|
|
|
|
|
by manarth
3498 days ago
|
|
Their system design accepted data from a number of sensors, and allowed for the possibility of sensor error. In a hypothetical scenario, if one of those altitude sensors used barometric pressure, then a piece of grit or ice could have blocked the air intake, allowing the sensor to record a lower pressure than expected. If that grit or ice were suddenly blown away, then the sensor could record an instant change from an incorrect value (3.7km altitude) to a correct value. Even a negative altitude isn't necessarily incorrect, if the "altitude" is based on a mean ground level. For example, the shore of the Dead Sea is at an altitude of -423m [1]. The challenge with designing something like this is to imagine all the possible ways it could fail, all the possible misleading sensors inputs, and an appropriate action for each of them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_places_on_land_with_el... |
|
As Mars lacks water, the idea of a "zero datum" isn't really meaningful, so an arbitrary point has been used.
Between 1971 and 2001, the "zero elevation" point was an atmospheric pressure of 6.105mb [1] (for comparison, Earth's zero datum is 1013.25mb).
Since 2001, the zero datum definition has been based on the mean radius of the planet (an ellipsoid called the Areoid, similar to Earth's Geoid).
The lowest point on Mars is therefore at an altitude of -8200m (the Hellas impact crater). [2]
(edit) Interestingly, the intended landing site - Meridiani Planum - is "below ground" at an altitude of -250m. [3]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Mars#Zero_elevati...
[2] http://geology.com/articles/highest-point-on-mars.shtml
[3] http://io9.gizmodo.com/this-elevation-map-of-mars-makes-the-...