Technical off topic: why does NASA like to store and/or share its images in the TIFF format? IIRC, the last time I saw it used was when I had a scanner in the early 2000s. Is there any technical/digital preservation reason?
The wikipedia article for TIFF [1] actually has a "digital preservation" section but just says it's _possible_ to create a TIFF image without proprietary headers or compression technologies, which doesn't sound to be that relevant nor impossible to achieve with other formats.
EDIT: nevermind, this might be the reason: "The inclusion of the SampleFormat tag in TIFF 6.0 allows TIFF files to handle advanced pixel data types, including integer images with more than 8 bits per channel and floating point images. This tag made TIFF 6.0 a viable format for scientific image processing where extended precision is required. An example would be the use of TIFF to store images acquired using scientific CCD cameras that provide up to 16 bits per photosite of intensity resolution."
Is this really only possible with TIFF? Or is it just because it's what they've used in the 90s, and since it's still viable now, they might as well keep using it for consistency?
Eventually we'll have equipment on Mars that we want to function for a long duration, and we'll need to solve that problem, but for InSight (and others) death by dust was by design.
It costs money to operate these probes with a whole staff here on earth monitoring, commanding and analyzing the data that we receive. After some time you get diminishing returns on how much you can learn from the same probe, and would be better off paying these people to work on a new probe (improved using what you have learned) or even an identical probe, deployed elsewhere on the planet.
When these missions are designed that is taken into consideration to determine the desired lifespan of the mission, and the probe is designed to that lifespan (with some margin). Spending money (or worse mass) to make a component survive well beyond that lifespan would be a waste, and could cut into the (fiscal or mass) budget resulting in tradeoffs that make the probe less capable during the lifespan it has.
Insight was designed to operate for at least two years with margin. It has hit the limits of that margin after four years and it's time to shut it down.
It's all true, but times are changing. Soon it will be cheaper, as lift cost drops, to just send a thousand cheap, heavier probes towards mars... than one super engineered probe.
But with a thousand probes you still might not care about dusting the panels off. It all depends on how long you need the probes to last. Mass savings will still be important, in the same way material costs become more important when mass-producing something than when making a one-off.
The sweeper arm idea is better for panels on Earth due to humidity: https://news.mit.edu/2022/solar-panels-dust-magnets-0311 Electrostatic based solutions using a layer called an electrodynamic screen that was introduced in the early 1970s using interdigitated electrodes has potential for moistureless environments like Mars. But, the development cost for ad hoc Mars application is a high barrier.
Motorcycle racers use "tear aways" on their helmet visors. Thin plastic sheets that they can tear off and throw away when the visor gets too dirty.
(Not sure I'd want to deploy a system that intentionally litters single use plastics onto pristine planets though. We're already the species who spent way too long tossing old-fashioned non-biodegradable styrofoam cheeseburger containers out of 1967 Cadillac Eldorado Convertibles with whale-skin hubcaps getting 1mpg doing 110mph down the freeway...)
Might be able to use something like a toner transfer belt/blanket in a laser printer, with brushes and/or electrostatics to clean the belt as it cycles in a loop.
I'm sure it's not that simple, but I suspect that it simply isn't worth it to launch extra mass to Mars. InSight was successful in its mission, I don't know what value would be gained from extending its life further.
I always want to bike-shed this problem so bad. Brushes, electrostatic cleaners, vibrators, vortex generators, reel-to-reel plastic film over the panels...
There are so many things that seem like they would work but I know it's only because I don't understand the tradeoffs. In space tech, everything comes with a catch.
Perseverance uses an RTG (radioisotope thermal generator) and does not have solar panels.
And, as mentioned, you don't want the helicopter flying anywhere near the rover for fear it would collide and damage the rover.
Also, not really ironically, the helicopter's own solar panels (which sit above the rotor blades) are collecting dust, and that plus the lower sunlight during this part of the Martian year have significantly reduced power levels. They have had to implement measures to reduce power consumption, which will reduce the operating life of the internal batteries. It is possible we won't see any more flights, not sure yet.
Because the linked article doesn't explain, here's the Wikipedia blurb about what InSight is/was:
The Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport (InSight) mission is a robotic lander designed to study the deep interior of the planet Mars. It was manufactured by Lockheed Martin Space Systems, is managed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), and most of its scientific instruments were built by European agencies. The mission launched on 5 May 2018 at 11:05:01 UTC aboard an Atlas V-401 launch vehicle and successfully landed at Elysium Planitia on Mars on 26 November 2018 at 19:52:59 UTC. InSight traveled 483×106 km (300×106 mi) during its journey. As of 25 May 2022, InSight has been active on Mars for 1242 sols (1276 days; 3 years, 180 days).
InSight's objectives are to place a seismometer, called Seismic Experiment for Interior Structure (SEIS), on the surface of Mars to measure seismic activity and provide accurate 3D models of the planet's interior; and measure internal heat transfer using a heat probe called HP3 to study Mars' early geological evolution. This could bring a new understanding of how the Solar System's terrestrial planets – Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars – and Earth's Moon form and evolve.
The lander was originally planned for launch in March 2016. An instrument problem delayed the launch beyond the 2016 launch window. NASA officials rescheduled the InSight launch to May 2018 and during the wait the instrument was repaired. This increased the total cost from US$675 million to US$830 million. NASA stated that due to excessive dust on its solar panels preventing it from recharging, they plan to put InSight in low-power mode for detecting seisemic events in July 2022 and continue monitoring the lander through the operational period ending in December 2022.
InSight recently recorded its largest earthquake a M5. And it was far enough away that it might have passed the Martian core, constraining its diameter.
I think there have been six quakes large enough to determine the location, i.e. a distance and azimuth. There have been hundreds of smaller quakes where they determine seismicity patterns, but not location.
I feel like I'm in a time warp lately. Bunch of things obvious and non-obvious contributing to this, but if someone asked me when this landed I would have said end of 2020 or so. It's disturbing lol.
It's not a rover so it didn't get as much attention.
Also one of its goals was to drill a 10ft shaft with a heat probe to study subsurface temperatures, but this drilling operation did not succeed given the soil composition was different than expected.
The wikipedia article for TIFF [1] actually has a "digital preservation" section but just says it's _possible_ to create a TIFF image without proprietary headers or compression technologies, which doesn't sound to be that relevant nor impossible to achieve with other formats.
EDIT: nevermind, this might be the reason: "The inclusion of the SampleFormat tag in TIFF 6.0 allows TIFF files to handle advanced pixel data types, including integer images with more than 8 bits per channel and floating point images. This tag made TIFF 6.0 a viable format for scientific image processing where extended precision is required. An example would be the use of TIFF to store images acquired using scientific CCD cameras that provide up to 16 bits per photosite of intensity resolution."
Is this really only possible with TIFF? Or is it just because it's what they've used in the 90s, and since it's still viable now, they might as well keep using it for consistency?
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF