Hello Larry -

Thanks for the link.

No doubt MGS has a first rate team - nice people and some of the best around - but like so many of the other points you are raising, this avoids the question of the use of non-Deep Space Network antenna. This is not a trivial problem, as in a short time extreme demands are going to be placed on the DSN. I understand that there may be technical constraints, but these need to be looked at, and looked at very carefully.

But I'll get to that in a second.

First off, note the 1.5 km limb resolution. Here it appears they are talking about image frame limb, which at its own ends also includes the planetary limb. I don't know whether they've ever bothered to combine this data with the MOLA data to get planetary elevations, or how it will ever ultimately fit in with it.

Note the desire to measure hypothesized "weather", while the real mechanisms of that weather are not understood at all. PMIRR was supposed to return atmospheric water data - where is it? Did water not show up, and everyone conclude that the mechanism was at fault?

The low resolution images were intended to record this "weather" optically - while at the same time, the detailed regional images are without context, the contexts which are needed to understand the mechanisms creating the real weather in the first place. Particularly lacking are higher resolution color contexts.

Now given the low resolution at image limb for color shots, the thing to do would simply be to throw the limb data out for the central portion of the shots, as the same area will be imaged at a much higher resolution on the next pass, that is, if you were actually trying to get color context, and not "weather".

The other desire was to look at "splotches" and "streaks" - my guess is that they thought there would be plants or springs of water.

Given the resource constraints, how the hell anyone could ever dare to try to justify random sampling is simply beyond me. Obviously no one on the core team thought to set up a way for other researchers to request that their targets be set in the target database.

And the assertion that contiguous mosaics are impossible to assemble is groundless. If they ever think that they have flowing water, you'll see those mosaics assembled right quick.

By the way, there are two independent computers and buffers and the cameras can operate independently.

And here we get to the nut:

"Buffer space is thus an important resource that requires close management."

Especially when you can't empty either of the buffers by the use of antenna other than DSN antenna.

Now note the differences in "real time" versus the stored image transmission necessary when the DSN antennas have other use:

"MOC data rate allocations change substantially over the course of the Mars Observer mission. MOC has been allocated data [and WTF is this supposed to mean in English? The camera is "allocated data" by the spacecraft?] for each of the three record rates and the realtime rate. These vary from 0.7 Kbps during the lowest record rate to 9 Kbps during the highest record rate, and 29 Kbps during realtime transmissions. These rates permit the daily transmission of roughly 2, 4, and 8 uncompressed 2048 X 2048 images during "record only" days and, on the average of once every three days, 14 such images during an eight hour realtime pass. These numbers can be larger or smaller, depending on the compression factors used and the resolution of the global map. MOC is capable of simultaneously sending data to both the record and realtime streams, and is further capable of matching any data rate available on-board the spacecraft."

THAT'S A 8/14 REAL DIFFERENCE, OR A 43% LOSS IN OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY, AND IT IS CAUSED BY THE LACK OF DSN TIME AND/OR THE REFUSAL TO USE OTHER ANTENNAS.

Additionally, if you don't mind loosing some data to noise, you can get a lot more data by real time transmission of the buffers. Depending on the rate of loss to noise, which will vary, the best idea may be simply to loose the packets. Take the data off the CCDs, use the highest predicted lossless compression to move it to the buffers, and then send it and free the buffers.

What is happening to the WA context data? Is it in 2 colors? Were the all three CCDs calibrated to sensitivities to different frequencies, allowing better color images to be constructed?

Note the hand placement of the context, instead of automated systems.

What I think they should want is very high resolution images of strata banding, and contexts.

No question for me that Galileo has priority for DSN time.

ep