Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

Rxke · 2004-01-27 13:46:54

A little update by [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3435143.stm]BBC News:

Scientist think (cautiously) the layered slabs are sedimentary layers (!!!!)

They're very thin, so probably *not* lava flows.

Some minor power aomaly on Opportunity, probably a heater switching on...

Spirit 'recovering well' , now most likely down because of the 'data overflow' not something else...

Rxke · 2004-01-27 14:14:08

To give people a better idea of th size of the outcrops: they made an animation with the rover on top of it, one frame can be seen [http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … R1_br2.jpg]here.

(how high is the rover exactly? About 120 cm (4 feet) i thought ...

Byron · 2004-01-27 15:53:14

To give people a better idea of th size of the outcrops: they made an animation with the rover on top of it, one frame can be seen [http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … R1_br2.jpg]here.
(how high is the rover exactly? About 120 cm (4 feet) i thought ...

Wow...those rocks are MUCH smaller than I had believed. It's so hard to get a sense of scale without any familiar objects around..lol. At least there'll be no trouble of Opportunity crawling out of the "craterlet"..lol

B

Palomar · 2004-01-27 16:08:24

To give people a better idea of th size of the outcrops: they made an animation with the rover on top of it, one frame can be seen [http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … R1_br2.jpg]here.
(how high is the rover exactly? About 120 cm (4 feet) i thought ...
Wow...those rocks are MUCH smaller than I had believed. It's so hard to get a sense of scale without any familiar objects around..lol.

*No kidding! And me too, Byron.

Rik, I read (and posted waaaaay back in the original thread) that the rovers' tallest "point" is 5 feet tall. I remember because it's only 6 inches shorter than I am.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2004-01-27 16:52:16

*Adrian or Josh:

I've noticed three times now that this thread is NOT showing up when "New Posts" is clicked.

We're at nearly 290 posts in this thread. It might be time to start Spirit & Opportunity *No. 3*?

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-27 17:11:34

Hmm, it's showing up for me in New Posts, Cindy. But 'Members' also works for me (and others are claiming troubles, so maybe admins are lucky). I'll look in to it, but 20 posts ain't that far away. When I get back from letting all this new info sink in, I'm sure I'll make half of 'em! hehe, just kidding.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-27 18:38:49

Wow, that was the longest most boring Q&A session I have ever seen! Those journalists asked the same exact questions, only worded slightly different, about ten different times! Wow.

Anyway, at the beginning, Steve showed that high res (greyscale) pan others here have already posted, and he goes, "I'm going from left to right because it just gets better."

Just like I told Stu the other night, heh.

Also, it seems that the rocks are one of two types of formations, layered sedimentary, or layered volcanic ash... the former of which I think it really is.

Other than that, and the crazy journalists asking the same questions over and over, there wasn't anything new that you can't read in the text feed in my sig...

Adrian · 2004-01-27 18:44:37

I wonder, what with all of New Mars' connections, whether we could get a brief interview with a member of the NASA MER team. I know that Joel managed to interview Steve Squyres a while back and I'm sure he must remember who New Mars is. We could certainly ask them some new questions It's a thought, anyway.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-27 19:36:33

Hi Brthrjon, nice to see new contributors here! (Not that there's anything wrong with the 'old' contributors, of course! )

Thanks for bringing those whitish looking objects south-east of Opportunity to our attention. Very interesting!
The larger whitish object, on the right, definitely looks like a prominence rather than a depression, judging by the shadows around it. And it seems to have a feint whitish circle around it like a badly eroded crater wall.
I have no idea what the pale substance could be but it looks too bulky to be a layer of frost. If pressed for an off-the-cuff layman's opinion, I would hazard a guess at some kind of erosion resistant chemical compound - perhaps a salt or carbonate material. (Just supposition, of course.)

If the crater indicated with the arrow is 150 metres across, the large whitish prominence must be about 350 metres across and approximately 3 kilometres from the indicated crater.
Assuming Opportunity is actually in a crater itself, that large whitish prominence should be clearly visible when we trundle up and out onto the surrounding plain. But it may be too far for us to reach unless the solar panels stay free of dust for longer than anticipated. We live in hope!

The black and white 3-D panorama is fascinating to look at through filters; you feel like you could just walk right into the picture!
But the landscape beyond the low hills all around Opportunity (you can get a vague appreciation of it in sections of the panorama shot) looks like it consists of low undulating hills anyway. Is it possible Opportunity isn't in a crater at all, just a random depression in a sea of low undulating sand hills? Just a thought.

The rock outcrop almost at the extreme right of the panorama has what looks to me to be the most obvious layered material. I can only imagine how anxious the NASA team geologists must be to get over to that stuff and have a good look at it ... I hardly know one rock from another and I'm busting my arteries with curiosity!!
:laugh:

I can't express how happy I am with these two MER missions! What a wonderful year 2004 is.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-27 20:06:43

Hi again, Brthrjon.
I've been staring at that large whitish object again and I'm beginning to wonder about the apparent shadows near it. Just abutting the upper left side of the white material is a crescent of darkness which I assumed to be a shadowed depression. Now I'm wondering whether it could just be a stretch of darker sand containing more haematite(?)
It may be harder than it looks to judge the height of things here!
I'm afraid we'll just have to wait and see ... UNGHHH!!! ... FRUSTRATION !

Palomar · 2004-01-27 20:22:41

http://newmars.com/forums/edit.php?id=26680[http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040127/sc_nm/space_mars_dc_1]Oh damn (pardon my language)

*Rik alluded to something along this line earlier, I believe.

Opportunity is experiencing a "power drain." From the article:

"...mission controllers at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said they are now contending with a power drain on Spirit's newly arrived twin, Opportunity.

Mission manager Jim Erickson told reporters said the power loss appeared to be from one of the craft's heating units that keeps turning itself on and running overnight without receiving commands from NASA to do so.

While engineers do not believe the faulty thermostat will overheat the vehicle, the long-term consequences of the glitch and whether it can be fixed are not yet known, Erickson said."

If the rovers keep having problems, I'm going to modify my car really quick and drive over to Mars to fix the problems myself. I've got room for 3 passengers...who's going with me? :angry:

--Cindy

wgc · 2004-01-27 23:34:25

[http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … _mars_dc_1]Oh damn (pardon my language)
*Rik alluded to something along this line earlier, I believe.
Opportunity is experiencing a "power drain." From the article:
"...mission controllers at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said they are now contending with a power drain on Spirit's newly arrived twin, Opportunity.
Mission manager Jim Erickson told reporters said the power loss appeared to be from one of the craft's heating units that keeps turning itself on and running overnight without receiving commands from NASA to do so.
While engineers do not believe the faulty thermostat will overheat the vehicle, the long-term consequences of the glitch and whether it can be fixed are not yet known, Erickson said."
If the rovers keep having problems, I'm going to modify my car really quick and drive over to Mars to fix the problems myself. I've got room for 3 passengers...who's going with me? :angry:
--Cindy

15 watts, your car probably has more of a power drain, unless you are 110% up on maintenance. Actually you probably wouldn't realize it. If you did, its January you'd probably wait until July to take it to the dealer.

This over the mission lifetime could be a problem but I doubt its significant right now.

Of course the news services outside the US are making a big deal of it... it like us vs. them. This is not supposed to be a space race, I'm saddened for the loss of Beagle, that probe was uniquely designed to find edvidence of life.

Rxke · 2004-01-28 04:04:30

I don't think it's a us v. them thing... Nobody 'hates' spirit or Opportunity for being successful. It's only that a lot of newspapers think space exploration is a waste of money. I wrote a letter to one recently, of course no reply. They said it was all for show, for Bush eleection! (idiots, these rovers were planned years ago, and must be launched and landed on particular time intervals, election year has nothing to do with it...)

Anyway... I think 15 Watt *is* a lot of power... Esp compared to the total power consumption of the MER, wich isn't that big, it's all designed to be low-power, high efficiency stuff, and 15 Watts more or less is significant, esp when that gets dissipated during the night...

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-28 04:13:20

I think this is the news media overblowing things. Spirit was clearly in bad shape, but a power drain on a rover we can actually talk to and get responses from is nothing compared to the total inablity to get a response as with Spirit.

And since it's only on when it's cold enough, things aren't that bad, from Erickson (got this from my text feed): "It's not on continuously, let me make sure that is clear. It is only when the thermostat brings it on during the cold period of the day. We use it to keep the rover's shoulder mechanism warm enough to operate correctly. Apparently it is going to be warm enough to operate correctly whether we want it to be operated or not!"

So, I personally do not think it's an issue, as the drain is probably within the limits of average drains on Opportunity.

Rxke · 2004-01-28 05:16:24

Sure, it's nothing compared to a 'major breakdown' but still it's something that deeds to be aadressed, if only to make sure it will work longer than 90 days (wich by now, we're all counting on, no?)

But you're right, this is not headline worthy stuff, but then again, all publicity is good publicity, remind the public 'we' are there, and maybe even more important: that 'we' are capable of doing minor repairs, etc...

(but not too much, or everybody starts yelling we don't need no people on Mars, ever...)

Zardor · 2004-01-28 05:40:41

I would think that a 15 watt drain is *very* serious. I believe that the rover's solar panels are supposed to generate 750watt-hours per day (at the start of the mission. This will decrease over time due to dust of course)
Also, Sprit was generating less than that at the start if its mission, due to the atmosphere being more dusty. I don't know the figures for Opportunity, since Nasa prefers to give us pretty pictures instead of telemetery.

Anyway, if we assume that the 15watt thermostatically controlled heater is on half the time (12 hours, at night when it's coldest), thats a daily power requirment of 12*15, i.e 180watt-hours. That's 25% of the power budget, not allowing for charge/discharge losses in the batteries.

This will get much worse, as the solar illumination decreases, the panels get dusty, the batteries age, and average temperatures drop due to seasonal changes on Mars.

Still, 15watts seems quite large for a simple joint heater. Perhaps that figure is not accurate, or the units given are wrong (i.e. 15watt-hours instead of watts?)

Anyone got more information on this issue?

Rxke · 2004-01-28 06:26:20

Hi, Zardor.

Yup, that was why i said it was significant. But i'm sure they'll be able to find a way to switch it off, when not using the arm.

Glad you came up with some numbers, i only found 65 Watts... But what's that mean? Watts/hour? (probably, since 65*12 is 780 W/h... close to yuor number)

I think that 15 Watt is the correct number, but the heater circuit staying on all night is almost certainly an anomaly, the joint is not a critical piece of hardware when not in use, i'd think.
I'm particulary concerned what this will do to the batteries, their charging/decharging behaviour in the long run...

But again, they will almost certainly come up with a softwarepatch...

remcook · 2004-01-28 07:11:59

Watt-hour is a measure of energy. It is also used here in the Netherlands for your electricity bill (kWh = kiloWatthour = 1000 Watthour). I suspect also in Belgium.

Watt is a measure of power.

Rxke · 2004-01-28 07:53:56

Heh; me and my crummy "Engrish" again! I do know that (have experience/education with electricity/electronics.)

It was just trying to state that reading 'Rover uses 65 Watt' didn't make things clear for me: was it 65 Watt/ hour or all day or while active etc....

My apologies for the confusion... Again.

For the non-electricians aboard: When for instance, a lightbulb says: 60 Watt, that means you're going to be billed 60 Watts per hour, for that's what it 'consumes' in one hour.

Arccos · 2004-01-28 08:29:58

60W on a light bulb means, that this bulb consumes 60Wh [Watt-hour] per hour.

Rxke · 2004-01-28 08:36:33

Yes!

(I really AM worthless trying to make things clear)

Nice article: [http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-mers-04zr.html]there's hematite in them... plains (Spacedaily)

Palomar · 2004-01-28 09:17:02

[=http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/spirit_apollo_040128.html]Apollo 1 Astronauts Honored at Gusev Crater

*"PASADENA, Calif. -- NASA has memorialized the Apollo 1 crew -- Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee -- by dedicating the hills surrounding the Mars Exploration Rover (MER) Spirit's landing site in Gusev Crater to the late astronauts..."

Wonderful.

--Cindy

::EDIT::

[http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=v_gusev_apollo_02.jpg&cap=Locations%20in%20relation%20to%20Mars%20Rover%20Spirit's%20landing%20site%20of%20the%20hills%20NASA%20has%20chosen%20to%20memorialize%20the%20Apollo%201%20crew%20--%20Gus%20Grissom,%20Ed%20White%20and%20Roger%20Chaffee.]Map

brthrjon · 2004-01-28 09:27:54

We'll Rik, looks like astrobio was a little premature in their location estimate, I think those features will be somewhat farther away than we imagined....

"Astrobiology is wrong. The blue arrow in their image is pointing, not at the 150 meter crater in the DIMES image, but at a much larger, possibly as wide as 250 meters, crater that sits more than 10 kilometers too far to the east."

You can get more info at
[http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa]http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa

On another note, one thing that no one has mentioned, i suppose because it might be a bit far fetched, is this. When I think of sediments here on earth I think of fossils. If we're really looking at sediments created by water, and if there was some sort of signifigant life forms, we should see fossils in the sediments. I think if we don't see any, this says something.

Rxke · 2004-01-28 09:36:22

Great weblog!

Thanks for pointing that out!

remcook · 2004-01-28 12:17:02

cool panorama

[http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … B004R1.jpg]http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery....4R1.jpg

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#276 2004-01-27 13:46:54

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#277 2004-01-27 14:14:08

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#278 2004-01-27 15:53:14

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#279 2004-01-27 16:08:24

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#280 2004-01-27 16:52:16

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#281 2004-01-27 17:11:34

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#282 2004-01-27 18:38:49

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#283 2004-01-27 18:44:37

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#284 2004-01-27 19:36:33

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#285 2004-01-27 20:06:43

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#286 2004-01-27 20:22:41

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#287 2004-01-27 23:34:25

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#288 2004-01-28 04:04:30

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#289 2004-01-28 04:13:20

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#290 2004-01-28 05:16:24

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#291 2004-01-28 05:40:41

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#292 2004-01-28 06:26:20

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#293 2004-01-28 07:11:59

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#294 2004-01-28 07:53:56

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#295 2004-01-28 08:29:58

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#296 2004-01-28 08:36:33

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#297 2004-01-28 09:17:02

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#298 2004-01-28 09:27:54

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#299 2004-01-28 09:36:22

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

#300 2004-01-28 12:17:02

Re: Spirit & Opportunity 2 - Continued from original thread

Board footer