41–50 of 89 posts
I would like to see this result in a frustrated James Cameron building his own Mars probe for filmmaking
I think the explanation is satisfactory, but how often, if at all, do other components of such projects change, up until lift off? I imagine engines and other propulsion parts won't be upgraded much after the original spec, even if such components even remotely followed the same curve of improvement as digital chips do. But what about other types of sensors used by the rover? What is the most recent piece of tech use…
Getting a camera there is far more important than its spec sheet, and given that the lifetime of nuclear powered instruments can exceed 30 years (e.g. Pioneer and Voyeger) any over-achieving mission is going to be dependent on obsolescent hardware for a very long time. When Curiosity was developed, the choice of a four megapixel camera would still be quaint by today's consumer expectations.
It would be neat if one day they send rovers in modules - one nuclear power supply to last dozens if not a hundred years, then a mini-robot sent to replace the modular camera with a 15MP one after they upgrade the bandwidth from 2mpbs to 10mbps and then one day 100mbps. That 15-30 minute pingtime is a problem that cannot be overcome unless they find a faster than light wave that can be used for transmission - or a wa…
The mast camera is actually two cameras with zoom of each camera fixed at two different values: http://msl-scicorner.jpl.nasa.gov/Instruments/Mastcam/ James Cameron lobbied to make zoom lenes for the cameras so they could be set at the same zoom level to create stereo pairs for 3D images. JPL had "problems designing the lens without using wet lubricants which would require battery-sapping heating" Difficult trade-off…
Likewise, there are no camera shops on Mars.
I would like to see this result in a frustrated James Cameron building his own Mars probe for filmmaking
I would like to see this result in a frustrated James Cameron building his own Mars probe for filmmaking
The lack of an on-board microphone could/should do that, too. :-) Pictures are a great, but a full-30fps video (with audio!) would greatly enhance our feeling of what it's like to be on the surface there.
I would like to see this result in a frustrated James Cameron building his own Mars probe for filmmaking
The lack of an on-board microphone could/should do that, too. :-) Pictures are a great, but a full-30fps video (with audio!) would greatly enhance our feeling of what it's like to be on the surface there.
2004 technology aside, this is called the "Good Enough Factor". Obviously every super geek at NASA wants an 20 MP camera with full zoom,100 year lifetime, 3d, blah blah blah. But, they are working in very exact specifications and budget. So, you have to opt for the option that satisfies the Good Enough Factor. What will get us closest to what we actually want, without totally breaking spec and screwing with the time…
Everyone is missing the point here. The problem isn't that these cameras are old tech and using outdated CCD censors. If these were the best images we've seen to date of Mars, you're right, there'd be a "Good Enough Factor" — the best images we've seen from a NASA mission, but not as good as modern DSLRs. Understandable. The problem, that I think a lot of people are missing, is that Viking 1, from 1976, took higher q…
If you use a low-res camera to take 1000 images of the same thing, you can use software to make a high-res image from those.
I think the explanation is satisfactory, but how often, if at all, do other components of such projects change, up until lift off? I imagine engines and other propulsion parts won't be upgraded much after the original spec, even if such components even remotely followed the same curve of improvement as digital chips do. But what about other types of sensors used by the rover? What is the most recent piece of tech use…
Last minute changes are made. Or at the very least I know of one such change in the case of Curiosity. The dust covers over the haz cams (the navigation cameras on the belly of Curiosity) were added in the last minute. Here is the engineer who implemented them writing about the covers: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29612.msg93... Basically, the Phoenix lander (landed on May 25th 2008) kicked up mor…
Cost, schedule, risk. They are the fundamental resources for a project like this. Cost and schedule are more familiar than risk.