[X] My Assistant

[volcanopele]

Actually implementing this is the responsibility of the individual instrument team.
I don't know the specifics of any of the MRO teams' plans, and it's too early to say for MSL.

JPEG2000 versions of HiRISE images would be available on the web within a few days of being returned.

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

I'm back, and I do have news. I'd tell it to you all now, but unfortunately I'd have to kill you. (Either that or give up my $1500 from "Astronomy" -- and if murder is necessary for me to retain that, I am not going to let mere squeamishness stand in my way.)

I WILL say that the biggest news is that the first post-Griffin architecture for the Mars program was revealed, and that it has some intriguing changes which seem, at least to me, to make eminent sense -- although one lesser point puzzles me. There were quite a few other lesser tidbits, too -- some of which you can see for yourselves in the report from the OPAG October meeting, which was released while I was at the COMPLEX meeting ( http://www.lpi.usra.edu/opag/oct_05_meetin...ting_report.pdf ). As for the other stuff, I'll see whether I can safely leak any of it to you over the next few days. It contains at least two new scandals, but all in all the planetary exploration program seems to me to be adjusting pretty well to the new funding limitations. The fact that NASA now actually has an administrator with a 3-digit IQ has doubtless helped.

Meanwhile, I see that Hayabusa screwed up its practice landing (for reasons which JAXA has not yet seen fit to tell us), and that the PFS on Mars Express has been fixed (a pleasant surprise; I only heard a fuzzy rumor that the situation had "improved" while I was at the meeting). I can also safely tell you right now that there will be very interesting results from MARSIS released at the Fall AGU meeting -- I can tell you this because we weren't told anything else about those results.

[The Messenger]

Meanwhile, I see that Hayabusa screwed up its practice landing (for reasons which JAXA has not yet seen fit to tell us),

As near as I can tell from the juxipositional interpretations, they do not know: They couldn't track altitude during the descent as well as expected, possibly because the software could not handle the unanticipated roughness of the surface. Ground control got jittery over the ambiguities, and aborted.

I can also safely tell you right now that there will be very interesting results from MARSIS released at the Fall AGU meeting -- I can tell you this because we weren't told anything else about those results.

Interesting is good, as long as interesting does not include Coke cans and faces!

Even the science data from Huygens -- given the maddening delays in the official "Nature" issue on the subject -- is likely to get important coverage at this meeting (I've written about two dozen questions on that alone).

Did you get any explanations?

Any side discussions about the two year delay in the release of WMAP data?

Where's the data?

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

I'd already gotten the explanation for the "Nature" delay from Ralph Lorenz: they're delaying the issue until the very last team has completed its article. As for the WMAP data, I suspect it has something to do simply with the difficulty of completely analyzing it. We are talking about staggeringly small differences in microwave intensity, after all.

[The Messenger]

I'd already gotten the explanation for the "Nature" delay from Ralph Lorenz: they're delaying the issue until the very last team has completed its article.

Thanks. I don't expect a lot of detail until the public release next June.

As for the WMAP data, I suspect it has something to do simply with the difficulty of completely analyzing it.  We are talking about staggeringly small differences in microwave intensity, after all.

You shouldn't let them off that easy, they knew that going in. The first release was ~6 months late - now we are talking years. Ned posted a new presentation on his site:

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CMB-MN-0...Nov05-clean.pdf

A simple 5 parameter (Alpha) CDM model fits all of these facts remarkably well, But are we missing something? Is there another 'CN' line out there?

Is this a hint? Perhaps the WMAP team will come up with some surprises of its own.

[remcook]

bruce,

any idea in what timeframe the huygens issue WILL be finished?

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

Damned if I know. I'm getting pretty frustrated myself.

[Redstone]

Bruce, how long until the Astronomy article shows up?

And can I press you on MSL? Green light, yellow light or red?

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

I don't think the "Astronomy" article will be in print for a couple of months, but I'll find out how much I can leak before then. As for MSL, it's still firmly on schedule for 2009. (One of the most interesting pieces of news out of the meeting was the official unveiling of what NASA intends to do about Mars afterwards; the plan has had to be radically reshuffled to deal with the funding problems, but it seems to me to make good sense.)

[volcanopele]

bruce,

any idea in what timeframe the huygens issue WILL be finished?

Soon.