MRO to insert very soon

[bonzelite]

i do know that the ground penetrating radar will be very revealing. i think it "only" will be able to resolve 35ft down, though. that is somewhat disappointing as i would have thought they'd have stacked that puppy up with hundreds of feet of penetration. <br /><br />that is a good question about CH4 detection, ie, what is the extent of it's spectroscopic capability?

 

[yevaud]

Ahh, that hundreds of feet just plain isn't really possible. (We're speaking of "Synthetic Aperature Radar" here). It'll likely be more like a few meters penetration, but even that will be terribly revealing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

The following is what the Encyclopedia had to say:<br /><br /><font color="lightblue"><b>Ground-penetrating radar (GPR)</b> works much like regular radar, using pulses of electromagnetic radiation in the microwave band (UHF/VHF frequencies) of the radio spectrum, and reading the reflected signal to <font color="white">detect subsurface structures and objects without drilling, probing or otherwise breaking the ground surface</font> Applications include <font color="white">locating buried voids/cavities, underground storage tanks, sewers, buried foundations, ancient landfills</font> It can also be used to <font color="white">characterize bedrock, the internal structure of floors/walls, water damage in concrete, and the internal steelwork in concrete</font><br /><br />The range of the scan is affected mostly by the conductivity and composition of the ground; the resolution of the scan is affected by the scanning frequency. Higher frequencies do not penetrate as far as lower frequencies, but give better resolution.<br /><br /><font color="white">Water ice would make a great conductor, as would most liquids, and metallics for that matter.</font><br /><br />Ground-penetrating radar units are generally in contact with the ground for best performance. There are GPR horn antennas that can be used one to two feet above the ground. These antennas can collect data at highway speeds.<br /><br /><font color="white">I have heard that the shuttle was able to resolve ancient archaeological finds from space, but I have not found any links on the subject.</font><br /><br />A similar technology is wall-penetrating radar, which can read through walls and even act as a motion sensor for police.<br /><br />Both types of radar are considered ultra wideband. These differ from a metal detector, which uses electromagnetic induction rather than reflection.<br /><br />The "Mineseeker Project" seeks to design a system to determine whether landmines are present</font>

 

[yevaud]

Yes it does, and I for one am eagerly awaiting next Fall, when this all really begins.<br /><br />Ain't science fun?! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

The following is not as well understood by me, would you care to explain this equipments role in further detail, if you have the time? :<br /><br /><font color="lavender">MCS (Mars Climate Sounder) This atmospheric profiler will detect vertical variations of temperature, dust, and water vapor concentrations in the Martian atmosphere.</font> <i>Retrieved from NASA March 3, 2006</i>, and I do not remember the link, sorry. In addition, I realize that its function is one of an atmospheric profiler, but I doubt that its capabilities are limited to just water detection, is that right?<br /><br />I expect other chemical signatures to resolve, as well; (e.g. Methane, Argon, Carbon Dioxide/Monoxide, Oxygen, Ammonia, etc...).

 

[yevaud]

Yes, correct. Using it's suite of multispectral imaging systems - various visual bands, IR, Thermal, radar - it should be able to detect numerous aspects of the composition and dynamics of the Martian atmosphere. These are usually used in combination with each other; for example, a combination of visual bands and Near IR will assist in determining the presence of water vapor in the atmosphere (using a formula known as CLAVR, which determines cloud presence and density). Hopefully, this will shed some light on the exact nature of the Martian atmosphere.<br /><br />Speaking of, perhaps I should go look at the exact imaging systems and the bands they use. Haven't really done so yet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

I'm hoping the MRO will provide a detailed map of the types of clay deposits found by ESA's Mars Express. These were described as ideal targets for future science rovers -- better than the layered sulfate deposits of Meridiani that the rover Opportunity is exploring. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jatslo]

centsworth_II: "... <font color="gold">I'm hoping the MRO will provide a detailed map of the types of clay deposits found by ESA's Mars Express. These were described as ideal targets for future science rovers -- better than the layered sulfate deposits of Meridiani that the rover Opportunity is exploring.</font> ..."<br /><br />When I gold mine; clay is both welcome and not welcome, because clay tells me that I am working old cemented deposits, yet, sticky clay carries the gold away when I am washing sediments. Clay is a great indicator of present hydrology; however, it turns to rock quite quickly. When gold mining, I find the wet sticky type, and the cemented rock type. Clay traps gold like you would not believe. Clay also traps and fossilizes just about anything layer after layer. Some layers are worth more than others.<br /><br />I have worked some areas that yield about $80-$90 dollars a yard when gold was priced at $150 an ounce, so those deposits are worth more than twice the amount now. Anyway, the following apparatus might shed some light on your clay deposits; do you think?<br /><br /><font color="lightyellow"><b>CRISM (Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer for Mars)</b>: This instrument splits visible and near-infrared light of its images into hundreds of "colors" that identify minerals, especially those likely formed in the presence of water, in surface areas on Mars not much bigger than a football field.</font> <i>Retrieved from NASA website on March 3, 2006</i>, and I do not remember the link, sorry.<br /><br />If manned missions turn into actual business enterprises; precious metals/minerals might actually stimulate an interest long after I leave this world. What is your interest in the types of *CLAY*, and why is *IT* so important to future robotic or manned missions? Clay is an important indicator during archeological digs, as well. Wouldn't that be cool, if MRO found archeological evidence from space. <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" />

 

[bonzelite]

as you mention clays and minerals, any chance of gold or silver or copper being on mars? there is much iron oxide on mars, at least in the form of rust dust. any chance, then, of actual iron ore? maybe JonClarke can elaborate on that. if there is already a thread about minerology on mars, then pardon my unawareness of it. <br /><br />

 

[jatslo]

bonzelite: <font color="yellow">as you mention clays and minerals, any chance of gold or silver or copper being on mars? there is much iron oxide on mars, at least in the form of rust dust. any chance, then, of actual iron ore? maybe JonClarke can elaborate on that. if there is already a thread about minerology on mars, then pardon my unawareness of it.</font><br /><br />The encyclopedia says: "... <font color="gold"><b>Gold</b> is widely distributed in the Earth's crust at a background level of 0.03 g/1000 kg (0.03 ppm by weight). Hydrothermal ore deposits of gold occur in metamorphic rocks and igneous rocks; alluvial deposits and placer deposits originate from these sources.<br /><br /></font>Satellite telemetry from space involving alluvial and/or placer deposits is evidence for the existence of precious metals. For example, hematite is a great indicator, but not a guaranteed indicator for gold. Unfortunately, sampling for gold requires a more hands on presence, and/or robotic presence.<font color="gold"><br /><br />The primary source of gold is usually igneous rocks or surface concentrations. A deposit usually needs some form of secondary enrichment to form an economically viable ore deposit: either chemical or physical processes like erosion or solution or more generally metamorphism, which concentrates the gold in sulfide minerals or quartz. There are several primary deposit types, common ones are termed reef or vein. Primary deposits can be weathered and eroded, with most of the gold being transported into stream beds where it congregates with other heavy minerals to form placer deposits. In all these deposits the gold is in its native form. Another important ore type is in sedimentary black shale and limestone deposits containing finely disseminated gold and other platinum group metals.<br /><br /></font>I can use various chemicals to leech gold, and electrolysis to plate gold, and of course it helps when one separates the magnetic materials from the non-magn

 

[tony873004]

Here's an image I put together of its arrival trajectory and initial orbit after the insertion burn. Also included is the trajectory it would follow if it should fail to burn. The orbits of Phobos and Deimos are shown as well.<br /><br />Full description :<br />http://www.orbitsimulator.com/gravity/articles/MROarrival.html

 

[paulanderson]

Test images to be taken week of March 20. Here's hoping for a safe orbital entry...<br /><br /><b>Powerful Orbiting Camera Will Send Its First View of Mars to UA Soon</b><br />http://uanews.org/cgi-bin/WebObjects/UANews.woa/8/wa/SRStoryDetails?ArticleID=12261<br /><br /><i>"HiRISE scientists will power the HiRISE camera the week of March 20. It will begin taking pictures 18 hours later, and it will take pictures during two orbits. NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory mission specialists will decide exactly which orbits will be HiRISE imaging orbits after Mars orbit insertion on March 10.<br /><br />These will be the camera's only photos for the next six months because it will be turned off while the spacecraft "aerobrakes." This involves dipping repeatedly into the upper atmosphere to scrub off speed and drop into successively more circular orbits.<br /><br />The camera will take pictures of the middle latitudes of the southern hemisphere, a region where many geologically recent gullies have been seen, gullies possibly carved by water. Researchers won't know the exact area they'll photograph until the spacecraft is safely captured into orbit around Mars.<br /><br />The camera's first images will be taken when the MRO is flying between about 2,500 miles and 600 miles (4,000 km and 1,000 km) above the planet. After aerobraking, the camera will fly just outside the planet's atmosphere at only 190 miles (about 300 km) above the surface."</i>

 

[llivinglarge]

Can MRO resolve the rovers on the ground?

 

[bonzelite]

i was way wrong about the ground penetrating radar! <br /><br />from the front page on this site:<br /><font color="yellow">"The NASA probe’s Shallow Subsurface Radar (SHARAD) is expected to ping the planet in 85-millisecond bursts of radar and penetrate up sixth-tenths of a mile (one kilometer) beneath the surface – actual depth depends on the Martian upper crust..."</font><br /><br />wow. 1km depth!!

 

[tony873004]

<i>"Can MRO resolve the rovers on the ground?"</i><br /><br />Theoretically yes. But it would be a single pixel. You'd never be able to tell that it was the rover, but I imagine we might see a few pictures of a dot with a circle drawn around the dot showing the rovers' locations.<br /><br />But consider that NASA usually doesn't do anything just for fun. So taking pictures of the rovers is probably low on their priority list.

 

[centsworth_II]

What you describe has already been done with the Mars Global Surveyer. With about five times the resolving power, the MRO should see the destinctive delta shape of the rover. The MRO can <b>resolve</b> objects one meter in size (the rovers are a little larger than that). Pixel size is probably 10 or 20 cm. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[telfrow]

According to the specs I found here, it's 30cm/pixel, as compared to 150cm/pixel on MGS. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[tony873004]

I hope you're right, because it would be cool to have hi-res orbital images of the rovers. However, I doubt we'll see any shape to them.<br /><br />The MRO's primary mirror is 0.5 meters in diameter. Its orbit will bring it over the equatorial regions of Mars with an altitude of about 290000 meters (290 km). Under the most ideal conditions, it will have a diffraction limit of about 25 centimeters in blue light (350 nanometers) and about 50 centimeters in red light (700 nanometers).<br /><br />1.22 * wavelength / diameter * distance<br /><br />1.22*350e-9/.5*290000 = 0.25 meters (blue light)<br />1.22*700e-9/.5*290000 = 0.50 meters (red light)<br /><br />So it can't possibly resolve anything smaller than this.<br /><br />This only takes into account diffraction limit. The motion of the spacecraft will further reduce its ability to resolve. The realistic pixel size is 1-2 meters. The rovers are about 1-2 meters, so they will fill no more than about a pixel. <br /><br />According to http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/HiRISE/ the MRO will be able to image <i>"Thousands of high-resolution sub-scenes with 1 to 2 meters/pixel content"</i><br /><br />To resolve means to be able to magnify enough to distinguish from a point source, like we can resolve the planets into disks, but not the stars (except Betelegeuse). Even though we can see the stars, we can not magnify them enough to show a disk, hence they are unresolved.<br /><br />In the images you linked to, although visible in the image, the rover was not resolved. No detail about their shapes could be discerned (unlike the parachute which is clearly resolved. That's a cool picture. Thanks for the link.)

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"According to the specs I found here, it's 30cm/pixel, as compared to 150cm/pixel on MGS."</font><br /> <br />From here:<br /><i>"The [MGS] camera has 1.5 meter per pixel resolution," said Malin, and "using the spacecraft to help, super-resolution of 0.5 meters/pixel. That is 50 centimeters."</i><br /><br />I'm sure the MRO will have the same ability to use super-resolution on occasion which will improve on the 30cm/pixel -- unless 30cm/pixel already takes into account the use of super-resolution techniques. Anyway, 30cm/pixel would give a rover image with 20 to 25 pixels. <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<i>"The MRO's primary mirror is 0.5 meters in diameter...with an altitude of about 290000 meters (290 km.... diffraction limit of about 25 centimeters in blue light (350 nanometers) and about 50 centimeters in red light (700 nanometers)." -- tony873004</i> <br /><br /><br />You certainly seem to be more familiar with the issue than I am!<br /><br />You commented that "The motion of the spacecraft will further reduce its ability to resolve." <br />Super-resolution techniques would reduce this as a factor. And, if they are not too dusty, the solar panels would reflect more blue light in contrast to Mars' reddish surface -- another plus according to your information.<br /><br />In any case, as neat as images of the rovers would be, the really, really neat thing will be getting high resolution shots of the gullies, rivuletts, layers, and other intriguing features seen in the MGS and Mar Express images.<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[tony873004]

I'm not sure what they mean by super resolution mode, but thinking about it, since the craft is moving, they may be able to treat 2 consecutive images as if it were 2 images from 2 different telescopes. There's a term, its slipping my mind now, but 2 small telescopes spaced 100 m apart can give the resolution of a 100 m telescope (not the light gathering power, just defraction limits). Perhaps that's what they're talking about, in which case the spacecraft's motion helps instead of hurts like I said. <br /><br />I agree, the suface features are the real treat. Seems kinda silly to send a probe that far to image a manmade object and its tire tracks. But for some reason I hope they try.

 

[CalliArcale]

I could imagine useful science coming out of that sort of imagery, though. They could image the site, drive the rover around a bunch to stir things up, and then image it again. Not sure if it would be enough to justify messing up the primary mission's schedule, though. (It would also be dependent on how long the rovers continue to operate, obviously.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"I'm not sure what they mean by super resolution mode..."</font><br /><br />As I understand it, an orbiter's attitude control system is used to fix the the camera on a target, eliminating as much as possible degradation of the image due to the velocity of the orbiter. I think I saw it described in one account as similar to a person taking a picture from a moving car turning their upper body to fix a target in the viewfinder in spite of the car's motion.<br /><br />From here:<br /><br /><i>"Anti-smear Tactic<br />In using the HiRISE camera, Mars can be surveyed as never before. But snagging those high-resolution photos won't come easy. MRO is far from being a "point-and-click" spacecraft. <br /><br />Just like super-snooper spy satellites circling Earth, MRO needs to precisely steer itself during photo shoots to reduce smear as it passes over select target areas.<br /><br />"It's a very sophisticated instrument," said Steve Jolly, chief systems engineer for MRO at Lockheed Martin. "Getting that correct motion compensation it's a very, very interesting problem."</i> <br /><br />I don't know if they call it "super resolution" as used by the MRO. This term is used to describe the technique when used experimentally with the MGS.<br /><br />This article talks about the "two shots from different angles" method you describe to give three-dimentional images and "super" vertical resolution. (That's a new one for me!):<br /><i>"Paired images of top-priority target areas taken from slightly different angles during different orbits will yield three-dimensional views revealing differences in height as small as 25 centimeters (10 inches)."<br /></i><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jatslo]

CalliArcali: "... <font color="pink">drive the rover around a bunch to stir things up</font> ..."<br /><br />Not sure that the rovers can stir things up to a detectable magnitude, but those Martian "Dust Devils" might be able to. Not sure, if making a movie in that regard is plausible either; like hurricanes in motion, for instance.

 

[CalliArcale]

Yes, they can. I didn't mean in the sense of kicking up lots of dust, but merely of turning over the top layer of dust. Already, they've imaged rover tracks with existing orbiters, so as I think about it more, MRO's capabilities are really not neccesary for this, unless its spectrometer can be applied. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>