Juno perijove 4, February 2, 2017 |
Juno perijove 4, February 2, 2017 |
Feb 6 2017, 08:56 AM
Post
#16
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 80 Joined: 18-October 15 From: Russia Member No.: 7822 |
-------------------- |
|
|
Feb 6 2017, 09:12 AM
Post
#17
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2428 Joined: 30-January 13 From: Penang, Malaysia. Member No.: 6853 |
|
|
|
Feb 8 2017, 07:45 PM
Post
#18
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2511 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
The Pearl of Jupiter Thanks, Roman. It's images like this one that keep me going in the face of all the negative clueless remarks on reddit about the supposed "mediocrity" of Junocam. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Feb 9 2017, 12:14 AM
Post
#19
|
|||
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
This is a 5-fold reduced full version of the PJ04 "Radiation Trend Monitoring" image:
This is an enhanced crop of the same image: Mediocre? I wonder, which other camera in a high-radiation environment on a spinning spacecraft would be able to produce images of a similar quality. Those remarks can only be based on temporary lack of knowledge. I'm sure, by now, they are happy to be proven wrong. |
||
|
|||
Feb 9 2017, 01:58 AM
Post
#20
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8783 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
Mike, your 'mediocre' camera is beyond the wildest dreams of achievement of any random hundred thousand anonymous nay-sayers combined, plus their mommies.
We UMSFers value your work tremendously. -------------------- 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.
|
|
|
Feb 9 2017, 09:03 PM
Post
#21
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
|
|
|
Feb 13 2017, 09:18 PM
Post
#22
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
The first 20 PJ-04 Departure Movie images.
These drafts are without considering spacecraft motion or Jupiter shape model. |
|
|
Feb 14 2017, 03:26 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 12-December 16 Member No.: 8089 |
Mike, your 'mediocre' camera is beyond the wildest dreams of achievement of any random hundred thousand anonymous nay-sayers combined, plus their mommies. We UMSFers value your work tremendously. Ditto. Despite the people complaining over at the subreddit, I'm sure they're a vocal minority and the rest of us are also appreciative of the work you guys do. |
|
|
Feb 14 2017, 05:41 PM
Post
#24
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2511 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
Despite the people complaining over at the subreddit, I'm sure they're a vocal minority... My suspicion is that people just look at the basically-raw images on missionjuno and compare them to the best, most heavily-processed press releases from Voyager or Galileo. And they also likely can't tell what the scale of any particular image is -- all Junocam images are limb-to-limb, even the highest-resolution ones, and the maximum resolution is only achieved at the center of the image. If I had the time I would process some high-res Voyager images and compare them to the Junocam images -- in most places Jupiter is pretty bland at the km scale. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Feb 14 2017, 07:13 PM
Post
#25
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 12-December 16 Member No.: 8089 |
My suspicion is that people just look at the basically-raw images on missionjuno and compare them to the best, most heavily-processed press releases from Voyager or Galileo. It's actually they've been mostly comparing JunoCam to Cassini's ISS and New Horizons' LORRI in particular. The people plaguing the comments often complain that JunoCam's pics aren't as "impressive" or "stunning" as images from Cassini or New Horizons. The best I could do was simply say that each camera was built to serve different purposes; I'm not one to start arguments on reddit, especially when I'm supposed to be a neutral moderator. |
|
|
Feb 14 2017, 08:58 PM
Post
#26
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2082 Joined: 13-February 10 From: Ontario Member No.: 5221 |
Say they are lucky to get any images at all, and that a camera was almost not even included! Otherwise Juno would be about as well known to the public as Ulysses was.
|
|
|
Feb 14 2017, 09:53 PM
Post
#27
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2511 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
Say they are lucky to get any images at all, and that a camera was almost not even included! That sort of argument just feeds into the notion that Junocam is somehow inferior. It's not inferior, it's just different. The driving requirement was to be able to image the full disc of Jupiter from above the pole, which led to a very wide field of view, utterly unlike the instruments that it's being compared to. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Feb 19 2017, 07:07 AM
Post
#28
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 12-December 16 Member No.: 8089 |
An interesting question was brought up by my friend from ANU when he saw the images of Ganymede's shadow - will there ever be a time in the mission where JunoCam will be able to observe a transit shadow up close or, better yet, fly into the shadow of a transit during a perijove?
|
|
|
Feb 19 2017, 07:21 PM
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 306 Joined: 4-October 14 Member No.: 7273 |
I took a look a while back, but that was still when the mission was planning to run 14-day orbits.
Since the moons' orbital planes are inclined to the ecliptic and Jupiter's equatorial plane, Callisto's shadow doesn't currently fall on the planet and won't do so again until sometime around 2020. The track of Ganymede's shadow is also edging north and will continue producing shorter eclipses until about the middle of next year when the eclipse tracks start drifting south again. There should be a series of Ganymede eclipses occurring near the north pole around then. Europa's eclipse track is currently located along the North Temperate Belt, while Io's is located along the northern edge of the North Equatorial Belt. Like Ganymede's eclipse track, they're also drifting north at the moment, but being closer to the planet, the track positions won't change as substantially. Right now I'd say Ganymede and Europa have the best chance for close eclipse photos, given the smaller field of view at lower latitudes and the lower likelihood of Io's shadow catching JunoCam's eye during a perijove pass. There's a very tiny chance that the shadows of Amalthea would be visible during a JunoCam pass. I'd need an updated list of perijove encounter times, but it should be trivial to determine if Juno could see eclipses up close. |
|
|
Feb 19 2017, 10:05 PM
Post
#30
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
PJ05 is 2017 MAR 27 08:52:14 (according to SPICE spk file juno_pred_orbit.orb). The later perijoves haven't yet been determined, when I checked for it about two weeks ago.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th April 2024 - 11:57 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. |