Spirit & Opportunity

Rxke · 2004-01-06 16:04:49

Someone mirrored it on slashdot.... you could try there

link to the nice guy, decide for yourself...here

edit, i checked the pic, it's a clean 8Mb version (remember, this is Slashdot, they sometimes lure people to very disturbing pictures), coming in at 110kb/sec, get it while it's up! (wich won't be long, once this is modded up at +5 informative...

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-06 16:20:21

Thanks for the link Rxke, I'm sure the others will appreciate it. Stu, if you need it, I can always host it on my computer and let you download, same goes to anyone, really, just let me know. It's really a stunning picture.

BTW, the original large image was 8MB, not sure about a 40Mb version (40 megabits = 5 megabytes).

And also, when I was talking about Elvis, I naturally meant rocks that might be shaped like elvis or other characters. Linclon is a common one, too. You see him in potatochips all the time.

Stu · 2004-01-06 16:47:29

Stu, if you need it, I can always host it on my computer and let you download, same goes to anyone, really, just let me know. It's really a stunning picture.
BTW, the original large image was 8MB, not sure about a 40Mb version (40 megabits = 5 megabytes).

Thanks :-) I actually got the 8Mb version... spectacular... but I am sure there was another version available, a link to a 40Mb one directly below the 8Mb one. Maybe it was a mistake on the website... or maybe I haven't recovered from the weekend's sleep deprivation yet!

S

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-06 17:07:34

Oddest thing, my cache mysteryiously cleared itself... I was going to go check and see if you were remembering correctly. I think you might be correct (because I recall at the conference they said the image was larger than the 3.8K*3.8K image we have; something like 12K*whatever), but I coulda swore I linked, and downloaded, the large image originally.

I hope you're right though. I would love to get my hands on a 40MB image like that. BTW, the image we are looking at is 64Mb (megabits), and it took pretty much two passes to get down the pipe!

jadeheart · 2004-01-06 19:01:01

Mission scientists said an anomaly in the operation of this so-called "high gain antenna" has so-far prevented them from using it to transmit large volumes of data. A special team has formed to investigate the problem.

has anybody heard anything more about this? saw it in cnn's latest MER story. i was wondering why the data downloading was taking longer than they initially projected.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-06 19:51:10

This is regarding, specifically, the anomaly where the high gain antenna caused an energy spike while being moved during the deployeement stage. They did some tests on it and are attempting to make sure those energy spikes are not due to something stuck in the gears or a broken joint or what. This is just them being very very very careful. And by very careful, I mean that they seriously are not doing anything without going over it twice and twice again. This is precisely why they are successful; they are not taking any risks.

Doing some math, under the best possible conditions, they would be able to get about 16 megabytes down a day via the high gain antenna alone (mind you, it's direct to earth-only). That's very good, considering that with the orbiters they get under half that. Of course, with the orbiters, they use the UHF antenna, and they don't have to expend as much energy (eight minutes of transmission at a go, vs. the 3 hours required for optimal high gain transmission, a probably unlikely scenario, but then again, these guys have been way lucky so far). With the high gain they have to use a bit more energy than they might want to use. Especially with the lower than optimal charge on the rover.

In a way, this is working out alright. They wouldn't want to be using the high gain antenna constantly since they have the heating problem, and once they get off the lander, the heating problem should go away, or at least, be less of an issue, so by then it may be good to use the high gain antenna.

But again, these are all optimal conditions, and though the high gain antenna has shown to work perfectly each go (I think they've used it three times already, each successfully, with good links), it seems to me that the Odyssey and MGS passes are far more reliable simply because targeting is unnecessary.

They're just playing it safe. And personally, I don't think there's a big of a concern that CNN might be suggesting here. This is certainly nothing like the Galileo probe and his antenna problems. Our high gain works; just not perfectly, and these guys are being rather meticulous. They've been practicing for three years, they aren't going to simply stop practicing because of an energy spike that may or may not be bad.

In a way they might even be exaggerating the urgency of it, simply because everything is going so perfectly, they have to find something wrong. (Totally serious with this observation.)

Palomar · 2004-01-06 20:21:26

*Don't know if this is "new" news to anyone else, but earlier today I read (for the first time that I recall) at Yahoo! News that the camera on Spirit will be 5 feet high when Spirit begins to roll out onto Marsian ground...they mentioned that's somewhat comparable to "average" (?) human height. I didn't realize it would have that high of a vantage point (I'm 5' 6"...). She's definitely not going to be hugging the ground, as it were.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-06 20:39:53

A cute thing occured in the press conference yesterday. One of the journalists specifically asked how much of a vantage change could you expect from the rover standing up, and Steve Squyers stood up, almost all the way, but not quite, looked around, and laughed. It was quite charming. So, yeah, I did the same thing, too, just to get an idea.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-06 21:46:17

The link I made earlier is now active, only it's not a press release about the images, it's a press release about how many hits the site recieved, and how much data was transferred.

No wonder the NASA TV stream was at a craw on the landing day, over 48 thousand people were watching at the same time (just a mind boggling number to me, I didn't think streaming technology was that good).

I can't believe the stats, though, I'll let you follow the link rather than paste them here.

BTW, Stu, I found the 40 megabyte image you were talking about! The thing is, I find that .tiff and .jepg at these levels are pixel identical (although don't hold me on that), and I find it quite hard to believe that they actually downloaded a 40 megabyte .tiff from the rover (indeed, they did say it was compressed 24 to 1). The most likely situation is that they put it in .tiff format for research purposes. .tiff is a container format more or less, not so much a compresion format, so it's good for those who want to be sure the image is processed easier and in an archivable condition. It would be trivial to convert the (8 MB) .jpeg into a bit identical .tiff. I'll try that, actually. But I'm giving you the link now so you can check it out in the meantime.

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalo … r=pia04995

Someone forgot to take down an image, mwah! (Actually, it's just likely that since the jpl site isn't getting nearly as many hits as the marsrover site, they're just leaving it up.)

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-06 22:35:27

Couldn't create a bit-perfect file, but doing basic pixel comparasions shows quite a bit of difference. My eye isn't as discerning as I once thought it was! The .tiff is probably a composite of all the compressed images, but since it's uncompressed, it's still rather large (the .jpg being, of course, a compression of the .tiff file, which actually makes sense in retrospect, though I was assuming they'd actually combined and sent the composite from the rover thus making it a true "one picture"). The image difference is very very neglegible at best, though, I mean, it took me actually comparing pixel values to tell the difference between some pixels!

I think I understand more why they saved it in and made it availalbe in .tiff format, now. Though I'm at a loss as to why they didn't do simple zip compression on it. It'd be half its size... and still be a valid .tiff file. Ahh well. I would prefer the raw compressed files (which were combined to make the full file) to the .tiff file they make available for printing, etc.

Stu · 2004-01-06 23:26:54

BTW, Stu, I found the 40 megabyte image you were talking about! The thing is, I find that .tiff and .jepg at these levels are pixel identical (although don't hold me on that), and I find it quite hard to believe that they actually downloaded a 40 megabyte .tiff from the rover (indeed, they did say it was compressed 24 to 1). The most likely situation is that they put it in .tiff format for research purposes. .tiff is a container format more or less, not so much a compresion format, so it's good for those who want to be sure the image is processed easier and in an archivable condition. It would be trivial to convert the (8 MB) .jpeg into a bit identical .tiff. I'll try that, actually. But I'm giving you the link now so you can check it out in the meantime.

Thanks Josh, appreciate that. I'll give it a peek later. Another work day beckons for me here.

Crunch Day #1 for Beagle today... Mars Express pass is due for 12.15 UT, with results expected around 15.00 UT. I'd convert those times into US times but haven't had any coffee yet, sorry.

Still stunned about that picture... :-)

S

Rxke · 2004-01-07 00:10:34

Stu, you're up awfully early! i thought i got up early, but you beat me by at least half an hour! (so i understand your drowsyness..)

Aargh... a full day in the labyrinth of some computer-less museum, today...

BTW that Slashdot article... already some people found 'geometrical patterns' in the rocks, the dust-wakes...

Unbelievable.

another BTW: who'd ever have thought a rover would get too HOT on Mars??? Well better that than too cold, i guess.

Arccos · 2004-01-07 06:46:21

MERs are able to go up to 40m per day. So, considering 90 days of operations, they can reach more than 3.5km from the landing site. But they won't go straight. They will traverse from rock to rock instead.
What do you think - how far can Spirit get from the landing site?
To be honest: I would like Spirit to reach the mountains on the southeast (not their tops or slopes of course). That would provide us with really spectacullar views! Alas, I know it's a wishfull thinking...

Mark · 2004-01-07 06:49:03

Just curious, what happens after the 90 days of operations, they cease to function or await further instructions/commands?

Arccos · 2004-01-07 07:07:53

I think that they won't stop operations. 90 days is only estimated lifetime of MERs. Because of decreasing power from solar panels and because of inconvenient position of Mars to Sun (control room will not be able to communicate with MERs at that time). After that the connection may reestablish, but MERs probably won't survive so long.

eeeh... sorry for my English, I speak like a bushman

Byron · 2004-01-07 07:11:52

Just curious, what happens after the 90 days of operations, they cease to function or await further instructions/commands?

I believe the 90 days is the minimum mission length...there's a very good chance that the rover will be able to operate far longer than that...let's hope so anyhow!

I'm curious about how far the rover will make it from the lander as well....it won't go very far in the first few weeks, but once the key mission objectives have been fulfilled, I imagine they'll be much more bold with the rover and drive it towards that alluring horizon. I'd be disappointed if they don't drive it at least a kilometer away before it goes cold...

Does anyone have any idea of how far away the horizon is in the first PanCam? It's no more than a kilometer or two, I imagine, even though it's almost impossible to judge scale and distance in that photo.

Can't WAIT until the rover rolls off next week...that's going to be so much fun

B

Arccos · 2004-01-07 07:23:48

That's also my opinion.

According to my (very humble) estimation, the mountains should not be farther than 3 or 4 km. Since their tops are visible, the horizont must be much closer, probably not more than 1 km.

Palomar · 2004-01-07 08:25:48

Does anyone have any idea of how far away the horizon is in the first PanCam? It's no more than a kilometer or two, I imagine, even though it's almost impossible to judge scale and distance in that photo.

*I just saw an interview Charlie Gibson of "Good Morning America" did with an astrophysicist named Tyson (last name; I can't recall his full name because I just woke up). Mr. Gibson asked that question, as they were looking at yesterday's "postcard" on a big screen. Mr. Tyson said the horizon is about 20 km away, give or take a few km. (If I recall correctly, Gustev Crater is approximately 100 km wide...)

I can't wait for it to start rolling either!

Mr. Tyson also said the largest boulders you see in that photo are roughly the size of a small car. But most are cobblestone in size, fist-sized, etc.

--Cindy

Arccos · 2004-01-07 08:39:17

Yes, but horizont toward the mountains must be closer. The mountains are about 3 or 4 km far.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-07 11:04:17

The conference is on now! Sorry for not giving a 30 minute heads up!

Stu · 2004-01-07 12:15:03

Watched first half of conference before I had to log-off to do a couple of radio things, but some interesting info, and the new 3D hi-res pic is very intriguing! No sign of it appearing on any sites yet, slower than yesterday. Wanna see it... got my 3D glasses here ready too! :-(

S

Rxke · 2004-01-07 12:23:41

just came home in time to catch the last three questions from the press... What's the news?

Stu · 2004-01-07 12:23:54

Ah, found one...

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/mer2004....yph.jpg

S

Rxke · 2004-01-07 12:33:08

oh boy... that's *so* reminiscent of my eght hours of hard work at the museum of photography, today....

(laughs himself silly)

Stu · 2004-01-07 12:38:28

just came home in time to catch the last three questions from the press... What's the news?

Well, as far as the first half went, it was a bit light on news I thought... more of a "steady as she goes" update. Concern over the high gain antenna seems to be waning... everyone is delighted with the cameras' performance... NASA is staggered by the demand for images online... they were pleased to be able to honour the Columbia crew by placing the plaque on the rear of the HGA...

The main item I heard concerned the airbag obstructing the ramp. Yesterday's efforts to drag it back in succeeded in part, but there is still some material in the way, causing concerns that it might hit the rover's solar arrays if it isn't removed, so the plan today is to try a "lift and tuck" manouvre - they'll lift up that petal of the lander, then try to drag the bag back in, then lower the petal again, squishing down the bag in the process. Updates to follow, with images, later in the day, after Spirit has woken up.

As far as images are concerned, they hope to have a full, hi-res panorama by week's end, and today's grand unveiling was of a hi-res 3D anaglyph image of part of the panorama, which you can access at the link I posted above. Again, like yesterday's image, it shows amazing detail, including some rocks perched on what appears to be the rim of a ledge, beyond which is a drop to a lower-lying part of the landing site.

The nature of the landing site was also discussed - is it a lake bed? is it a flood plain? The rocks seen so far make it hard to conclude which. Some people think the rocks are mostly old, volcanic bedrock, excavated from beneath the surface by impacts. Others think they're rocks brought into Gusev by flood waters or river flow.

One thing was very obvious - the science team are DESPERATE to get off the lander and start driving around! Me too! :-)

Can anyone fill us in on the content of the second half of the conference..?

S

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#176 2004-01-06 16:04:49

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#177 2004-01-06 16:20:21

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#178 2004-01-06 16:47:29

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#179 2004-01-06 17:07:34

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#180 2004-01-06 19:01:01

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#181 2004-01-06 19:51:10

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#182 2004-01-06 20:21:26

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#183 2004-01-06 20:39:53

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#184 2004-01-06 21:46:17

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#185 2004-01-06 22:35:27

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#186 2004-01-06 23:26:54

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#187 2004-01-07 00:10:34

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#188 2004-01-07 06:46:21

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#189 2004-01-07 06:49:03

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#190 2004-01-07 07:07:53

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#191 2004-01-07 07:11:52

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#192 2004-01-07 07:23:48

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#193 2004-01-07 08:25:48

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#194 2004-01-07 08:39:17

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#195 2004-01-07 11:04:17

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#196 2004-01-07 12:15:03

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#197 2004-01-07 12:23:41

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#198 2004-01-07 12:23:54

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#199 2004-01-07 12:33:08

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

#200 2004-01-07 12:38:28

Re: Spirit & Opportunity

Board footer