[AR] Re: Payload ideas for low altitude rocket
- From: "John Stoffel" <john@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 10:22:40 -0400
"William" == William Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
William> Camera calibration consists of measuring the field of view
William> upon recovery; the rest is just monkey motion that provides
William> no useful insight.
I don't agree, because that monkey motion involves something new to
the team doing the work, and since they're a student/amateur group,
they don't have the expertise (probably) to do more esoteric work.
And they have just 1lb to work with. So getting fundamentally new
science work to fit into that space/mass is a project in and of
itself.
William> Exactly this technique was used—off duty—by staff at JPL to
William> estimate the height at which an image was taken during the
William> RRS Dart flight of 1996; the relevant variance analysis had
William> to do with the ability to measure the bulge in the Earth
William> horizon image, which was accounted for in the analysis as
William> documented in the article currently available at rrs.org.
Now that paper might be a great start, and now they can work to
miniaturize this type of sensor system so that it's trivial for others
to use down the line.
William> If one insists upon correlative data, it can be had from
William> direct imaging of the ground—as was done w/ the RRS Dart
William> data. Correlating w/ GPS or any alternative data source is
William> merely redundant to what is already proven.
William> The rest of what you propose apoears—to me—to be utterly
William> irrelevant: it is—in my experience—a waste of effort and
William> money to spend time on problems the answers to which can not
William> effect the certainty of our existing knowledge.
I view this project as an opportunity to learn something new, which
involves the entire process from start to finish, not just the
science results generated.
John
Other related posts:
