Night Sky on Mars

Michael wrote:
Is it possible for the Rover to take a 20 second ASA 400 sky shot at night
from Mars? I would
think it would be spectacular as far as a standard wide angle sky shot goes.
If not, maybe next time
they should have a Fugi FinePix strapped to it to take some shots of the
Martian night sky.

If it were done on a clear Martian night, there would be no visually
detectable difference between it and a photo from a dark site on Earth
(other than the fact that the Earth might be in the photo!).

Bryan

"CLT" not@thisaddress wrote:

But it's just a robot. If it fails, launch another one.

True. After all, you can get them at Sears for $10 a piece.

That the beloved NASA has chosen to purchase its probes for hideously
inflated prices doesn't seem germane to the basic point.

And if you buy more than five, they throw the launch vehicles in for free.

Launch costs are trivial in comparison to the management/bureaucracy
budget. (Alcohol costs money).

But nonetheless, this sounds like a plan to me: instead of building
just two instances of a custom, one-off, design and cross your
fingers, why not go for volume production and build (say) 10 of them
and _really_ play?

"CLT" not@thisaddress wrote:

But it's just a robot. If it fails, launch another one.

True. After all, you can get them at Sears for $10 a piece.

That the beloved NASA has chosen to purchase its probes for hideously
inflated prices doesn't seem germane to the basic point.

And if you buy more than five, they throw the launch vehicles in for free.

Launch costs are trivial in comparison to the management/bureaucracy
budget. (Alcohol costs money).

But nonetheless, this sounds like a plan to me: instead of building
just two instances of a custom, one-off, design and cross your
fingers, why not go for volume production and build (say) 10 of them
and _really_ play?

"CLT" not@thisaddress wrote:

But it's just a robot. If it fails, launch another one.

True. After all, you can get them at Sears for $10 a piece.

That the beloved NASA has chosen to purchase its probes for hideously
inflated prices doesn't seem germane to the basic point.

And if you buy more than five, they throw the launch vehicles in for free.

Launch costs are trivial in comparison to the management/bureaucracy
budget. (Alcohol costs money).

But nonetheless, this sounds like a plan to me: instead of building
just two instances of a custom, one-off, design and cross your
fingers, why not go for volume production and build (say) 10 of them
and _really_ play?

(Brian Tung) wrote:

Maybe it's too cold for the batteries to run efficiently?

At the beginning of the Spirit wipe-out, people were afraid, at one
point, that the probe was up all night in reboot/crash cycles. So the
batteries work, though probably at reduced output, during the night.
How many images could it squeeze off? I don't know either.

(Brian Tung) wrote:

Maybe it's too cold for the batteries to run efficiently?

At the beginning of the Spirit wipe-out, people were afraid, at one
point, that the probe was up all night in reboot/crash cycles. So the
batteries work, though probably at reduced output, during the night.
How many images could it squeeze off? I don't know either.

(Brian Tung) wrote:

Maybe it's too cold for the batteries to run efficiently?

At the beginning of the Spirit wipe-out, people were afraid, at one
point, that the probe was up all night in reboot/crash cycles. So the
batteries work, though probably at reduced output, during the night.
How many images could it squeeze off? I don't know either.

"CLT" not@thisaddress wrote:

Cold [...]

Both rovers, like the previous Sojourner in 1997, have radioisotope
heaters for the battery and electronics.

[...] and concern about running them down...

Spirit has used up 1/4 or so of its expected lifetime either on the
lander or in a coma nearby. The other one is probably doomed to
suffer a similar fate. How much did the wipe-out chew out of the
battery? And isn't a bigger issue dust build up on the solar panels,
which happens day or night? The clock is ticking...

"CLT" not@thisaddress wrote:

Cold [...]

Both rovers, like the previous Sojourner in 1997, have radioisotope
heaters for the battery and electronics.

[...] and concern about running them down...

Spirit has used up 1/4 or so of its expected lifetime either on the
lander or in a coma nearby. The other one is probably doomed to
suffer a similar fate. How much did the wipe-out chew out of the
battery? And isn't a bigger issue dust build up on the solar panels,
which happens day or night? The clock is ticking...

"CLT" not@thisaddress wrote:

Cold [...]

Both rovers, like the previous Sojourner in 1997, have radioisotope
heaters for the battery and electronics.

[...] and concern about running them down...

Spirit has used up 1/4 or so of its expected lifetime either on the
lander or in a coma nearby. The other one is probably doomed to
suffer a similar fate. How much did the wipe-out chew out of the
battery? And isn't a bigger issue dust build up on the solar panels,
which happens day or night? The clock is ticking...