Re: Mars 3-D

[P3D John Ohrt <johrt@xxxxxxx>]

P3D Andrew Eskind wrote:
> Next outing, they should have cameras with variable heights on both
> lander and rover.
> Then the interocular distance could be adjusted as desired.

Just a few minor problems.  A calibrated extensible camera mount must be
rigid to hold the camera orientation to the vehicle.  Such creatures are
heavy, unreliable, and raise the center of gravity of the vehicle.  The
wind loading alone is a good reason alone to rule them out.  While you
can do anything in theory, the cost can be a problem in the real world.

The current system is simple, reliable, and doing the job.  You could
deploy ten pathfinders and sojourners and learn ten time as much about
Mars, but not much more about bigger and better followons.  They already
got one big surprise, the terrain is far more rugged than expected.

NASA's Mars program also depends on learning how to better explore the
planet.  While a more sophisticated sensor palcement and control system
is desireable, operating those systems in the field, where you can get
out and give it a kick to lossen it up, is fraught with problems.

Considering the low mass and power budget of ccd cameras, I agree with
the current approach, put the cheap cameras where you need them and pour
the money into a single scientific system with flexibility.  

All things considered, this mission is an outstanding success.  While no
mission should go uncriticized, I hope they manage to keep this one
private.  Public criticism left unbalanced has caused the scientific
space program enough trouble.  The media is far more interested in
blowing up the deficincies than presenting reasoned answers and
responsible assessment of risk.

Where are those stereo frames!

Regards,
--
John Ohrt,  Regina, SK, Canada
johrt@xxxxxxx


------------------------------