[X] My Assistant

[Tesheiner]

Dilo,

First of all, let me say again that your vertical projections are an excellent job and a good way to follow the rover progress and match it with MOC images.

Even if it is/was quite easy to match the outcrops seen on your maps with the orbiter imagery, it is true that I was only successful with near features on the range up to 10 meters. Farther outcrops didn’t match, including what I supose is the highway.

What I have found is that there is an error factor on those projections that increases with the distance. In other words, the outcrops look farther than they actually are.

For instance: the feature A I’ve picked on your last “route map” (see below) is supposedly at 13.1 m from the camera.

However, the same feature, which can be identified on the original images from sol 569 (see below), is calculated to be at 11.1m using the MER Parallax Calculator or at 11.74m using the elevation (pitch) angle.

Similar case for the feature B. It is at 41.3m per your “route map” and at 34.8m (plus/minus 2.5m) according to parallax. By taking the elevation angle, the result is 32.6m.

Do you (or anybody else) know which is the reason for this discrepancy, and if it can be corrected?
If it could, I think that those projections would fit orbital imagery even better then now, matching almost all the outcrops seen by the rover up to the Erebus Highway.