IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
InSight mission
hendric
post Jan 9 2012, 07:40 PM
Post #16


Director of Galilean Photography
***

Group: Members
Posts: 710
Joined: 15-July 04
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 93



I think they're some work you can do with direct vs reflected signals to determine distance and range. Also, P and S waves travel at different velocities, assuming their seismograph is sensitive enough, they could roughly determine distance that way. This would, however, not let them determine depth of the hypocenter, unless there's some other aspect they can model.

It really is a shame this will probably be a one-off. Too bad a pair of DS2 seismographs couldn't be dropped off the deck as is falls, even if they land just a few km away they could help with triangulation.

#include <doug_rant_on_tradeoffs.h>



--------------------
Space Enthusiast Richard Hendricks
--
"The engineers, as usual, made a tremendous fuss. Again as usual, they did the job in half the time they had dismissed as being absolutely impossible." --Rescue Party, Arthur C Clarke
Mother Nature is the final inspector of all quality.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ElkGroveDan
post Jan 9 2012, 08:50 PM
Post #17


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4657
Joined: 15-March 05
From: Sloughhouse, CA
Member No.: 197



QUOTE (Greg Hullender @ Jan 8 2012, 10:59 AM) *
Without location, you don't really have magnitude, do you?

Actually you do. Because earthquakes generate three distinct types of waves that travel at different rates a lone seismometer can be used to calculate absolute distance to the focus (or center) of the event and magnitude as well. The only problem is direction. However if you have TWO sufficiently sensitive devices you can calculate the location by first identifying the two intersecting nodes, and then using secondary reflected events to isolate one of the two nodes as the event location. In fact the Viking landers had seismometers for this very purpose, however one of them malfunctioned (forget which right now).


--------------------
If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewjack
post Jan 9 2012, 09:25 PM
Post #18


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 252
Joined: 5-May 05
From: Mississippi (USA)
Member No.: 379



Warning I am not a geologist.

My impression, when I read a short explanation of the mission, was that they were only trying to measure the planets seismic energy. You don't need direction and maybe not even distance for that. Mars doesn't have plate tectonics, as far as I have heard, and I guess the level of seismic energy will say something about the planets core.

Jack
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
antipode
post Jan 10 2012, 02:44 AM
Post #19


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 147
Joined: 1-October 06
Member No.: 1206



QUOTE
Too bad a pair of DS2 seismographs couldn't be dropped off the deck as is falls


Exactly what I was thinking! Its too bad that penetrator technology seems to have gone nowhere since then, and Im not just talking about for Mars.

Still, here we all are musing about bolting stuff onto a Discovery class proposal, stuff that wouldnt make it a Discovery class proposal any more. That cap is why I love TiME so much, assuming they CAN actually fly the thing under the cap...

P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PaulM
post Jan 10 2012, 03:34 PM
Post #20


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 165
Joined: 15-August 07
From: Shrewsbury, Shropshire
Member No.: 3233



I assume that there is a mission assumption is that the solar panels will continue to suppy power for much more than 90 days. I understand that the Pathfinder lander only lasted 90 days because of a complete lack of cleaning winds. The question that I want to ask is how common are cleaning winds on Mars? Perhaps the only safe landing site for the InSight mission is the Opportunity landing elipse? At least there cleaning winds are guaranteed.

I also wonder how much of its potential payload mass this mission is using? Would it really cost anything for the odd Phoenix instrument to be reflown? I would like to see Lidar reflown to a landing site where it could operate for longer than a very limited 150 days.

Obviously the most important missing instrument is a camera to scan the horizon. Would a pair of black and white Navcams cost much to fly? I guess that Navcams are two a penny given the number of spare Navcams that are flying on MSL.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Drkskywxlt
post Jan 10 2012, 03:42 PM
Post #21


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 287
Joined: 29-August 06
From: Columbia, MD
Member No.: 1083



I'm guessing the mission is more cost-limited than mass-limited. To fit the Discovery cost cap, they can't fly any more instruments. Even if an instrument was donated by a foreign agency or NASA wanted to fly a camera for purely PR purposes, there are mission financial costs associated with that that could be counted against InSight's cost cap.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Jan 10 2012, 03:42 PM
Post #22


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13708
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (PaulM @ Jan 10 2012, 07:34 AM) *
. I understand that the Pathfinder lander only lasted 90 days because of a complete lack of cleaning winds.


No- the battery died. It was a silver-zinc battery, and couldn't withstand the manifold charging cycles that more recent technologies can.
Estimate were between 30 and 100 recharges would be the end of it. It lasted 83 sols (not 90)
Thereafter, the lander couldn't keep itself warm at night, and presumed failures of other components quickly followed.

The Level 1 requirement was a month.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Mar 23 2012, 01:06 PM
Post #23


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5556
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



A few new details about the mission, from Bruce Banerdt at LPSC.

The spacecraft carries a MER hazcam (maybe 2) fixed on the body to give an overview of the instrument deployment area, and a MER navcam (or a pair, more likely) on the arm elbow area for detailed instrument deployment coverage. After instrument deployment, but during the first 60 days, they will use the navcam(s) to do a full panorama and other things like change detection (which might include clouds, dust devils etc.) . Then they go to reduced operations for the rest of the mission, only monitoring the instruments.

Phil



--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vikingmars
post Mar 28 2012, 11:03 AM
Post #24


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 593
Joined: 19-February 05
From: France, close to Paris & Meudon Observatory
Member No.: 172



QUOTE (PaulM @ Jan 10 2012, 04:34 PM) *
I understand that the Pathfinder lander only lasted 90 days because of a complete lack of cleaning winds.

Well. No : mainly because of a main battery failure which changed the time set on the onboard clock... No more energy storage + no more onboard time = no more tasks doable in a proper order = end of telecoms = end of mission !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MERovingian
post Aug 20 2012, 07:01 PM
Post #25


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 14-January 07
From: France
Member No.: 1602



Happy Day!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hea...1e9c_story.html


Bravo JPL! cool.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hungry4info
post Aug 20 2012, 07:18 PM
Post #26


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1006
Joined: 26-July 08
Member No.: 4270



Awesome! Mars! I can't remember the last time we landed there!


--------------------
-- Hungry4info (Sirius_Alpha)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Aug 20 2012, 07:55 PM
Post #27


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5556
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



Good one, Hungry! I would have liked any of them but I'm especially interested in this one.

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Aug 20 2012, 08:41 PM
Post #28


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43 35' 53" N 1 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



press release New NASA Mission to Take First Look Deep Inside Mars


--------------------
I'm one of the most durable and fervent advocates of space exploration, but my take is that we could do it robotically at far less cost and far greater quantity and quality of results.

James Van Allen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Aug 20 2012, 09:24 PM
Post #29


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43 35' 53" N 1 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



interesting... the German heat probe "mole" will be based on Beagle 2's PLUTO mole
http://www.dlr.de/irs/en/desktopdefault.as...970_read-25032/


--------------------
I'm one of the most durable and fervent advocates of space exploration, but my take is that we could do it robotically at far less cost and far greater quantity and quality of results.

James Van Allen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Aug 20 2012, 09:26 PM
Post #30


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13708
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



That's cool - PLUTO was an awesome and cunning little piece of kit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st July 2014 - 09:39 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.