From: henry@spsystems.net   
      
   In article <72d32143.0311012209.20aaafe8@posting.google.com>,   
   Christopher M. Jones  wrote:   
   >Limited bandwidth and limited budget I'll buy, but not limited light.   
   >Modern imaging technology is just too good to give that any weight.   
   >Keep in mind that the '70s vintage Voyager spacecraft did a fair job   
   >out at Neptune...   
      
   Bear in mind that the only probe yet to enter Jupiter's atmosphere was   
   built only a few years after the Voyagers, with quite similar technology.   
      
   The two situations also are not quite comparable.  Voyager 2 at Neptune   
   could, and did, use quite long exposures.  That option isn't available   
   when parachuting down through an atmosphere.   
      
   >...The setup for imagery on   
   >Saturn's moon Titan will be no better than within the Jovian   
   >atmosphere but there at least the probe has the chance to land on the   
   >surface and spool off all its recorded images.   
      
   No, the data and images from Huygens will be coming back in real time.   
   There is no assurance that it will survive the landing, since we know   
   almost nothing about the nature of the surface.  Whether it will remain in   
   communication is also a little uncertain; in particular, if it lands on a   
   slope, its antenna may be pointed too far off vertical for Cassini to   
   continue receiving it.  And finally, even if all goes well, it won't be   
   sending data from the surface for more than a half hour or so (I forget   
   the exact number), partly because its batteries will be getting very low   
   but mostly because Cassini will go below its horizon.  Huygens is   
   primarily an atmosphere probe, not a lander, so long surface life was   
   not a design goal.   
      
   The difference in imaging is partly better technology, but mostly just   
   that the people designing Cassini/Huygens gave imaging a higher priority.   
   There wasn't any law of nature saying that the Galileo atmosphere probe's   
   data rate had to be too low for effective imaging; that number emerged from   
   the design tradeoffs that were made, based partly on the assumption that   
   the probe didn't *need* a high data rate.   
   --   
   MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec    | Henry Spencer   
   pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well.  | henry@spsystems.net   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)