International Lunar Decade and all that. This is what I've found out from half an hour of Googling.

It'd be nice to fill it out significantly with more details stats, perhaps a coverage ( or expected coverage ) %'ge value, and some older spacecraft (Clementine for example)

Give me the raw figures, I'll plug them in, then think of a means to display them

Doug

Yes - that's going to be very useful.

I think coverage is the next big issue. For instance, LRO high resolution will be like MOC, a very small percentage of the surface in exquisite detail. If you look at Chandrayaan's terrain camera, 5 m/pixel will be a lot of pixels if global coverage is obtained. Will they have the downlink capability? I don't think that is expected.

Incidentally, a set of nine international calibration targets have been chosen so all these instruments will look at the same places for calibration and comparison purposes.

Phil

The Apollo 11 landing site?

*ducks*

www.planetology.ru/txt/pieters_et_al_20070831_15301.doc

Nyet! But Apollo 15 and 16, yes.

Phil

I'm sure Emily did an amazing comparative diagram for all the Mars instruments - but now I can't find it.

Doug

I remember that. It should be in her weblog archive around the time MRO arrived. It was excellent.

Ahh - got it !

http://www.planetary.org/blog/article/00000205/

Just to repeat - if you know of any blanks ( or any restrospective imaging instruments ) that can be filled in - post them and I'll add them

Doug

Doug, there is some surprisingly detailed information about Clementine's science instruments in Wikipedia.
Yes, I know, it's not the most reliable source in web, but it's better than nothing...

Mps

Glad the diagrams were useful Once you've assembled your info, Doug, I can make another one of those for the Moon.

I agree it's useful to have some info on what fractional area of the planet will be covered. I could add little pie charts on my diagrams to indicate that.

--Emily

Minor change, but your table says 3 UV bands and 4 vis/IR bands for LROC WAC. I'd have said 2 UV bands and 5 vis/IR bands, because we consider the blue band to be a visible band. At least, that's how I implemented it in the firmware, so if somebody wants it different they need to tell me.

Thanks for that Mike - not sure where I got that figure from - I do remember umming and arrring over it for some reason.

Can we consider the cameras & other instruments onboard the SM from Apollo 15 to 17 ? Also their sub-sattelites ?

If you can give me res and coverage....do it. The only thing I'd not like is the Rangers - who go from a res of about a squillion m/pixel to a squillionth of an m/pixel. I don't think the Apollo Sub-Sat in A15 and 16 carried cameras thoough.



Doug