Now that we are a month out from the Ganymede encounter, I'm creating a special thread just for this encounter.
A few basic facts about the encounter:
The encounter takes place June 7, 2021 at 16:56:07.972 UTC at an altitude of 1042 km from Ganymede's surface. The central latitude and longitude of the close approach point is 23.58 N, 57.62 W. The inbound leg occurs over Ganymede's nightside while the outbound leg covers the dayside, allowing for imaging of Ganymede's leading and sub-Jovian hemispheres.
Click to view attachment
The best imaging opportunities occur after closest approach, with dayside imaging possible between +00:15 and +06:45 at distances between 1050 km and 5690 km above Ganymede's surface (though the first pass will be along the terminator and the last pass will only capture a bit of the bright limb). This allows for JunoCAM images with resolutions between 0.71 and 3.82 km. The best imaging opportunity in my opinion is centered at +01:45 when Juno is 1,515 km above Ganymede. This allows for imaging at around 1 km/pixel, doesn't cover the terminator or too much of the limb, and allows for detailed imaging of Perrine Regio and Tros crater, a prominent ray crater within Phrygia Sulcus. A Cosmographia screen shot of the center time for this pass is below.
Click to view attachment
I've updated my simulation video of the encounter, now making use of updated trajectory and now has real orientation information.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_UO3EFB6l0
Full Version: Ganymede Flyby - PJ34
If I'm correct, the highest resolution pictures should be taken at low sun angle, so I expect spectacular scenes. Especially, we will be able to see details of the topography of Tros crater, one of the youngest craters on Ganymede. Can't wait.
Mike, any chance you can share preliminary/(final?) junocam commanding parameters for Ganymede encounter?
I'm checking out my pipeline and would rather use your commands than make up my own.
Tangentially related... typically, when is the deadline for delivering commands for uplink to Juno for a perijove?
I'm checking out my pipeline and would rather use your commands than make up my own.
Tangentially related... typically, when is the deadline for delivering commands for uplink to Juno for a perijove?
QUOTE (volcanopele @ May 7 2021, 06:41 PM) 
Now that we are a month out from the Ganymede encounter, I'm creating a special thread just for this encounter.
A few basic facts about the encounter:
The encounter takes place June 7, 2021 at 16:56:07.972 UTC at an altitude of 1042 km from Ganymede's surface. The central latitude and longitude of the close approach point is 23.58 N, 57.62 W. The inbound leg occurs over Ganymede's nightside while the outbound leg covers the dayside, allowing for imaging of Ganymede's leading and sub-Jovian hemispheres.
Click to view attachment
The best imaging opportunities occur after closest approach, with dayside imaging possible between +00:15 and +06:45 at distances between 1050 km and 5690 km above Ganymede's surface (though the first pass will be along the terminator and the last pass will only capture a bit of the bright limb). This allows for JunoCAM images with resolutions between 0.71 and 3.82 km. The best imaging opportunity in my opinion is centered at +01:45 when Juno is 1,515 km above Ganymede. This allows for imaging at around 1 km/pixel, doesn't cover the terminator or too much of the limb, and allows for detailed imaging of Perrine Regio and Tros crater, a prominent ray crater within Phrygia Sulcus. A Cosmographia screen shot of the center time for this pass is below.
Click to view attachment
I've updated my simulation video of the encounter, now making use of updated trajectory and now has real orientation information.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_UO3EFB6l0
A few basic facts about the encounter:
The encounter takes place June 7, 2021 at 16:56:07.972 UTC at an altitude of 1042 km from Ganymede's surface. The central latitude and longitude of the close approach point is 23.58 N, 57.62 W. The inbound leg occurs over Ganymede's nightside while the outbound leg covers the dayside, allowing for imaging of Ganymede's leading and sub-Jovian hemispheres.
Click to view attachment
The best imaging opportunities occur after closest approach, with dayside imaging possible between +00:15 and +06:45 at distances between 1050 km and 5690 km above Ganymede's surface (though the first pass will be along the terminator and the last pass will only capture a bit of the bright limb). This allows for JunoCAM images with resolutions between 0.71 and 3.82 km. The best imaging opportunity in my opinion is centered at +01:45 when Juno is 1,515 km above Ganymede. This allows for imaging at around 1 km/pixel, doesn't cover the terminator or too much of the limb, and allows for detailed imaging of Perrine Regio and Tros crater, a prominent ray crater within Phrygia Sulcus. A Cosmographia screen shot of the center time for this pass is below.
Click to view attachment
I've updated my simulation video of the encounter, now making use of updated trajectory and now has real orientation information.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_UO3EFB6l0
so will we get any new map coverage (like the poles)?
and will we get any good stereo DEMS from the encounter?
i want more complete ganymede DEMs then just tiny chunks
nice video
only if juno had a ganymede and europa lander, we could land something on those 2 moons like cassini and huygens, but juno's original mission was to study jupiter witch needs no landers because jupiter is a gas planet
we need landers to go on ganymede and europa some day
No to the pole coverage but yes to the color imagery and yes to improving resolution in some areas. It is likely stereo coverage will allow some DEM's to be made of this region eventually.
QUOTE (Antdoghalo @ May 18 2021, 02:38 PM)
No to the pole coverage but yes to the color imagery and yes to improving resolution in some areas. It is likely stereo coverage will allow some DEM's to be made of this region eventually.
wait juno can take stereo (3d) imagery, or do you need 2 different view of the same spot to make a stereo image for a DEM?
how reliable would the DEMS of that area of ganymede be that juno saw (according to the video simulation)?
the region that i am curious about elevation (perrine regio area) is in fact going to be clearly visible during the juno flyby (according to video)
The issue isn't coverage or even viewing angles, the issue will be resolution. The best resolution images will be at ~0.7 km/pixel, and some of the best images will be closer to 1–2 km/pixel. Whether there is enough topography for that scale to be useful is a good question.
QUOTE (Brian Swift @ May 15 2021, 08:15 AM)
Mike, any chance you can share preliminary/(final?) junocam commanding parameters for Ganymede encounter?
Sorry, no, because of the way we command these the details go outside the boundaries of the Junocam team.
Jason's animation gives you a good flavor of the likely timing, but of course the spacecraft spin phasing cannot be predicted in advance with any accuracy. We are almost certainly not going to try any imaging of the nightside because of time and data volume constraints. In rough terms, imaging will start around 16:57:30 +/- 15s and continue at 1-minute cadence for a while (TBD just how long, Ganymede leaves the field by 17:03:30 or so anyway but there are other constraints.)
FWIW, the kernels on the public NAIF site are the same ones we use.
for those that do not have these bookmarked already
the public orbital kernels are here
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/spk/
and the rotational kernels are here
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/ck/
you will also need other kernels like the framing one and the leap-second to do any spice calculations
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/fk/
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/lsk/
the public orbital kernels are here
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/spk/
and the rotational kernels are here
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/ck/
you will also need other kernels like the framing one and the leap-second to do any spice calculations
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/fk/
ftp://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/JUNO/kernels/lsk/
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ May 19 2021, 01:42 PM)
Sorry, no, because of the way we command these the details go outside the boundaries of the Junocam team.
Jason's animation gives you a good flavor of the likely timing, but of course the spacecraft spin phasing cannot be predicted in advance with any accuracy. We are almost certainly not going to try any imaging of the nightside because of time and data volume constraints. In rough terms, imaging will start around 16:57:30 +/- 15s and continue at 1-minute cadence for a while (TBD just how long, Ganymede leaves the field by 17:03:30 or so anyway but there are other constraints.)
FWIW, the kernels on the public NAIF site are the same ones we use.
Jason's animation gives you a good flavor of the likely timing, but of course the spacecraft spin phasing cannot be predicted in advance with any accuracy. We are almost certainly not going to try any imaging of the nightside because of time and data volume constraints. In rough terms, imaging will start around 16:57:30 +/- 15s and continue at 1-minute cadence for a while (TBD just how long, Ganymede leaves the field by 17:03:30 or so anyway but there are other constraints.)
FWIW, the kernels on the public NAIF site are the same ones we use.
Thanks Mike. I'm lazy. Didn't want to knock out an encounter planner if you already had the numbers available.
So, are you saying the plan is to collect a series of full spin images, with spin phasing hopefully known well enough to keep Ganymede off the start/end seam?
For Jupiter images, does flight software (realtime attitude) determine image start times?
Should we expect TDI=1?
I haven't run the numbers yet, do you know if motion blur is going to be particularly bad?
QUOTE (Brian Swift @ May 19 2021, 10:43 PM)
So, are you saying the plan is to collect a series of full spin images...
That would not be possible, because it takes a lot longer than a spin to read out a full spin of data (over two minutes, in fact.)
One might assume that whatever magical process we used for, say, the PJ29 images of Ganymede (10 frames more or less centered on Ganymede) might be employed here in some form, but alas, I can't describe the details.
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ May 20 2021, 07:27 PM)
... but alas, I can't describe the details.
Is this due to information being MSSS proprietary, or something that is going into a future publication, or ITAR spacecraft commanding concerns, or something else?
Can you comment on how INTERFRAME_DELAY is determined?
Also, do you know if there is going to be a post-Ganymede encounter press conference? And if there is, if "they" (the powers that be)
are considering holding back the raw images until after the press conference?
QUOTE (Brian Swift @ May 24 2021, 09:14 PM)
Is this due to information being MSSS proprietary, or something that is going into a future publication, or ITAR spacecraft commanding concerns, or something else?
I've already said as much as I can for reasons I cite upthread. It's certainly neither of the first two.
QUOTE
Can you comment on how INTERFRAME_DELAY is determined?
It can be directly commanded or it can be computed onboard based on spacecraft attitude knowledge (this is described in the Junocam paper so I feel OK saying that.) It would be an interesting exercise to compare the actual attitude in the reconstructed C kernels to that in the predicted C kernels, as that would give you a sense of how well this is known in advance.
QUOTE
Also, do you know if there is going to be a post-Ganymede encounter press conference? And if there is...
If there is, no one has told me about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
I will say that many people have done a lot of work over the past few months planning this sequence. It would have been less stressful to start with a more distant encounter, but we'll see how it goes.
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ May 25 2021, 07:10 PM)
It would have been less stressful to start with a more distant encounter, but we'll see how it goes.
Just think of this and the Europa flyby as dress rehearsals for the Io flybys
Understood Mike. Thanks for the response. Checking on value of INTERFRAME_DELAY for past few perijoves, looks like it is almost always .370, so I just use that as a fixed value.
Here is a visualization of what I think the imaging opportunities are for the PJ34 Ganymede encounter.
It was produced by running a raw data test pattern image through my pipeline using metadata generated
based on the SPICE available 5/26. (Hopefully I don't have the wrong side of Ganymede illuminated or
something upside-down.) https://youtu.be/SzHtDbhAF7E
Table of timings for my data takes which include one frame of padding at beginning and end.
P34_9001 to P34_9005 are on dark side.
P34_9021 didn't produce any imagery on the target even though the encounter planner thinks it should see 7 degrees of the limb.
imageId START_TIME STOP_TIME duration totalFrames limbPoints terminatorPoints
P34_9001 2021-06-07T16:53:19.678 2021-06-07T16:53:25.968 6.29 17 92 0
P34_9002 2021-06-07T16:53:48.459 2021-06-07T16:53:56.599 8.14 22 143 0
P34_9003 2021-06-07T16:54:17.627 2021-06-07T16:54:27.247 9.62 26 185 0
P34_9004 2021-06-07T16:54:47.170 2021-06-07T16:54:57.530 10.36 28 207 0
P34_9005 2021-06-07T16:55:17.088 2021-06-07T16:55:27.448 10.36 28 218 0
P34_9006 2021-06-07T16:55:47.014 2021-06-07T16:55:57.374 10.36 28 240 21
P34_9007 2021-06-07T16:56:16.943 2021-06-07T16:56:26.933 9.99 27 233 99
P34_9008 2021-06-07T16:56:47.252 2021-06-07T16:56:56.872 9.62 26 216 102
P34_9009 2021-06-07T16:57:17.568 2021-06-07T16:57:26.448 8.88 24 212 105
P34_9010 2021-06-07T16:57:47.521 2021-06-07T16:57:56.401 8.88 24 254 61
P34_9011 2021-06-07T16:58:17.857 2021-06-07T16:58:26.367 8.51 23 271 27
P34_9012 2021-06-07T16:58:47.822 2021-06-07T16:58:55.962 8.14 22 250 8
P34_9013 2021-06-07T16:59:17.795 2021-06-07T16:59:25.935 8.14 22 237 0
P34_9014 2021-06-07T16:59:48.146 2021-06-07T16:59:55.546 7.4 20 215 0
P34_9015 2021-06-07T17:00:18.127 2021-06-07T17:00:25.527 7.4 20 205 0
P34_9016 2021-06-07T17:00:48.478 2021-06-07T17:00:55.138 6.66 18 182 0
P34_9017 2021-06-07T17:01:18.837 2021-06-07T17:01:25.127 6.29 17 167 0
P34_9018 2021-06-07T17:01:48.822 2021-06-07T17:01:54.742 5.92 16 145 0
P34_9019 2021-06-07T17:02:19.185 2021-06-07T17:02:24.365 5.18 14 111 0
P34_9020 2021-06-07T17:02:49.915 2021-06-07T17:02:53.985 4.07 11 83 0
P34_9021 2021-06-07T17:03:20.650 2021-06-07T17:03:23.240 2.59 7 25 0
Here is a visualization of what I think the imaging opportunities are for the PJ34 Ganymede encounter.
It was produced by running a raw data test pattern image through my pipeline using metadata generated
based on the SPICE available 5/26. (Hopefully I don't have the wrong side of Ganymede illuminated or
something upside-down.) https://youtu.be/SzHtDbhAF7E
Table of timings for my data takes which include one frame of padding at beginning and end.
P34_9001 to P34_9005 are on dark side.
P34_9021 didn't produce any imagery on the target even though the encounter planner thinks it should see 7 degrees of the limb.
CODE
imageId START_TIME STOP_TIME duration totalFrames limbPoints terminatorPoints
P34_9001 2021-06-07T16:53:19.678 2021-06-07T16:53:25.968 6.29 17 92 0
P34_9002 2021-06-07T16:53:48.459 2021-06-07T16:53:56.599 8.14 22 143 0
P34_9003 2021-06-07T16:54:17.627 2021-06-07T16:54:27.247 9.62 26 185 0
P34_9004 2021-06-07T16:54:47.170 2021-06-07T16:54:57.530 10.36 28 207 0
P34_9005 2021-06-07T16:55:17.088 2021-06-07T16:55:27.448 10.36 28 218 0
P34_9006 2021-06-07T16:55:47.014 2021-06-07T16:55:57.374 10.36 28 240 21
P34_9007 2021-06-07T16:56:16.943 2021-06-07T16:56:26.933 9.99 27 233 99
P34_9008 2021-06-07T16:56:47.252 2021-06-07T16:56:56.872 9.62 26 216 102
P34_9009 2021-06-07T16:57:17.568 2021-06-07T16:57:26.448 8.88 24 212 105
P34_9010 2021-06-07T16:57:47.521 2021-06-07T16:57:56.401 8.88 24 254 61
P34_9011 2021-06-07T16:58:17.857 2021-06-07T16:58:26.367 8.51 23 271 27
P34_9012 2021-06-07T16:58:47.822 2021-06-07T16:58:55.962 8.14 22 250 8
P34_9013 2021-06-07T16:59:17.795 2021-06-07T16:59:25.935 8.14 22 237 0
P34_9014 2021-06-07T16:59:48.146 2021-06-07T16:59:55.546 7.4 20 215 0
P34_9015 2021-06-07T17:00:18.127 2021-06-07T17:00:25.527 7.4 20 205 0
P34_9016 2021-06-07T17:00:48.478 2021-06-07T17:00:55.138 6.66 18 182 0
P34_9017 2021-06-07T17:01:18.837 2021-06-07T17:01:25.127 6.29 17 167 0
P34_9018 2021-06-07T17:01:48.822 2021-06-07T17:01:54.742 5.92 16 145 0
P34_9019 2021-06-07T17:02:19.185 2021-06-07T17:02:24.365 5.18 14 111 0
P34_9020 2021-06-07T17:02:49.915 2021-06-07T17:02:53.985 4.07 11 83 0
P34_9021 2021-06-07T17:03:20.650 2021-06-07T17:03:23.240 2.59 7 25 0
We will be releasing the PJ34 data per our usual process. Recall that we can't release standard products until we get the reconstructed C kernel, and we don't release partial images until every effort has been made to retransmit them. For the Ganymede imaging, we'll be trying to generate the map-projected standard products but it's not clear how well that will work (may be sensitive to SPK errors or our software might just choke); if it doesn't work then we will just release the raw products.
All that adds up to the data showing up on missionjuno no earlier than 8 June and hopefully no later than the day after, barring unanticipated events. And note that I haven't looked at the specifics of the DSN schedule so I'm not sure when the raw data is expected on the ground.
In theory we could post the raw data without waiting for the C kernel, but that would be outside our normal flow and might preclude ever posting the map-projected images if they do work, so I wouldn't count on it for now.
All that adds up to the data showing up on missionjuno no earlier than 8 June and hopefully no later than the day after, barring unanticipated events. And note that I haven't looked at the specifics of the DSN schedule so I'm not sure when the raw data is expected on the ground.
In theory we could post the raw data without waiting for the C kernel, but that would be outside our normal flow and might preclude ever posting the map-projected images if they do work, so I wouldn't count on it for now.
My simulations of the first two Ganymede images, subject to spin phase and timing/nav errors.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Thanks for the update Mike. I assume everyone is pretty excited about the Ganymede encounter, I certainly am.
Glad to hear the plan is for a normal data release. (Though I can certainly understand projects wanting to be more restrictive to maximize a news-cycle impact.)
Looks like my mapping images are consistent with you’re simulated images, so at least I don’t have the illumination coming from the opposite direction.
Can you say if the Ganymede images will be less compressed than typical Jupiter images given their novelty.
Glad to hear the plan is for a normal data release. (Though I can certainly understand projects wanting to be more restrictive to maximize a news-cycle impact.)
Looks like my mapping images are consistent with you’re simulated images, so at least I don’t have the illumination coming from the opposite direction.
Can you say if the Ganymede images will be less compressed than typical Jupiter images given their novelty.
As with many high-value Jupiter images, the plan is to take the Ganymede images with lossless compression.
We always compress at as high a quality factor as we can given the goals and constraints of each PJ pass.
We always compress at as high a quality factor as we can given the goals and constraints of each PJ pass.
Would have any of these flybys been possible had Juno successfully completed the Period Reduction Maneuverer to the nominal 14 day science orbit, assuming an extended mission was granted?
An interesting what-if, but the increased radiation damage taken during those orbits makes it hard to be certain. Funny to think the mission might already have been over by now but for the engine problems!
QUOTE (Steve G @ May 31 2021, 12:50 PM)
Would have any of these flybys been possible had Juno successfully completed the Period Reduction Maneuverer to the nominal 14 day science orbit, assuming an extended mission was granted?
No idea, it depends mostly on the delta V required to trim the orbit. I didn't have the impression that it took that much delta V but I could be mistaken.
AFAIK the dose per orbit is not much different between the 53-day orbit and the 14-day orbit, you just accumulate it faster with the shorter orbit. There's no way to know how the nominal mission with the PRM would have gone.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/10/12/juno-...jupiters-moons/
Note: not a direct quote from Bolton; author's words.
QUOTE
The 53-day orbit meant Juno operated at a slower scientific cadence, but the longer orbit is what allows the mission to venture near Jupiter’s moons in the 2020s, Bolton said.
Note: not a direct quote from Bolton; author's words.
QUOTE (stevesliva @ Jun 1 2021, 04:41 AM)
https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/10/12/juno-...jupiters-moons/
Note: not a direct quote from Bolton; author's words.
Note: not a direct quote from Bolton; author's words.
I heard Bolton say equivalent words in meetings.
Ganymede is the only large moon with the exception of Iapetus that has significant albedo variations like Earth's moon. Even Mercury is relatively bland. It is a fascinating world, and I'm looking forward to the results that I am certain will be fascinating.
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ May 29 2021, 06:41 PM)
My simulations of the first two Ganymede images, subject to spin phase and timing/nav errors.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
i want to make a mosaic from the real images when we get them tomorrow, but how am i going to fix the distortions as seen in your simulation of 2 of the pics?
QUOTE (TrappistPlanets @ Jun 6 2021, 07:56 AM)
how am i going to fix the distortions as seen in your simulation of 2 of the pics?
There's nothing different about the Ganymede images and they have to be processed the same way as any other Junocam image.
The simulation was just a rough stitch of the simulated frames with the overlap removed and doesn't closely resemble either the real raw data or our map projections.
As discussed above, the earliest you can expect the data on missionjuno is sometime on Tuesday 8 June. I honestly don't know if playback will be happening between the Ganymede encounter and the perijove pass (I hope so), but checking https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html to see if there is high-rate downlink from Juno will be a clue.
In all the excitement about visual images of Ganymede, I lost track of how Juno's main instruments will provide at least four new (or best-yet) kinds of science regarding Ganymede, taking surface spectroscopy in new wavelengths and doing some subsurfacing microwave sounding, which is a big deal – penetrating the ice of a jovian moon is a major goal for Europa in particular and Juno will be the first opportunity to do so, first getting data from Ganymede and then, hopefully, differential data that is comparable at Europa. Finally, occultation of radio signals is not something new but 2021 technology is an advance over Galileo results; moreover, with the variable nature of Jupiter's and Ganymede's particles and fields environments, more data at new lat-lon locations is always valuable.
That data won't all be analyzed this week, but should be available eventually if the encounter goes well.
That data won't all be analyzed this week, but should be available eventually if the encounter goes well.
NASA's Eyes show flyby happening right now.
mcaplinger,
many juno jupiter images look like this https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/03/jupiter-pe...83360265305.png, and that is a lot of distortion to fix
juno did fly close enough for some of that to be happening
many juno jupiter images look like this https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/03/jupiter-pe...83360265305.png, and that is a lot of distortion to fix
juno did fly close enough for some of that to be happening
QUOTE (TrappistPlanets @ Jun 7 2021, 09:42 AM)
mcaplinger,
and that is a lot of distortion to fix
and that is a lot of distortion to fix
I'm not sure I'd call that distortion, when you fly close to something that's roundish you're pretty much stuck with a view like that.
I think you should simply wait for the data and then see what you and others can do with it.
QUOTE (TrappistPlanets @ Jun 7 2021, 01:42 PM)
mcaplinger,
many juno jupiter images look like this https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/03/jupiter-pe...83360265305.png, and that is a lot of distortion to fix
juno did fly close enough for some of that to be happening
many juno jupiter images look like this https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/03/jupiter-pe...83360265305.png, and that is a lot of distortion to fix
juno did fly close enough for some of that to be happening
Those images are composites of multiple images and are intentionally reprojected by me (in this case) into a simulated Fisheye Equisolid lens ("Little Planet" effect). From some of the simulated images, it doesn't look like Juno flew so close to Ganymede where this effect would be so pronounced
QUOTE (Kevin Gill @ Jun 7 2021, 11:40 PM)
Those images are composites of multiple images and are intentionally reprojected by me (in this case) into a simulated Fisheye Equisolid lens ("Little Planet" effect). From some of the simulated images, it doesn't look like Juno flew so close to Ganymede where this effect would be so pronounced
so i should be able to reproject the Ganymede images one we get them tomorrow morning (my time zone) with little to no distortion related issues as long i know where the poles and the equator is located and the angle/axis of the object in the images?
It depends on the level of imagery you're using. The raw data has significant distortions caused by the motion of the spacecraft, but certainly people here will be able to re-project them correctly.
ETA on imagery?
QUOTE (TrappistPlanets @ Jun 7 2021, 05:56 PM)
little to no distortion related issues
You are talking about push frame images from a spinning spacecraft travelling at 19km/sec just 1,038km from the surface that will have moved nearly 600km in a single rotation.
It's nothing BUT distortion related issues.
The images will be here when they're here.
Some of the gurus of Junocam work will figure out some nice reprojections I'm sure.
QUOTE (Steve5304 @ Jun 7 2021, 06:47 PM)
ETA on imagery?
Per post #16 in this thread: "All that adds up to the data showing up on missionjuno no earlier than 8 June and hopefully no later than the day after".
Ganymede, in regional views, gives us one thing that Jupiter doesn't – a bonanza of well-known control points that have already been identified. Even without knowing a bit about the motion of Juno, it seems that someone could stretch and fit whatever images we get to existing maps.
ADMIN MODE: The ETA on end of tolerance for people badgering others about this flyby has long since passed. In fact it's passed for badgering of ALL kinds.
Stop. Now. Right now.
/ADMIN MODE
Stop. Now. Right now.
/ADMIN MODE
While we are waiting, I think this is timely and relevant, for this encounter and certainly for JUICE.
Is it a collisional atmosphere? Maybe some of the time, in some places?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.03570.pdf
P
Is it a collisional atmosphere? Maybe some of the time, in some places?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.03570.pdf
P
Goldstone is currently receiving a downlink from Juno.
can't wait to see juno's new images of ganymede
what rayleighs did juno image ganymede in during the flyby?
what rayleighs did juno image ganymede in during the flyby?
QUOTE (JRehling @ Jun 8 2021, 04:49 AM)
Ganymede, in regional views, gives us one thing that Jupiter doesn't – a bonanza of well-known control points that have already been identified. Even without knowing a bit about the motion of Juno, it seems that someone could stretch and fit whatever images we get to existing maps.
yeah, Ganymede is so well mapped that if you know enough or seen enough already existing Ganymede maps, you can easily recognize a curtain crater or fault
as for Jupiter, it changes so much that you struggle to tell what the offset of that particular image should be after you reproject it...
QUOTE (volcanopele @ May 7 2021, 12:41 PM)
This allows for JunoCAM images with resolutions between 0.71 and 3.82 km. The best imaging opportunity in my opinion is centered at +01:45 when Juno is 1,515 km above Ganymede. This allows for imaging at around 1 km/pixel
Here's a comparison with Voyager and Galileo images -
Click to view attachment
The frame at left was taken by the Voyager 2 spacecraft when it flew by in 1979, with a resolution of about 1.3 kilometers (0.8 mile) per pixel. The frame at right showing the same area was captured by Galileo during its first flyby of Ganymede on June 27, 1996; it has a resolution of about 74 meters (243 feet) per pixel, more than 17 times better than that of the Voyager image.
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/ganymede-co...ileo-resolution
QUOTE (TrappistPlanets @ Jun 8 2021, 05:35 PM)
hmm wonder why images are not released yet?
NASA should have gotten the full transmission by now?
NASA should have gotten the full transmission by now?
Still talking to Canberra dish.
https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html
Going to be quite busy, 3 Mars rovers, Juno, New Horizons, and 2 Voyagers.
(I'm assuming the Chinese rover uses the DSN, rather than their own dish?)
QUOTE (HSchirmer @ Jun 8 2021, 06:43 PM)
Still talking to Canberra dish.
https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html
Going to be quite busy, 3 Mars rovers, Juno, New Horizons, and 2 Voyagers.
(I'm assuming the Chinese rover uses the DSN, rather than their own dish?)
https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html
Going to be quite busy, 3 Mars rovers, Juno, New Horizons, and 2 Voyagers.
(I'm assuming the Chinese rover uses the DSN, rather than their own dish?)
i have just found this image from the juno flyby https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/jpl/juno...nymede-close-up
now hm.... how am i going to work with this to turn that into a map, i think i can figure that out myself...
I've tried to be very patient (the mods can attest to the fact that I haven't complained about any post on this thread), but people are just not getting what I am saying, apparently.
We are working through some issues with our processing and I hope the images will be showing up on missionjuno shortly. In the meantime enjoy the quicklook product that NASA released.
We are working through some issues with our processing and I hope the images will be showing up on missionjuno shortly. In the meantime enjoy the quicklook product that NASA released.
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Jun 8 2021, 07:54 PM)
I've tried to be very patient (the mods can attest to the fact that I haven't complained about any post on this thread), but people are just not getting what I am saying, apparently.
We are working through some issues with our processing and I hope the images will be showing up on missionjuno shortly. In the meantime enjoy the quicklook product that NASA released.
We are working through some issues with our processing and I hope the images will be showing up on missionjuno shortly. In the meantime enjoy the quicklook product that NASA released.
Wonderful photos!!! Thank you!!!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.