Answers #2 and #4 are by the person who designed the flanges on both Viking's and Voyager's DTRs. (The flange was "designed to absorb resonances created by the clear/transparent belt wrapped around the tape, generated by the movement of the tape drive itself.")
Answer #1 and #3 have useful information and links to contemporary sources that provide more detail about high-tech the recorders were.
Incidentally, Voyager's DTR was mounted so that it's mechanical movements had minimal impact on the spacecraft's pitch and yaw, which I assume means they had the most effect on the roll axis. For the Uranus and Neptune encounters, which required long exposures and panning, finer control of Voyager 2's attitude was implemented, including counteracting even the minimal pitch and yaw effects of the DTR.
Those interested in more information about Voyager's DTR should check out a discussion on the Space Exploration Stack Exchange, "How was magnetic tape decay prevented in Voyager 1?", https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/2053/how-was-magne...
Answers #2 and #4 are by the person who designed the flanges on both Viking's and Voyager's DTRs. (The flange was "designed to absorb resonances created by the clear/transparent belt wrapped around the tape, generated by the movement of the tape drive itself.")
Answer #1 and #3 have useful information and links to contemporary sources that provide more detail about high-tech the recorders were.
Incidentally, Voyager's DTR was mounted so that it's mechanical movements had minimal impact on the spacecraft's pitch and yaw, which I assume means they had the most effect on the roll axis. For the Uranus and Neptune encounters, which required long exposures and panning, finer control of Voyager 2's attitude was implemented, including counteracting even the minimal pitch and yaw effects of the DTR.