Quoting from the discussion in the
Northern Clouds thread:
QUOTE (JRehling @ Feb 12 2006, 03:55 AM)
QUOTE (JTN @ Feb 11 2006, 10:25 PM)
How much can the Cassini mission design adapt to observe short-term "targets of opportunity" like this?
Limited attitude control fuel is probably what will end Cassini's lifetime, so every pointing action cuts into the lifetime. But one act of pointing wouldn't be a huge expenditure.
For imaging a large storm on Saturn, there should be plenty of time during near-apoapsis to do so. The schedule at periapsis would be more crowded.
Apart from the physical constraints like fuel, how fast can the mission team react?
The sequences can be and are developed months and years in advance (or so it seems from the Significant Events reports) because the trajectories are fairly predictable, and I get the impression that this is a fairly drawn-out process (possibly it's just relaxed).
If something unexpected leads to a new plan, how quickly can they crank the handle and turn that into new instructions executing on the spacecraft? Is there slack built in to the sequences (e.g., near apoapsis, as you suggest) which could be used to perform new observations without disturbing the existing plan?
(elakdawalla has explained the difficulties of this particular case well in her
blog post, but I'm interested in the general case. How fast could they react if, I dunno, Mimas turned unexpectedly pink?)