"There's a problem with this focus movie"

[elainekeefe]

1946340V1

I think that the team have suggested the wrong end of this track for the correct co-ordinates. The correct point (deepest) should be around 500, 210?

7311872V1 and 4606572V1 - Am I alone in missing these as I considered that a particle track would be deeper into the gel than the surface features?

Perfect examples of why I stopped dusting. I no longer have a clue as to what we're looking for.

[caprarom]

Well, laserphil, don't know as it should make you feel any better, but I missed both 7311872 and 4606572 as well.

Mike C.

[fjgiie]

1946340V1

I think that the team have suggested the wrong end of this track for the correct co-ordinates. The correct point (deepest) should be around 500, 210?  ...

A missed track

Which end do we click on it here? - two tracks in this movie

[laserphil]

And another with the track totally out of focus before the surface is in focus - I hate missing a 7 pointer because the track is above the gel surface!

3436492v1

Laserphil

[laserphil]

And yet another where the track is in focus above the surface debris and goes totally out of focus as the surface comes into focus:
3436492V1

Tracks in air not aerogel!

[laserphil]

Sorry to all, I put the wrong PM number on my last post it should have been

7311022V1

[Shigeru]

Hello to everybody! I'm returning to dusting after sometime "offline" due a various problems, I found this focus movie out of focus:

5849867V1

Nevertheless, things are working better now for what I can see

[laserphil]

I feel that I am now alone dusting or at least posting anything on the forum.

I have listed this before at least a couple of times but still get caught - We have all been instructed to mark the deepest point of the track even if it is out of focus yet still this PM has incorrect co-ordinates marking the highest point not deepest!

highest point

I was under the mistaken impression that this error had been corrected - the vast majority have but it still appears.

Is there anyone from the team monitoring these posts any more?

[caprarom]

Hmmm - I agree that it is hard to discern in some of these tracks just what is the deeper end, but I would side with the team on this particular one. However, it looks like someone could click on the left edge of the "correct" end and still record a miss. I much prefer the smaller tracks - less uncertainty.

[laserphil]

Hi Caprarom

I take it then that you do not see this as an HAT with the deepest particles aligned away from the supposed correct co-ordinates towards the top edge of the FOV.

What do you see as the track?

If you consider the structure at the co-ordinates as the track then what are the particles in the line to the top of the PM - they do come into focus progressively deeper than the object at the co-ordinates?

I still stand by my determination that the deepest part of this HAT is at the top edge of the FOV. Unless this is one of the tracks that came through from the back of the collector!!!!! And there is no way possible for a duster to determine that without being informed by the team!

[laserphil]

Just had a look back at the last time I posted about this track and it is one that has come through from the back of the collector. This was Dan's answer on it from page 18 of this post

Okay, don't be paranoid. This is a "track," but it came up through the aerogel from the OTHER SIDE! (just please don't ask what it is, because right now, we're not sure) Anyway, that's why the terminal end (which is where the "where to click" got placed) is not actually the deepest focus. But of course that causes the confusion you've experienced, which is not really fair and it probably should have never been turned into a PM. Thus we're working on removing it as PM. But there are "cousins" (other PMs made from the original), so if you spot them, please report them here too. Thank you!

[jsmaje]

Okay, don't be paranoid. This is a "track," but it came up through the aerogel from the OTHER SIDE!

Crazy stuff! I’m a bit hazy as to the material (? aluminium) and how thick the partition between the cometary and interstellar particle sides of the collector were. I guess that to have penetrated through the first into the second and created a ‘reverse-track’ must surely imply something fairly hefty – a particularly heavy cometary particle or random metallic micrometeorite, or perhaps deflected material from some opposite-surface of the spacecraft?

Or, might such a ‘reverse track’ have occurred due to a not-quite-head-on IS particle impacting close to (as is common ) a distorted/amorphous edge of the aerogel tile (therefore unlikely to leave a clear initial track), but then bouncing back from the rear surface before leaving a recognisable trace?
Just a wild thought!
John

[fjgiie]

Perhaps only a fiducial. (or Needle Poke)

See bottom entry

I can see where the team would have trouble figuring out what this is. It is a very strange looking track. However, I agree that the lowest point is at the top of the page.

@jsmaje        Please see this old post by albutterworth.

[caprarom]

Hmmm - interesting. Upon closer examination, I agree. You were right; I was wrong. Certainly not for the first time. I much prefer the smaller tracks!

Mike C.

[DanZ]

Hi Everyone,

Sorry to have been away for so long (really!) but I have been pulled by other pressing projects, proposals, etc. by the team I actually do most of my work with (90-95%) - including some projects where I essentially function as PI (and thus need to report to NASA on, etc.). Seems things have calmed down now though and I will do my best to get caught up.

Thanks very much for continuing to post problematic PMs under this thread. I have recorded all that have been posted since my absence and am going to try and meet with the team to see if we can't correct these issues (many of which have common "themes") before we launch the new skill scoring mechanism (which in my mind would probably be a good time for a new "phase"). Give me a week and I'll fill you in with what gets decided!

Dan