We crossed the ten thousand observation mark this week; that’s our total number of observations since arriving at Mars. Roughly 9800 observations are of Mars (of course). Then there’s Phobos, Deimos, Jupiter, and the Earth and Moon (hope you were smiling!).

Over 9400 of these observations have been released to the Planetary Data System as JP2 files (over 9000 of these have color). As of today, 365 observations have been received after the end of the last PDS delivery, and are in the queue for the next one.

A handful of observations have data gaps in critical portions of the raw files (namely, science channel headers), or other severe problems that prevent processing from proceeding. We’re working on improved tools and procedures to alleviate the large amount of manual work to process those images; there’s a very good chance that the usable data can ultimately be recovered and released.

The rest (243 to be exact) are ‘CAL’ or calibration observations, used to verify settings on HiRISE, or obtain data that helps us remove noise and other imaging artifacts in our automated processing. They’re normally taken while on the night side of Mars with ’stim’ lamps on to provide a known, fixed light source.

Take a look at the plot below, which shows the cumulative number of observations received (in salmon) and the cumulative number released (as RDR’s, in mauve) as a function of time.

• The big steps are PDS data releases. The first was six months after beginning the primary operations in November 2006.
• There’s a missing step around December of 2007. That’s because we released a large number of color images, getting caught up with our color processing in lieu of a standard EDR/RDR release.
• The horizontal steps are not completely horizontal. The slope is our rate of weekly featured image releases.
• As noted earlier, just about everything is released, the totals are converging, the lag is 365 observations, or about a month at our current rate.
• The totals are a little less than 10,000; that’s the difference made by the CAL observations and the handful that currently can’t be easily recovered.
• There’s a ‘hump’ of received observations in late 2008, that’s the high data rate period (when Earth and Mars were closest).
• There are a few flat steps where no observations are received. One is the month-long solar conjunction period centered on Nov-Dec 2008, the safe modes of February 2007 and February 2008, etc.

We’re doing about ten observations per day at the moment. During the high data rate period it was nearly double that.

(more…)

We’re in the midst of another HiRISE team meeting here in Tucson. I can’t believe it’s been almost two years since the team meeting I blogged about here. There are a few new faces, but mostly familiar friends that we’ve worked with for years by now. Our two newest Targeting Specialists are meeting the science team for the first time. (They’re actually not that “new” any more – they started last June, but this is their first team meeting.) Some of the other new folks are students and post-docs who are working on interesting research projects using HiRISE data. There are also a few people from JPL here at the meeting, who we talk to on the phone and email often, but we’ve never actually met face-to-face before.

Today during the meeting we are getting updates on all the Science Themes. Our images are divided into groups according to the geologic process that we hypothesize occurred. For each of these themes, a Science Theme Lead is assigned. These “STLs” are Co-Investigators or postdocs who are experts in that area. For example, the Volcanic Processes theme contains images intended to explore phenomena related to volcanism, such as inflated lavas, water-lava interactions, volcanic pits and cones, and mysterious types of collapse features such as the one shown in the anaglyph to the left. As you can read in the caption for that image, we’re still not sure how this feature formed. There are several different possibilities. The image was originally placed in the Impact Processes theme because that was one hypothesis. However, after seeing the high resolution image and stereo data from HiRISE, formation by a meteor impact doesn’t seem as plausible. Collapse after loss of material beneath the surface, such as magma or water, is a better fit to our observations.