PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Old NASA Equipment Will Be ...



Fraser
2005-Jul-12, 05:03 PM
SUMMARY: During the Apollo era of spaceflight, many US spacecraft and vehicles were left on the Moon when the astronauts returned home. For the first time in more than 30 years, we'll get a chance to see them again when NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter arrives at the Moon in 2008. It will be equipped with a camera capable of resolving the surface of the Moon down to half a metre (1.6 feet). Some of the larger structures on the Moon are 9 metres (30 feet) across, so they should be easy to spot by the orbiter.

View full article (http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/abandoned_spaceships_lroc.html)

What do you think about this story? Post your comments below.

antoniseb
2005-Jul-12, 05:24 PM
It will be cool to see the images. I'm kind of curious to see the giant boulder that Schmidt was working around in his last EVA for Apollo 17.

suitti
2005-Jul-12, 07:23 PM
So, in 2008 or so, the conspiratists will claim that NASA faked the new Apollo images.
Hi res images of the Mars face hasn't really slowed them down much. Now if ESA,
Russia, China, India or Japan images the moon landers, it would be that much
harder to say it was all a fake, though I'm sure they'd try.

One of the problems that HST has in imaging the moon is tracking. It isn't
designed to track the moon - it moves too fast, and there isn't anything for
the fine guidance sensors (which are designed to see point like objects)
to lock onto. So, though the moon has been imaged by HST, the results
aren't as impressive as they might be. They are a little blurry, due to incorrect
tracking. They are better than they might be because the moon is bright,
and so short exposures can be made.

It should be pointed out that the fine guidance sensors
take 20 minutes to obtain a 3 milliarcsecond lock. At the slew rate of the
moon (and taking into account the changing orbital position of the HST), in 20 minutes,
any guide stars are way out of the field of view... so the best one can do
is guess. One does that by writing software to compute the position and
speed of the HST, and position and speed of the Moon, and the angle rates
that this implies. Then, you guess how fast to turn the HST during the shot.
But, you can't actually track anything and fix up the inevitable differences
between theory and practice.

What is the difference between theory and practice? Well, in
theory, they're the same.

I think that Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy (http://www.badastronomy.com)
rebuttals to the conspirators are more convincing. His site shows why
the conspirator's interpretation of the evidence is flawed, even silly.
It discredits the conspirators in a way that is verifiable by a fairly wide
audience.

And, Phil's site is cheaper.

Guest
2005-Jul-12, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by suitti@Jul 12 2005, 07:23 PM
I think that Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy (http://www.badastronomy.com)
rebuttals to the conspirators are more convincing. His site shows why
the conspirator's interpretation of the evidence is flawed, even silly.
It discredits the conspirators in a way that is verifiable by a fairly wide
audience.

And, Phil's site is cheaper.
But this mission isn't being sent up to disprove conspiricy theorists, that's just a bonus. Plus, this won't put out their fire- they'll just say these photos are fake, and that they're digitally altered to make it look like proof.

Greg
2005-Jul-13, 03:41 AM
Finally, we can put the conspirator mania to rest once and for all. I imagine some futile effort will be made to discredit this data somehow, but eventually even they will realize that nobody will be listening and they will go away. I am sure that they will rally behind some other paranoid cause unsubstantiated by facts, however.

aeolus
2005-Jul-13, 04:28 AM
Originally posted by Greg@Jul 13 2005, 03:41 AM
... but eventually even they will realize that nobody will be listening and they will go away.
I'm not even listening right now...why haven't they gone away yet??? :P

piersdad
2005-Jul-13, 04:36 AM
its like a mental illness repeat the same thing endlessly hoping for a different result

they repeat all the time and hope some one with brains will believe them.

John L
2005-Jul-13, 05:08 AM
They won't say the images from this will be faked. They'll say that now that NASA does have the technology to send things to the Moon and beyond that they sent what we'll see up in the last few years on some of those top secret military launches so that when this probe finally arrives and starts snapping pictures there will be something to see. The resolution won't be good enough to make out footprints, just the landers, rovers, and some rover tracks maybe. That NASA can fake easy!

Of, course, they'll be stark raving loonies, but we all seem to recognize that. :blink:

Tony Branton
2005-Jul-13, 05:46 AM
And don't forget the Lunokhod Soviet teleoperated rover and sample return vehicles, the crater left behind by the SIVB stage and maybe some Ranger impacts - hopefully they'll also be resolved by LROC.

I can hardly wait!

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-13, 09:48 AM
I am not bothered whether the Americans landed on the moon or not. I am more intrigued in why Russia never talks about being on the moon.

Also, Clementine images are possibly full of LARGE objects on the moon. Depending how open minded you are ! :huh: you might find this research interesting.

http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidenc...oon-objects.htm (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2004/068/moon-objects.htm)

antoniseb
2005-Jul-13, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Eric Vaxxine@Jul 13 2005, 09:48 AM
Depending how open minded you are you might find this research interesting.

Hi Eric,

I would be interested to know what the Clementine team has to say about these blurred out areas, but I am quite certain that our ground based telescopes would have noticed a 150 kilometer tall tower on the moon, even if it doesn't leave a shadow. It's not like the Clementine images are the best looks we have of these areas.

If this is from the back side of the moon, the lunar prospector images, and other lunar orbiter missions plus Apollo have probably got much better shots than this.

Jakenorrish
2005-Jul-13, 01:46 PM
I'm with JohnL on this one.

A new conspiricy will be invented along the lines of 'Well, of course they flew the equipment up there just to make it look even more convincing, though people didn't actually go there'.

Or 'They only flew all the equipment up there last year in anticipation of this'.

Or more probably 'Aliens left that equipment there. NASA faked the moon landings to stop people from finding out about them. The stars and stripes aren't on the equipment...'

Remember folks The truth is out there!

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-13, 04:01 PM
Antoniseb ... I like that. What do the Clementine team have to say? Is it possible to get something like this to them do you think? Would they be allowed to respond?

That Russion moon rover was news to me. Excellent.

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-13, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by Jakenorrish@Jul 13 2005, 01:46 PM


Remember folks The truth is out there!
Where is 'there', exactly?

antoniseb
2005-Jul-13, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Eric Vaxxine@Jul 13 2005, 04:01 PM
What do the Clementine team have to say?
Here's the NASA website for the mission:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/clementine.html

You can order CD's loaded with the images if you want. I didn't see them directly on-line, but I didn't look very hard. After you read everything on the website, you might try emailing your questions about it to Dave Williams, the mission curator.

I'd be interested in seeing your questions and his answers.

Personally I expect that the blurs and defects we are observing are because of communication issues, or spacecraft issues, and not because of something unusual on the moon, but I'd like to hear what caused them from an official source.

John L
2005-Jul-13, 07:12 PM
Or maybe that mars anomaly guy is insane, those are artifacts from him processing the imaging in jpeg format, and as Anton pointed out everything in that image has a shadow except the supposed tower. Can we get an official ban on linking to that nut? I know this site allows teh discussion of theories that are not widely accepted, by this guy is a proven fool...

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-14, 08:16 AM
John, I think that is a bit harsh: Insane; Official ban; Proven fool... anyhow, it's all good for discussion.
I will attempt to get some details from the C.Crew. Thanks Antoniseb

Guest
2005-Jul-14, 10:01 AM
Eric, I was using the tag line from the X files as that's a conspiricy theorists' TV programme.

Jakenorrish
2005-Jul-14, 10:03 AM
Sorry, the last post was me in case you were wondering!

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-14, 12:29 PM
Jakenorrish - Yes..sorry... I was only being flippant. How far is 30 minutes by car, for instance?

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-14, 02:22 PM
JakeNorrish - It was just me being flippant. Sorry. F'instance:
How far is 30 minutes by car ?





:rolleyes:

Eric Vaxxine
2005-Jul-18, 02:39 PM
I mailed the Clementine team today.



:o

antoniseb
2005-Jul-18, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by Eric Vaxxine@Jul 18 2005, 02:39 PM
I mailed the Clementine team today.
Thanks Eric,

I look forward to seeing the reply. Hopefully this is not a vacation week for the curator.

Nick4
2005-Jul-27, 03:21 AM
Are thay going to get the old equipment?

aeolus
2005-Jul-27, 06:57 PM
The article says they'll be photographing it, not retreiving any of it.