It looks like the Huygens probe does indeed have a camera.  Check out this link:

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/instruments-huygens.cfm

Then look under the "Descent Imager/Spectral Radiometer (DISR)" section and it talks about a visible and an infrared camera that will take a mosaic of pictures around the landing site and during descent.

You had me worried there for a moment.  I remember reading about the histories of the various problems and how so many scientists argued against having cameras on board (because they were "unscientific" and weren't there to address any specific hypothesis, rather just there to see what they could see) but the "PR" guys at Nasa (including, on some of the missions, Carl Sagan) forced them to put the cameras on.  Of course, it seems to have turned out, time and time again, that the cameras gave the most useful information every time.

Remember Galileo's probe that was dropped into the atmosphere of Jupiter?  It took them forever to explain the strange readings they got while it descended.  If they had a camera on board they would have seen right off the bat that the probe had dropped into a "hole" in the clouds.

Chuck Hards wrote:
Done a little surfing.  You know, this takes a lot of
time on a slow modem, and especially if one doesn't
bookmark many sites!

Now, I'm all for space travel, but I don't wear a NASA
jumpsuit or rubber-stamp my appoval on every press
release that comes out of NASA or JPL.  As a taxpayer,
though, I've got a right to question, even at this
late date.

Apparently the lander has no camera!  It is a ESA
craft, only the orbiter section's design and
constuction was NASA managed.  I had many problems
even loading some of the ESA pages, but couldn't find
anything on surface imaging.  The entire lander
science package is geared toward atmospheric
measurement.  There was one link that didn't work that
said something like 'surface science'.  Good luck,
folks, you've got maybe 180 seconds, so get it right!

Heck, I'd trade weather data for pictures or video on
the first mission to any planetary or "dirt" target,
any day.

I'm also reminded that the entire lander sequence has
been re-scripted since launch because it was
discovered that at the relative speeds of the two
craft after separation, they could'nt communicate with
each other.  Seems that the bandwidth on the orbiters
receiver is too narrow to receive the Doppler-shifted
transmitions of the lander!  No kidding!  So the new
separation scenario calls for a much slower approach.

C'mon, this is basic engineering for spacecraft.  How
could they have botched this?  A project manager
should have lost his/her job for that one.  And the
cost of the mission deducted from their check!

And with the power situation being as tightly budgeted
as it is, there won't be a second chance to transmit
the lander data.  Joe, the lander only has batteries,
no nuke fuel.

I really hope this mission works as advertised.  After
what I've read today, though, I'm not quite as
optimistic as I was.  Have we sent a K-car to Saturn?

my 3 cents (and all typed with one hand!).

C.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

_______________________________________________
Utah-Astronomy mailing list
Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy