines receaved from Mars 3 in +-20 seconds, the image corresponds to a field of view of 29 tall by 19 wide !!!

This is the contrary to my previous post, and as such there's not really that much horizontal compression on the original data! So the correct proportions might be something like this:

Attached Image


--------------------
_______________________
www.astrosurf.com/nunes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PhilHorzempa
post May 10 2006, 04:42 AM
Post #35


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 167
Joined: 17-March 06
Member No.: 709






I thought that we could try to get the record straight on Mars-96's official
designation on this thread. As I recall (but the memory is hazy), this probe
received the official title Mars 8 since, even though it didn't make it to Mars,
it was launched and did make it into space.

Can anyone confirm this?

If it is true, then perhaps we, on UMSF, should start calling this probe by
its proper name of Mars 8.


Another Phil
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post May 10 2006, 04:59 PM
Post #36


Martian Cartographer
****

Group: Members
Posts: 7221
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



I have never heard 'Mars 8' used for that mission. I would be more inclined to think somebody might have said that informally, and that's what you are remembering.

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ljk4-1
post May 10 2006, 05:23 PM
Post #37


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2454
Joined: 8-July 05
From: NGC 5907
Member No.: 430



QUOTE (Phil Stooke @ May 10 2006, 12:59 PM) *
I have never heard 'Mars 8' used for that mission. I would be more inclined to think somebody might have said that informally, and that's what you are remembering.

Phil


I have seen Mars 8 used a few times for Mars 96 (and before delays it was
known as Mars 94), but seeing as the probe never got very far, does it really
matter at this point? It doesn't seem to fit in with the Mars 2-7 series other
than its destination, either.

Mariner 8 would have been called Mariner H had reporters not kept calling it
with an 8 even though it ended up in the Atlantic Ocean. Pioneer E, the last of
the long-lived Pioneer solar probes in the 1960s, would have been Pioneer 10
had it not failed, but reporters weren't as focused on it so it retained the E.

Regarding the Mars 3 image, could the lander take images if it was knocked
on its side? Perhaps the lander came down and tipped over due to the dust
storm winds or some other technical factor or a combination of both.


--------------------
"After having some business dealings with men, I am occasionally chagrined,
and feel as if I had done some wrong, and it is hard to forget the ugly circumstance.
I see that such intercourse long continued would make one thoroughly prosaic, hard,
and coarse. But the longest intercourse with Nature, though in her rudest moods, does
not thus harden and make coarse. A hard, sensible man whom we liken to a rock is
indeed much harder than a rock. From hard, coarse, insensible men with whom I have
no sympathy, I go to commune with the rocks, whose hearts are comparatively soft."

- Henry David Thoreau, November 15, 1853

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post May 10 2006, 05:29 PM
Post #38


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4383
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



Mars '96 would have been Mars 8 if it hadn't been a launch failure. Other Mars spacecraft, such as third orbiter in 1971 which would have beaten Mariner 9, that failed at launch were also never given a number. That is true about the Pioneer series - "Pioneer 10" should have gone to the fifth spacecraft in the Pioneer 6-9 series (they all had letter names pre-launch). Pioneer F and G, the missions we know as Pioneer 10 and 11, would have been 11 and 12, and so on. Since Pioneer E never had a post-launch life, it never became Pioneer 10. And it was the only failure in the Pioneer series since the lettering began with 6. (They didn't count total launch failures in the Pioneer 1-5 series as numbers either, but the two programs of Pioneer 1-2 and 3-5 have nothing to do with the series of 6-13).


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Zvezdichko_*
post Dec 2 2007, 11:58 AM
Post #39





Guests






36 years ago, on this very same day, 2 December 1971, the Soviet probe Mars 3 successfully landed on Mars. Though it functioned for only 20 seconds and no science was returned it was indeed an engineering success.

The first and only picture from Mars 3 lander. Image Credit : Ted Stryk / strykfoto.org
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Adam
post Dec 2 2007, 12:12 PM
Post #40


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 17-September 05
From: Sweden
Member No.: 499



I might be wrong, but wasn't it pretty much decided that there was little data returned and that the "picture" is only noise?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Zvezdichko_*
post Dec 2 2007, 12:16 PM
Post #41





Guests






Yes. There have been speculations based on this image,however, that the lander was turned upside down and that line shows the horizon.
I hope that future probes or possibly astronauts will find out that's the reason for the failure smile.gif

There are some more errr... raw images:




Image of the PropM rover:

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nprev
post Dec 2 2007, 01:17 PM
Post #42


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 7968
Joined: 8-December 05
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 602



A date & an achievement worth noting to be sure, ZV...and only 14 years after Sputnik I! smile.gif


--------------------
A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Zvezdichko_*
post Dec 2 2007, 10:33 PM
Post #43





Guests






Yes, only 14 years after Sputnik mankind achieved a soft landing on Mars!

But... it's December already, it's an important month for Martian Exploration.
For example, tomorrow is 3th December. It's the day when Mars Polar Lander had to land, but the contact was lost. Eight years after that, we still don't know what happened to it.
Then... we have 25th December. It was the day when Beagle 2 was supposed to land... It was also lost...
So, we have several probes (Mars 3, MPL, Beagle 2) which were sheduled to land in December, and all failed. Bad statistics...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dilo
post Dec 2 2007, 11:14 PM
Post #44


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2492
Joined: 15-January 05
From: center Italy
Member No.: 150



Perhaps a little bit OT, but not completely...
Today, when looking to last MER images, I was talking to myself once more: "Is incredible, these beautiful pictures are almost realtime shots from the surface of another planet, and they comes daily in the last 4 years!". Same feeling with Cassini gallery...
I really hope this will continue to be the normality in the future, with a continuous coverage through MSL, EXO-mars and other long-duration missions. Besides scientific return, I think is important to easily access such "alien" visions, it helps us (poor humans) to have a wider breath, avoiding humanity to collapse on herself... smile.gif
Maybe I'm a dreamer, any though on that?


--------------------
I always think before posting! - Marco -
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nprev
post Dec 3 2007, 02:48 AM
Post #45


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 7968
Joined: 8-December 05
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 602



You're absolutely right, Dilo...we need to keep looking outward, always. We always have before. That's why we didn't become extinct in some forgotten African valley three or four million years ago...there were always a few rabble-rousers that wanted to see what was beyond the next hill.

If we play it right, it's our immortality... wink.gif ...God, how I hope that we do.


--------------------
A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

15 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st August 2017 - 02:10 PM
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 a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.