Quote from: Paul451 on 01/05/2023 05:06 pmQuote from: Zed_Noir on 01/05/2023 02:17 amAlso possibly thermal imagers installed in the EVA suits.And what exactly would the thermal imagers see? Think about it. What's the heat source? Hence, what would the image show?The difference in temperature of different materials. Small objects will loss heat faster than large objects. The inverse is small objects heat up faster than large objects.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 01/05/2023 02:17 amAlso possibly thermal imagers installed in the EVA suits.And what exactly would the thermal imagers see? Think about it. What's the heat source? Hence, what would the image show?
Also possibly thermal imagers installed in the EVA suits.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 01/05/2023 07:14 pmQuote from: Paul451 on 01/05/2023 05:06 pmQuote from: Zed_Noir on 01/05/2023 02:17 amAlso possibly thermal imagers installed in the EVA suits.And what exactly would the thermal imagers see? Think about it. What's the heat source? Hence, what would the image show?The difference in temperature of different materials. Small objects will loss heat faster than large objects. The inverse is small objects heat up faster than large objects.Sorry, I thought you'd get it with just a hint. Instead it came off as patronising.What I was trying to get at was that the source of heat is the sun. The same as the source of light. Therefore any IR imager will have the same issues as an optical camera (or an eyeball).While the shadowed areas might be emitting some IR, to see drops, holes, etc, otherwise hidden in the shadows, the imager will need to differentiate a few degrees variation in the faint <-100°C areas while blasted by extremely bright IR in the hot sunlit areas. I doubt any sensor would be able to have both the necessary sensitivity to be useful, while also the necessary range to cope with the contrast.And making even that moot, the imager itself will be heated at the very least to internal suit temps, probably external suit temps; so the lens, housing and sensor will all be emitting IR in that range, washing out anything coming from the low-temp areas in shadow.It'd be like JWST trying to image the nightside of the moon... while the sun is in line-of-sight... while JWST mirror/lightpath/sensors are all at room-temp.
Temperatures at the Moon’s polesare largely controlled by insolation and shadowing... Given the anticipated prevalence of shadows atsmall spatial scales, thermal infrared imaging providesan effective way to identify cold-traps quickly andaccurately... Here, we propose a low-cost, light-weightradiometer camera based on the Lunar CompactInfrared Imaging System (L-CIRiS) developed by BallAerospace and the University of Colorado’s Laboratoryfor Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP). L-CIRiS[5] uses a microbolometer detector array and a novelthree-point calibration system for excellent radiometricaccuracy for scene temperatures from < 100 K to >400K. Spatial resolution of ~1 cm is possible with thestandard optics from a distance of a few meters (Fig. 1). With some modest technical development this or asimilar system could be mounted on a mobile platformsuch as a rover or astronaut helmet.
...permanently shadowed craters will look like black holes to a thermal camera, since rocks and regolith in them will be at the same (very very cold) temperature, there is nothing a thermal camera could see that would make variations in the terrain visible. While, as the Osterman, et al., quote notes, you could rapidly and easily identify cold sinks with a thermal camera, you wouldn't be able to see what's in them.
...shadow temperatures can span a large range, from < 30K to >150 K [3, 6]; the warmer of these would beunlikely to contain ice, whereas the coldest mightcontain a wealth of useful and scientifically valuablevolatiles. An astronaut with a thermal IR camera couldtherefore make informed decisions in real-time to locatethe most promising sites for in situ resource utilization(ISRU). Besides ISRU, temperatures are also relevant toengineering constraints and astronaut safety.
I think their main point is that at the poles, permanently shadowed craters will look like black holes to a thermal camera, since rocks and regolith in them will be at the same (very very cold) temperature, there is nothing a thermal camera could see that would make variations in the terrain visible. While, as the Osterman, et al., quote notes, you could rapidly and easily identify cold sinks with a thermal camera, you wouldn't be able to see what's in them. A thermal camera for rover navigation or maybe as a supplement to an EVA suit's lights, might be useful for anywhere sunlight hits.
Lidar or radar would work great in a shadowed crater. Also, can just use lights.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 01/06/2023 11:08 pmI think their main point is that at the poles, permanently shadowed craters will look like black holes to a thermal camera, since rocks and regolith in them will be at the same (very very cold) temperature, there is nothing a thermal camera could see that would make variations in the terrain visible. While, as the Osterman, et al., quote notes, you could rapidly and easily identify cold sinks with a thermal camera, you wouldn't be able to see what's in them. A thermal camera for rover navigation or maybe as a supplement to an EVA suit's lights, might be useful for anywhere sunlight hits.Lidar or radar would work great in a shadowed crater. Also, can just use lights.
What issues does the lighting condition at the Moon's South Pole cause that Jim Free is tweeting about
Is there a thread for cis-lunar domain awareness? If not I think we may need one soon. Else that discussion will continue to spill over onto other cis-lunar activity threads.
Radar makes sense, but wouldn't lidar be affected by the strong light contrast?
Bill Nelson putting out a reason for keeping on schedule with Artemis to get back to the Moon:https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/01/we-better-watch-out-nasa-boss-sounds-alarm-on-chinese-moon-ambitions-00075803
The goal is still to fly Artemis II by the end of 2024, he said, but “they tell me they can’t [speed it up,] that they need that time to redo them and recertify and all that.”Then follows the signature goal of Artemis III to land astronauts on the moon by the end of 2025, which is already a year later than the Trump administration’s plan.“All of that is going to depend on two things,” Nelson said. “The space suits, are they ready? And is SpaceX ready? And I ask the question every day: ‘How is SpaceX’s progress? And all of our managers are telling me they are meeting all of their milestones.”
Quote from: Robotbeat on 01/06/2023 11:47 pmRadar makes sense, but wouldn't lidar be affected by the strong light contrast?I'm no expert, but I would think that because of a laser's very narrow bandwidth, it would be easy to get a good signal-to-noise ratio even in bright sunlight with a narrow filter.
Quote from: Proponent on 01/07/2023 07:08 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 01/06/2023 11:47 pmRadar makes sense, but wouldn't lidar be affected by the strong light contrast?I'm no expert, but I would think that because of a laser's very narrow bandwidth, it would be easy to get a good signal-to-noise ratio even in bright sunlight with a narrow filter.Actually you were quoting me, but attributing my quote to Robotbeat... Do we have any hardware that is available today that could do that, or would be have to create customer lidar sensors with that sensitivity?
Aeva and NASA want to map the moon with lidar-powered KNaCK packDevin ColdeweyApril 21, 2022...its use of frequency-modulated continuous wave tech instead of flash or other lidar methods, means it is robust to interference from bright sunlight.Luckily, light works the same, for the most part anyway, on the moon as it does here on Earth. The lack of atmosphere does change some things a bit, but for the most part it’s more about making sure the tech can do its thing safely."There’s no need to change the wavelengths or spectrum or anything like that. FMCW allows us to get the performance we need, here or anywhere else," said Aeva CEO Soroush Salehian. “The key is hardening it, and that’s something we’re working with NASA and their partners on.”"Because we’ve packaged all our elements into this little gold box, it means that part of the system isn’t susceptible to things going on because of a change in atmospheric conditions, like vacuum conditions..."
The struggle over the Speakership and flaring intra-party tempers are important from a space policy perspective because of what it foreshadows for passing legislation in these next two years. Getting any legislation passed is a challenge, but all the more so when the Speaker and his supporters are at such odds with a group within their own party that it takes 15 votes to get elected. This was the first time since 1923 that it took more than one. It took nine that year. The record was 133 ballots in 1855-1856.That’s on top of the sharp divide between Republicans and Democrats on many issues, especially government spending. Republicans want to increase defense spending while cutting non-defense spending (e.g. NASA and NOAA) to reduce the debt. Democrats insist that non-defense spending be funded commensurately with defense.Washington Examiner reporter Susan Ferrechio reports that in order to win over detractors, he [McCarthy] vowed the House will pass a budget resolution capping discretionary spending at “FY2022 levels or lower,” reject negotiations with the Senate unless they comply with House direction, and refuse to increase the debt limit unless the growth of spending is reduced or capped.NASA’s budget could drop from the $25.4 billion it just got for FY2023 to $24.0 billion if they held to FY2022 levels on an agency-by-agency basis.Another concession McCarthy reportedly made was that each of the 12 appropriations bills must be passed individually instead of combined into a single omnibus bill, open to amendment on the floor, and on time. That sounds reasonable and Members from both parties on both sides of Capitol Hill routinely decry the use of Continuing Resolutions and omnibus bills, but they are commonplace because there’s no other way to reach agreement.
Members from both parties on both sides of Capitol Hill routinely decry the use of Continuing Resolutions and omnibus bills...
The challenging budget environment for Artemis going forward...QuoteThe struggle over the Speakership and flaring intra-party tempers are important from a space policy perspective because of what it foreshadows for passing legislation in these next two years. Getting any legislation passed is a challenge, but all the more so when the Speaker and his supporters are at such odds with a group within their own party that it takes 15 votes to get elected. This was the first time since 1923 that it took more than one. It took nine that year. The record was 133 ballots in 1855-1856.That’s on top of the sharp divide between Republicans and Democrats on many issues, especially government spending. Republicans want to increase defense spending while cutting non-defense spending (e.g. NASA and NOAA) to reduce the debt. Democrats insist that non-defense spending be funded commensurately with defense.Washington Examiner reporter Susan Ferrechio reports that in order to win over detractors, he [McCarthy] vowed the House will pass a budget resolution capping discretionary spending at “FY2022 levels or lower,” reject negotiations with the Senate unless they comply with House direction, and refuse to increase the debt limit unless the growth of spending is reduced or capped.NASA’s budget could drop from the $25.4 billion it just got for FY2023 to $24.0 billion if they held to FY2022 levels on an agency-by-agency basis.Another concession McCarthy reportedly made was that each of the 12 appropriations bills must be passed individually instead of combined into a single omnibus bill, open to amendment on the floor, and on time. That sounds reasonable and Members from both parties on both sides of Capitol Hill routinely decry the use of Continuing Resolutions and omnibus bills, but they are commonplace because there’s no other way to reach agreement.https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-finally-ready-for-118th-congress-government-spending-cuts-top-priority/
Quote from: VSECOTSPE on 01/09/2023 02:14 amThe challenging budget environment for Artemis going forward...QuoteThe struggle over the Speakership and flaring intra-party tempers are important from a space policy perspective because of what it foreshadows for passing legislation in these next two years. Getting any legislation passed is a challenge, but all the more so when the Speaker and his supporters are at such odds with a group within their own party that it takes 15 votes to get elected. This was the first time since 1923 that it took more than one. It took nine that year. The record was 133 ballots in 1855-1856.That’s on top of the sharp divide between Republicans and Democrats on many issues, especially government spending. Republicans want to increase defense spending while cutting non-defense spending (e.g. NASA and NOAA) to reduce the debt. Democrats insist that non-defense spending be funded commensurately with defense.Washington Examiner reporter Susan Ferrechio reports that in order to win over detractors, he [McCarthy] vowed the House will pass a budget resolution capping discretionary spending at “FY2022 levels or lower,” reject negotiations with the Senate unless they comply with House direction, and refuse to increase the debt limit unless the growth of spending is reduced or capped.NASA’s budget could drop from the $25.4 billion it just got for FY2023 to $24.0 billion if they held to FY2022 levels on an agency-by-agency basis.Another concession McCarthy reportedly made was that each of the 12 appropriations bills must be passed individually instead of combined into a single omnibus bill, open to amendment on the floor, and on time. That sounds reasonable and Members from both parties on both sides of Capitol Hill routinely decry the use of Continuing Resolutions and omnibus bills, but they are commonplace because there’s no other way to reach agreement.https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-finally-ready-for-118th-congress-government-spending-cuts-top-priority/Yes, I posted this article in the space policy section. I don't expect that shutdowns will happen. Republicans always get blamed for shutdowns (so they try to avoid them) but I would expect CRs. Apparently, the House CRs would be at 98% of the funding of the prior year.Year-long CRs are possible but it doesn't happen very often. It last happened in FY2013 and before that in FY2011 and FY2007.https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/20-years-of-congresss-budget-procrastination-in-one-chart/Having said all of that I am not sure that the challenging budget environment will affect Artemis more than other programs. A budget resolution isn't binding, so capping amounts in a budget resolution doesn't have much of an impact on the appropriations bill. If the House insists on capping amounts to the FY22 level, the likely result would be a series of CRs and perhaps even a year-long CR for FY24. For FY25, an agreement might be possible after the 2024 election.
The challenging budget environment for Artemis going forward...Quote<snip>Another concession McCarthy reportedly made was that each of the 12 appropriations bills must be passed individually instead of combined into a single omnibus bill, open to amendment on the floor, and on time. That sounds reasonable and Members from both parties on both sides of Capitol Hill routinely decry the use of Continuing Resolutions and omnibus bills, but they are commonplace because there’s no other way to reach agreement.</snip>https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-finally-ready-for-118th-congress-government-spending-cuts-top-priority/
<snip>Another concession McCarthy reportedly made was that each of the 12 appropriations bills must be passed individually instead of combined into a single omnibus bill, open to amendment on the floor, and on time. That sounds reasonable and Members from both parties on both sides of Capitol Hill routinely decry the use of Continuing Resolutions and omnibus bills, but they are commonplace because there’s no other way to reach agreement.</snip>
