IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

35 Pages V  « < 26 27 28 29 30 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
MSL at Rocknest, First scoop samples - sols 57-101
Reed
post Nov 6 2012, 09:03 PM
Post #406


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 17-May 08
Member No.: 4114



QUOTE (elakdawalla @ Nov 6 2012, 12:04 PM) *
I wonder if one aspect of this is going to be representative of the rest of the mission: that if they decide a site is worth SAMming, we should settle down for a long wait of several weeks or even a month.

Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I thought the initial plan called for the first SAM sample within days of the first ChemMin run. This suggests there might have been some 'funnies' in SAM commissioning. Wouldn't be surprising for such a complex instrument, and if so, I'd expect things to go a lot quicker for the later runs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Nov 6 2012, 09:56 PM
Post #407


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13849
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Reed @ Nov 6 2012, 01:03 PM) *
Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I thought the initial plan called for the first SAM sample within days of the first ChemMin run.


We are within days of the first ChemMin run.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Reed
post Nov 6 2012, 11:03 PM
Post #408


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 17-May 08
Member No.: 4114



The first run of Chemin was finished by sol 73: http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/news/category...f-chemin-online I guess you can call any period of time "within days" but most of us would call that weeks. The telecon discussing Chemin results was a week ago, and covered two sample deliveries.

I'm pretty sure the telecon prior to the start scooping sketched out a somewhat shorter timeline. IIRC, at the time it was suggested the second delivery would go to both SAM and Chemin, within a few of sols of the first Chemin run. In the end, it went to Chemin only.

None of this is a big deal. I'm not complaining, or saying the team mislead us. These things are uncertain and the team are always good about making it clear any future schedule is tentative. All I'm saying is that the timeline appears to have been slightly behind what was outlined at the start, and that might suggest some teething issues.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Nov 6 2012, 11:31 PM
Post #409


Bloggette par Excellence
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4503
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



...and although I am complaining, I am not criticizing the team. I'm sure they're doing what needs to be done. Meanwhile, I'm heartened by the following:
QUOTE ('Vandi Tompkins')
On sol 90, a marvelous dry run of our mechanism-SAM sample co-ordination dance and contact science in mahli images!


--------------------
My blog - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zelenyikot
post Nov 7 2012, 04:28 AM
Post #410


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 23-October 12
From: Russia
Member No.: 6725



It was funny.
MR - sol 59 , ChemCam - sols 57, 77, 82, 84

The line in the middle - from the laser.

Big size 3234x1500 (1mb)
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
 


--------------------
Curiosity on Russian: Livejournal, Twitter, vk.com
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CosmicRocker
post Nov 7 2012, 05:39 AM
Post #411


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2223
Joined: 1-December 04
From: Marble Falls, Texas, USA
Member No.: 116



Very interesting...These tapering vugs are apparently not vacancies left behind by eroded crystals as Opportunity found at Meridiani, or are they?

Nice work. smile.gif


--------------------
...Tom
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Nov 7 2012, 06:54 AM
Post #412


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13849
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



First time use of two astonishingly complex lab instruments was always going to take a while. I'm fairly sure we'll have dozens upon dozens of instances in 2013 when we're wishing they would put the brakes on
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zelenyikot
post Nov 7 2012, 08:42 AM
Post #413


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 23-October 12
From: Russia
Member No.: 6725



Sol 90 Same stone.

Seems rover moved.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 


--------------------
Curiosity on Russian: Livejournal, Twitter, vk.com
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Nov 7 2012, 02:19 PM
Post #414


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3291
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



What makes you say she moved? There are no post-drive hazcams.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mhoward
post Nov 7 2012, 02:31 PM
Post #415


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3420
Joined: 11-August 04
From: USA
Member No.: 98



She hasn't moved. The engineering rawids have something akin to a site/drive counter that has proven reliable. (So far.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zelenyikot
post Nov 7 2012, 02:56 PM
Post #416


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 23-October 12
From: Russia
Member No.: 6725



Between sol 84 and sol 90 the angle of a view of this rock changed.

Sol 59-84


Sol 89


--------------------
Curiosity on Russian: Livejournal, Twitter, vk.com
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mhoward
post Nov 7 2012, 03:41 PM
Post #417


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3420
Joined: 11-August 04
From: USA
Member No.: 98



Doesn't even look like the same rock to me. I guess it could be. But your first image appears to be from sol 59 - about two hours before the last small drive.

Identifying the site can be tricky since the science images don't have it in the rawid. I have to first put together a list of all of the images, sort them by time pulled off the web site, then keep track of the 'site/drive' (or whatever they're calling it for MSL) from the engineering rawids while going through the list. (I think I'm doing that now because sol 59 tricked me earlier, actually.)

Great colorizations earlier.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Nov 7 2012, 03:51 PM
Post #418


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3291
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



Way cooler than having your name etched on a microchip on Mars is having your actual handwriting on Mars:
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/ms...0000E1_DXXX.jpg
laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zelenyikot
post Nov 7 2012, 03:55 PM
Post #419


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 23-October 12
From: Russia
Member No.: 6725



QUOTE (mhoward @ Nov 7 2012, 03:41 PM) *
Doesn't even look like the same rock to me.

Great colorizations earlier.


Believe, while I did this image on post #411 I almost became related with it. It is the same stone.

Thanks

QUOTE (mhoward @ Nov 7 2012, 03:41 PM) *
But your first image appears to be from sol 59 - about two hours before the last small drive.

Yes, from the moment of this Mast Cam image (sol 59) the rover moved but is insignificant.

Shot on sol 84 under the same angle after small drive.

And it essentially changed for the sol 86-90

Though you are right on Haz cam it is not visible movements. But it is obviously same rock.
sol 59 sol 86 and sol 89

I can assume that the rover moved and returned into place.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image

 


--------------------
Curiosity on Russian: Livejournal, Twitter, vk.com
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Nov 7 2012, 08:22 PM
Post #420


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3291
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



You can see how far she drove on sol 59 in Phil's latest map. It was far enough to change the view of the rock from that of your sol59 to your sol86 images.

Why do you say she returned? Your sol 59 image (before the drive) shows one view, then the later images (86 and 89) both show the same view, which is different from the sol 59 view.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

35 Pages V  « < 26 27 28 29 30 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st November 2014 - 05:54 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.