IPB
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

37 Pages V  « < 10 11 12 13 14 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
On to Santa Maria!
SFJCody
post Nov 17 2010, 12:00 AM
Post #166


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 813
Joined: 8-February 04
From: Arabia Terra
Member No.: 12



Had one of those 'woah' moments just now. Looked at the 1.4km distance to Santa Maria while thinking "Oh, that's not so far now. Shouldn't take more than a few weeks."

Then I remembered that 1400m distance is over twice the mission success criterion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NW71
post Nov 17 2010, 12:16 AM
Post #167


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 19-January 10
From: Grimsby, N.E. Lincs, UK
Member No.: 5179



QUOTE (SFJCody @ Nov 17 2010, 12:00 AM) *
Had one of those 'woah' moments just now.


I'm glad it's not just me then!

We are still over ten times the mission success criteria away from Endeavour crater with a rover which has completed approximately 28 missions blink.gif

Neil
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Astro0
post Nov 17 2010, 06:02 AM
Post #168


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 3108
Joined: 21-December 05
From: Canberra, Australia
Member No.: 615



Nice Intrepid Crater 'look back' view with the tracks leading up from the distance. smile.gif
Attached Image
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
brellis
post Nov 17 2010, 07:08 AM
Post #169


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 754
Joined: 9-February 07
Member No.: 1700



Some future alien explorers might deduce that Oppy dodged that one! smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Stu
post Nov 17 2010, 08:22 PM
Post #170


The Poet Dude
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 5551
Joined: 15-March 04
From: Kendal, Cumbria, UK
Member No.: 60



'Road to Endeavour' blog updated: http://roadtoendeavour.wordpress.com/2010/...km-and-counting


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vikingmars
post Nov 17 2010, 09:30 PM
Post #171


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1089
Joined: 19-February 05
From: Close to Meudon Observatory in France
Member No.: 172



QUOTE (Stu @ Nov 16 2010, 04:18 PM) *
Sunrise Over Endeavour this morning... (hope you don't mind me using crop of your gorgeous panorama, James)

WOW ! My dream is becoming true !
Here is the link to this fantastic image
http://roadtoendeavour.wordpress.com/2010/...over-endeavour/
wheel.gif wheel.gif wheel.gif wheel.gif wheel.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ngunn
post Nov 17 2010, 10:52 PM
Post #172


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3516
Joined: 4-November 05
From: North Wales
Member No.: 542



I like that image too, and I have no quarrel with the notion of artistic license. In fact I think artists should have the license/freedom to do almost anything smile.gif so this is not a complaint. But in my mind's eye Martian sunsets are conceived as always being cold blue affairs, more like a failing fluorescent lamp than a comforting camp fire. (The alliteration is accidental, I promise.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
serpens
post Nov 18 2010, 01:12 AM
Post #173


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1063
Joined: 17-February 09
Member No.: 4605



QUOTE (djellison @ Nov 16 2010, 09:15 PM) *
It's simply below the resolving power of Pancam or Navcam to make any meaningful interpretation.


Hortonheardawho did some full filter ratio analysis on this with some interesting results. The reflectance of the stain is pronounced in the ultraviolet as opposed to surrounding soil, and a sample of clean deck. He and others on the yellow forum have also identified when the stain started (bottom of Victoria crater) and that it initiated with a feature just visible behind the sundial which then spread. Most likely a dark material spread by wind and covered/uncovered by the ubiquitous dust.

It is disappointing that JPL have not bothered to investigate this, or if they have that they did not think it worth mentioning. They would have all the spectral responses for the pancam filters and it would be interesting to know the makeup of whatever the stain is. Surely anything unusual associated with the Rovers is worth investigating.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Nov 18 2010, 01:18 AM
Post #174


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4260
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



The simplest explanation is that it's an area almost clear of dust. Comparing the spectrum with other almost clear areas of the panels is tricky, even if you used the calibrated data. Thin films of dust could affect the spectrum.

We'd need pretty good reasons to contemplate a new material not seen elsewhere.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Astro0
post Nov 18 2010, 02:07 AM
Post #175


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 3108
Joined: 21-December 05
From: Canberra, Australia
Member No.: 615



ADMIN HAT ON...

I think I'd like to see discussion on the so-scalled "stain" to stop here for now.
There's no further information that anyone can draw upon and any so-scalled "analysis" by the armchair explorers among us is working from less than the full spread of information that will one day be available through various sources. If it's something worth investigating then the mission team will definitely let us know.

There is plenty of "discussion and speculation" going on in other forums, so I believe it can continue there.
At the moment it's cluttering up the "On to Santa Maria!" thread and does not deserve a thread of its own.

Remember that you can always just PM each other if you want to discuss it further.

For now, like Opportunity, let's move on! wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pertinax
post Nov 18 2010, 02:15 AM
Post #176


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 198
Joined: 2-March 05
From: Richmond, VA USA
Member No.: 181



QUOTE (Astro0 @ Nov 17 2010, 11:07 PM) *
ADMIN HAT ON...
...
For now, like Opportunity, let's move on! wink.gif


Thank you.


-- Pertinax
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Nov 18 2010, 03:26 AM
Post #177


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4260
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



From Maxwell:
QUOTE
Going ahead with thisol's drive despite lack of HAZCAMs. Not a risk we'd take every day, but taking it today. Commanding 140m, ~130m likely.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nprev
post Nov 18 2010, 03:49 AM
Post #178


Merciless Robot
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 8789
Joined: 8-December 05
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 602



I know I'm gonna sound stupid for asking this, but are the hazcams all right? I assume Scott means that they just didn't get the images down, but it's scarily-phrased.


--------------------
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
elakdawalla
post Nov 18 2010, 03:52 AM
Post #179


Administrator
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 5172
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



Remember, Nick, this is Twitter. No room for detail. I think we can be quite confident that he meant "lack of Hazcam images in the downlinked data." And geez, do we need another warning about overinterpreting Scott's tweets?


--------------------
My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Nov 18 2010, 04:33 AM
Post #180


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4260
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



The answer is here:
QUOTE
No HAZCAMs today because of screwed-up downlink.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

37 Pages V  « < 10 11 12 13 14 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th October 2024 - 02:14 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 funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member.