Talk:JunoCam

Movable Cameras
Re: "...The Voyager cameras (that also imaged Jupiter) were the only spacecraft cameras that were movable."

This isn't true. Most of the missions with vidicams had scan platforms (Voyager, Mariner, Viking, some of the Rangers) as did Galileo.

Aspect Ratio
Re: "...capable of color imaging at 1600 x 1200 pixels...It has a field of view of 18 x 3.4 degrees..."

That implies a very "squished" aspect ratio. Is that correct? The visual aspect ratio can be corrected by image processing, but resolution (detail level) would then favor one axis over the other, meaning one axis will be roughly 5 times blurrier than the other. Not a show-stopper, but possibly confusing to human viewers. Unless, maybe the craft rotates to cover both aspects by taking two shots of the same spot at roughly a 90-degree angle. Then computer processing at the lab has more info to compensate and clean. --146.233.0.201 (talk) 18:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

The field of view of "18 x 3.4 degrees" is incorrect. The horizontal field of view is about 58°. Pixels are square. The CCD is 1600x1200 active pixels. The electronics reads out up to 4 stripes of height 128 pixels, each. Raw swathes are then composed of these framelets. On top of the CCD there are color filters, a red, a green, a blue and a "methane" (890 nm) filter, which add color semantics to the framelets. Between the readout regions there is a gap of 27 between the RGB readout regions, and a gap of 37 pixels to the methane filter. Basics of JunoCam here: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11214-014-0079-x CCD spec here: http://www.stargazing.net/david/QSI/KAI-2020LongSpec.pdf

Sounds like the resolution would be better than 15km at 4300km range, assuming the effective resolution is something approaching 1 milliradian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.75.200.138 (talk) 20:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

87.146.159.219 (talk) 14:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I started this article and that information originated here I am not sure why they (the author of this book) said it that way, but that is why it said 18 x 3.4 degrees for the field of view, it was from the book Giant Planets of Our Solar System: Atmospheres, Composition, and Structure. Thank you Fotaun (talk) 20:47, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Forgot to mention: The observation planning of JunoCam in the paper is obsolete in parts, since the trajectory planning has been changed to two 53.5 day orbits, followed by 14 day orbits. http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EPSC2015/EPSC2015-799-1.pdf 87.146.159.219 (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Period reduction maneuver (PRM) postponed
Due to an issue with valves in the propulsion system, the scheduled PRM couldn't be performed near perijove 2 (PJ2) on October 19, 2016. This scrambles all consecutive observation planning. Next attempt of PRM is to be determined. Next opportunity would be Dec. 11, but appears to be considered unlikely ("The next close flyby is scheduled on Dec. 11, with all science instruments on.". PRM is with all instruments off.) 87.146.152.80 (talk) 15:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on JunoCam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150702121637/http://missionjuno.swri.edu/media-gallery to http://missionjuno.swri.edu/media-gallery

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:12, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Update needed
The spacecraft has never been in its planned 11-day orbit, since the maneuver planned for October 2016 did not occur. As a result, the paragraph in the lead section regarding its downlink speed is factually wrong. The same problem is present in the Juno (spacecraft) article. The outdated paragraph should be either rewritten (with reliable sources about the actual data rate) or deleted. Renerpho (talk) 01:53, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Juno flyby of Jupiter, Perijove 16 (PIA22692).jpg