IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

221 Pages V  « < 118 119 120 121 122 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Opportunity Route Map
climber
post Aug 20 2006, 09:04 PM
Post #1786


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2641
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



QUOTE (Phil Stooke @ Aug 20 2006, 08:04 PM) *
... with a grid (based on a map-projected MOC image) at 100 m spacing.
Phil

I counted the grids blink.gif : we're (about) 6300 m south of Eagle-Endurance. I know you know, but...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
algorimancer
post Aug 20 2006, 09:06 PM
Post #1787


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 587
Joined: 20-April 05
From: League City, Texas
Member No.: 285



QUOTE (Phil Stooke @ Aug 20 2006, 01:04 PM) *
Here is the latest version of my total route map. It consists of 15 squares, each 500 m across, with a grid (based on a map-projected MOC image) at 100 m spacing. The origin of the grid is the lander. It incorporates numerous corrections to versions I have posted before. Each square (at full size) will be a separate map in a future project.

Phil

[attachment=7071:attachment]


Anyone else notice that the Twin Peaks (crater rim near 100 degrees azimuth) has ceased to be visible since moving onto the Victoria ejecta? This blows away all those notions I'd had about using them as a triangulation and calibration reference. I'd assumed this would occur eventually, but figured we'd be much closer to Victoria before it happened.

Phil, I notice that since entering the ejecta terrain there is a noticeable divergence between your map and Tesheiner's map (nice to see all of yours in one place). Presumably the dearth of landmarks is presenting the anticipated challenge to navigation. I'm curious as to what references the two of you are using at this point to derive your positions. I'm assuming that Beagle, Epsilon, and Delta are the most obvious targets, but of course they're all a bit ambiguous from this far away, so what I'm particularly wondering is whether there's enough detail in the MGS images to identify the particular dunes visible around Oppy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
algorimancer
post Aug 20 2006, 09:13 PM
Post #1788


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 587
Joined: 20-April 05
From: League City, Texas
Member No.: 285



QUOTE (Tesheiner @ Aug 20 2006, 09:07 AM) *
You should be quick or Oppy will run by that rock before we can locate it! biggrin.gif


At the moment, both your's and Phil's route maps suggest that Oppy is pretty-near aiming straight for Hawking rock, so it looks like we'll get to know it much better before long. The real trick will be to fix it to a nice unambiguous position on the route map, much as when we first hit Jesse Chisolm (West Hillock). Anyone know whether there is an ongoing campaign to have MGS periodically the rovers with c-proto images? It's been a long time since the last one.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
climber
post Aug 20 2006, 09:23 PM
Post #1789


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2641
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



QUOTE (algorimancer @ Aug 20 2006, 11:13 PM) *
Anyone know whether there is an ongoing campaign to have MGS periodically the rovers with c-proto images? It's been a long time since the last one.

Sorry I have no clue. I just want to remind that Doug once said that MRO's images will not surpass MGS c-proto's. So, we'd better get some more soon! In another end and IIRC, I red a long time ago that they were expecting MRO's pictures to help explore VC. Some contradictions there.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Aug 20 2006, 09:40 PM
Post #1790


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13869
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (climber @ Aug 20 2006, 10:23 PM) *
Sorry I have no clue. I just want to remind that Doug once said that MRO's images will not surpass MGS c-proto's.


Nuhhuh.....I think they will smile.gif MC doesn't think the difference will be much, but I think we'll be suprised, with twice the number of pixels on the ground downtrack, and 6 times as many across track, and a sort of 'colour' into the mix. OK - so it wont resolve 25cm/pixel (but the test images were damned impressive).....but even if it's only 50cm/pix - that's three on the ground for every CPROTO pixel.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bill Harris
post Aug 20 2006, 10:10 PM
Post #1791


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2345
Joined: 30-October 04
Member No.: 105



QUOTE
Anyone else notice that the Twin Peaks (crater rim near 100 degrees azimuth) has ceased to be visible since moving onto the Victoria ejecta?


Yes, I've noticed that things (appearances, actually) change quite rapidly on the Victoria ejecta apron. This is a major topographic feature, elevation-wise, but is very wide and smooth so you don't realize how tall it is. Beagle is sinking below the horizon, and look at the detail we're starting to see on the "Epsilon" rim.

I've not been able to guess at "Hawking Rock" on the MOC image, though.

--Bill


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gregp1962
post Aug 20 2006, 10:25 PM
Post #1792


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: 9-April 04
Member No.: 66



After only 2 days of driving since leaving Beagle, we're almost 1/4 of the way from Beagle to Victoria.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Aug 20 2006, 11:56 PM
Post #1793


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5842
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



"Phil, I notice that since entering the ejecta terrain there is a noticeable divergence between your map and Tesheiner's map"

Don't pay too much attention to exact locations - they will evolve a bit over time as we get exact distances and more looks back. I frequently go back and edit my map. I posted the big one because I've made numerous changes across the etched terrain.

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
algorimancer
post Aug 21 2006, 01:47 AM
Post #1794


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 587
Joined: 20-April 05
From: League City, Texas
Member No.: 285



Best guess at the location of Hawking Rock:

http://www.clarkandersen.com/R1500822_NWVi...mpp_Hawking.PNG
(big file, about 4.5 Megs, uncompressed)

This is a rescaled version of image R1500822 (the map projected version), scaled to 0.5 meters per pixel. It seems in reasonable agreement with the azimuths as reported by the AlgorimancerPG application.

I managed to find a single image showing Hawking from Sol 887, combined with another from Sol 904, yielding about an 80 meter baseline. Performed wide baseline photogrammetry to Hawking to yield the single-pixel hilighted positions. Results of 4 calculations are shown (single colored pixels). I would lean towards the lower two "corrected azimuth" versions (w/corrections referenced to the Twin Peaks yielding +0.33637284 azimuth degrees for Sol 887 and +0.086453315 azimuth degrees for Sol 904 (azimuth correction will be available in APG 3.3, not yet posted). I would allow a bit of leeway in the east-west dimension to allow for error in the image projection, but feel pretty confident about the north-south position (to within a few meters). Bearing in mind that illumination is from the left in this image, several features immediately east and west of the lower two pixel positions may in fact be Hawking, but for the moment I'm leaning towards the dark E-W linear feature immediately to the left (west) of the lower pixel pair, which terminates at the pixels, as Hawking + shadow. In ImageJ, with the image processed to apply a shadow illuminated from the Northwest, that feature stands out nicely.

It would be interesting to look at azimuths to Hawking from more recent Oppy positions, but for now there is some fuzziness in those positions, and no good horizon reference to calibrate the azimuth.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Aug 21 2006, 03:24 AM
Post #1795


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



After reading the planetary.org report about MER, I have found an phrase which Arvidson is saying that the MER will climb onto the annulus of Victoria and drive across the northwest portion of Victoria. That place is close to Beacon at near rim.

The extracted article.

While the discussions and debates about which direction to go and what to examine up close are ongoing, there is a general plan, Arvidson said. "Beagle crater features ejecta rays [areas of ejecta that look like rays in the orbital images], so we'll explore some of those first, then we'll climb onto the ejecta apron or annulus of Victoria and drive across toward the northwest portion of Victoria. We want to characterize the broad, dark apron [the Annulus] that extends out around the rim of Victoria, because it's very peculiar, very homogenous when seen from orbit, and we're not exactly sure what it is." Nor do they know what it will take to cross it.

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jeff7
post Aug 21 2006, 03:57 AM
Post #1796


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 477
Joined: 2-March 05
Member No.: 180



QUOTE (algorimancer @ Aug 20 2006, 09:47 PM) *
Best guess at the location of Hawking Rock:

http://www.clarkandersen.com/R1500822_NWVi...mpp_Hawking.PNG
(big file, about 4.5 Megs, uncompressed)

Just a side note, Irfanview can compress (losslessly) PNG files quite well. Get the Plugins pack and you can use PNGOut, which can really compress PNG files. I ran your file there through Irfanview with PNGOut, and it's down to 2,684,928 bytes.

And now back to your regularly scheduled thread....
smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Aug 21 2006, 04:30 AM
Post #1797


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1295
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (algorimancer @ Aug 20 2006, 02:13 PM) *
Anyone know whether there is an ongoing campaign to have MGS periodically the rovers with c-proto images?

For what purpose? We know where the rover is, and it's hard to improve on s11-471 for route planning.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Aug 21 2006, 04:34 AM
Post #1798


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1295
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (djellison @ Aug 20 2006, 02:40 PM) *
MC doesn't think the difference will be much, but I think we'll be suprised, with twice the number of pixels on the ground downtrack, and 6 times as many across track...

Not sure what people are expecting. I doubt that the rovers will be resolved as unambiguous objects. I think the images will be improved somewhat over CPROTOs. Having more coverage will be an improvement, of course. As I have said before, the real improvement is in SNR, but it's harder to judge what improved SNR will look like. There wasn't much overlap between MOC images and the HiRISE test images, so we'll have to wait some more to see.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
glennwsmith
post Aug 21 2006, 04:44 AM
Post #1799


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: 21-April 05
Member No.: 328



I'm a little late, Phil, but your composite route map is quite nice. And I can remember wondering if we'd reach Endurance Crater!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tesheiner
post Aug 21 2006, 07:13 AM
Post #1800


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4275
Joined: 19-April 05
From: .br at .es
Member No.: 253



QUOTE (algorimancer @ Aug 20 2006, 11:06 PM) *
I'm curious as to what references the two of you are using at this point to derive your positions. I'm assuming that Beagle, Epsilon, and Delta are the most obvious targets, but of course they're all a bit ambiguous from this far away, so what I'm particularly wondering is whether there's enough detail in the MGS images to identify the particular dunes visible around Oppy.


Given the absolute lack of outcrops here on the apron it's almost impossible to (at least to me) match ground vs. orbital images like while driving on the etched terrain.
For sol 912 drive there were some rocks visible on both pre-drive (sol 909 pancams) and post-drive (sol 912 navcams) images so I just calculated the driving distance using APG. For the driving heading, as "Delta" was visible on the pancams, I used something like "X degrees left of Delta".
For sol 914 drive I didn't calculate anything; just used the rover's position info obtained from the pancam data tracking. I plan to continue using it while we continue on site-id 75xx, if you know what I mean.

As I said before this approach accumulates errors so from time to time a sort of correction/adjustment should be made using a different method. Since it looks like they are heading the rover to that ramp at the end of my "hypotetical route", I'll wait until we are very near to "Epsilon" and then will try to pinpoint the rover's position using that crater as a reference. If I succeed, I'll then update previous positions (since sol 912) to match with this last measurement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

221 Pages V  « < 118 119 120 121 122 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th December 2014 - 09:00 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.