PDA

View Full Version : Can we see the remains of Apollo lander?



DrdB
2007-Oct-19, 05:18 PM
Here is an Apollo site from Earth-based telescope

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/apollolanding/ApolloLanding/slide_02.html

The Hubble angular resolution boils down to 32 feet on the Lunar surface

http://www.spacetelescope.org/about/faq.html

However, telescopic arrays can resolve 50 times sharper than Hubble

http://www.physorg.com/news110809335.html

That would be 0.64 feet or about 8 inches in old money.

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-19, 05:21 PM
I asked this a while back and the answer is no - not from Hubble nor from any ground-based telescope. There is a slim chance that the orbiting Japanese probe may be able to see a long shadow (sunrise or sunset). A few searches should show you these threads.

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-19, 05:24 PM
Take a look at this post: http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/40981-what-happened-moon-7.html#post1035826

NEOWatcher
2007-Oct-19, 05:25 PM
However, telescopic arrays can resolve 50 times sharper than Hubble
http://www.physorg.com/news110809335.html
That would be 0.64 feet or about 8 inches in old money.
That would be great if the lander were generating radio waves.

There's a big difference in resolutions at different wavelengths.

Larry Jacks
2007-Oct-19, 06:24 PM
Like NEOWatcher pointed out, your cited example is for a collection of radio telescopes. Since the Apollo landers aren't radiating any RF energy, they'd be invisible to radio telescopes.

About a year from now, NASA plans to launch the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft. It's LROC (http://lunar.gsfc.nasa.gov/lroc.html) system will be able to image the surface at 0.5 meter resolution, the best of any camera ever sent to the moon. The Lunar Module (http://www.astronautix.com/craft/apollolm.htm) descent stage is 4.21 meters across so from directly above it might appear as roughly 9x9 pixels. The landing pads might also be visible. Shadows would make it bigger but it isn't going to be some high resolution image. For the last 3 missions, the Lunar Rover might appear as a few pixels parked close to the descent stage.

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-19, 06:26 PM
Here are a few references as to what the camera aboard Kaguya might be able to see:

http://www.bautforum.com/universe-today-story-comments/65711-first-pictures-kaguya.html

antoniseb
2007-Oct-19, 06:32 PM
It would probably be possible to blast a radar pulse at the moon, and receive the echoes from the metalic objects there, and image them with an extended radio array, getting pretty good images of these things, but:
1. it would be expensive to set up
2. no one who doubts the moon landings would agree that such images were proof, as they took a lot of computer processing to generate.

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-19, 06:34 PM
2. no one who doubts the moon landings would agree that such images were proof, as they took a lot of computer processing to generate.

With this digital age that we have moved into it's going to get harder and harder to trust a photo or video.

NEOWatcher
2007-Oct-19, 06:36 PM
It would probably be possible to blast a radar pulse at the moon, and receive the echoes from the metalic objects there, and image them with an extended radio array, getting pretty good images of these things, but:
1. it would be expensive to set up
2. no one who doubts the moon landings would agree that such images were proof, as they took a lot of computer processing to generate.
3. The exposure time may need to be increased tremendously to capture a weaker reflected source over an actual object that generates radio.

antoniseb
2007-Oct-19, 06:59 PM
3. The exposure time may need to be increased tremendously to capture a weaker reflected source over an actual object that generates radio.
Probably not. Have you seen the radar maps of Venus from Arecibo?
A short blast at the moon could probably concentrate the beam into a pretty small area (under a mile), and the landers and rovers are made of electriclly conductive material (metal) which will bounce the signal back pretty well.

NEOWatcher
2007-Oct-19, 07:09 PM
...Have you seen the radar maps of Venus from Arecibo?...
Now that you said it, and caused me to look, I have...

So; a few random ones I pulled up, I see around a 1 mile resolution. So, wouldn't that translate to about 50 ft resolution on the moon? Or am I finding pictures that have been surpassed in resolution?

antoniseb
2007-Oct-19, 07:40 PM
No, you are right about the resolution, but they were received by Arecibo's 300 meter dish, not a broader array of dishes as the original poster suggested.

NEOWatcher
2007-Oct-19, 07:43 PM
No, you are right about the resolution, but they were received by Arecibo's 300 meter dish, not a broader array of dishes as the original poster suggested.
So how would the OP method compare with Arecibo?

antoniseb
2007-Oct-19, 07:59 PM
It would have a wider array, and so the theoretical resolution would be much finer. However, let me point out that this hasn't been tried (to my knowledge), and there are plenty of reasons to think it might be technically *very* difficult, and possibly require new equipment and analysis methods.

I am not advocating that we should do this.

alainprice
2007-Oct-19, 08:38 PM
Aren't there laser reflectors placed on the moon for expiremental purposes? As long as these were left by the Apollo astronauts, why not use the reflector as proof of landing?

Or do you want pictures showing gremlins have taken over the lander?

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-19, 09:14 PM
Aren't there laser reflectors placed on the moon for expiremental purposes? As long as these were left by the Apollo astronauts, why not use the reflector as proof of landing?



Apollo Moon Hoax believers would just say that they were left my an un-manned mission.

Kaptain K
2007-Oct-20, 03:45 AM
Apollo Moon Hoax believers would just say that they were left my an un-manned mission.
Not only would, but do! :eek:

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-20, 03:47 AM
Not only would, but do! :eek:

Yeah. You can't win. I think that if you took them along to the Moon and landed right next to the Apollo hardware, they still wouldn't believe. It's sad, really.

Kaptain K
2007-Oct-20, 04:19 AM
The Hubble angular resolution boils down to 32 feet on the Lunar surface
Actually (according to the website in the 2nd link) that would be 32 meters (105 feet).

bobtheowl001
2007-Oct-20, 06:03 AM
Yeah. You can't win. I think that if you took them along to the Moon and landed right next to the Apollo hardware, they still wouldn't believe. It's sad, really.

After getting back, would the moon hoax believers then deny that they themselves visited the Moon? :lol:

Kaptain K
2007-Oct-20, 11:05 AM
Probably! They'd claim that they were taken to a super-secret base (area 51?), drugged and false memories of the flight to the Moon were hypnotically implanted in their minds!

Hey, its no more far-fetched than what they already believe!

Neverfly
2007-Oct-20, 05:32 PM
I have no memory of being drugged while at Area 51 nor do I recall any secret hanger.

Kaptain K
2007-Oct-20, 08:04 PM
I have no memory of being drugged while at Arrea 51 nor do I recall any secret hanger.
Of course not! :whistle: