First Moon Picture from Japanese Orbiter

Here's a color & lighting corrected version of the "blue moon" shot. The lighting was corrected for the exposure of the shot, not the look of the moon.

Used is Corel Photo-Paint "Image Adjustment Lab" which uses 48 bit double-precision floating point per pixel component, so there should be very little loss in dynamic range.

Interesting too, the "blue moon" effect is caused by image auto-correction, possibly used in the camera itself. It came out blue because of the lack of dynamic range in the shot, probably mostly because of the subjects in the shot, not caused by the camera itself. Try running the auto-correction in whatever imaging software you use on my corrected pic, and you'll end up with another big ball of blue cheese.

I imagine the HD feed is going to be much higher quality, especially once they have had a chance to fine tune it up to the 19th. The shot of earth didn't impress me very much, but we don't know the circumstances behind the shot either. So I wait and see.

[edit on 15-10-2007 by fwombats]

Originally posted by Access Denied

Like I said, all of them.

(specifically who signed off on each original airmen certificate i.e. whether or not you took all the tests administered by a FAA inspector or DPE or merely received an endorsement from a flight instructor)

Also, did you have an Instrument Rating to fly under IFR?

Sorry if these questions have been asked before.

Thanks.

Here is a record of my certificates and check rides with the type of airplane first, then the FAA Inspector or Check Airman and the date.

As you can see I didn't keep any records after 1995 although I was flying an Lockheed L-1011 For American International Airways and then Kitty Hawk International as an FAA Designated Check Airman until they went bankrupt in 2000. So there would have been an average of 4 or 5 check rides per year (simulator and line checks) so add another 25 or 30 check rides to those below. I put a copy of my certificates at the end.

Originally posted by NJ Mooch
I'm more interested in the small bits of data that Zorgon listed under each pic.

First pic was taken around 2:50 @ 1500km.

Second pic was taken around 3:00 @ 1200 km.

Third pic was taken around 3:10 @ 800 km.

So in the short amount of time between pics you are going to tell me that this orbiter was able to reduce its altitude 186 miles in 10 minutes then drop another 248 miles of altitude in the next 10 minutes?

They said it has orbit correction maneuver time and it is currently in that stage since it just released the relay satellite.

Is this normal for orbiters to reduce altitude that fast? Why did it drop more altitude during the second ten minutes? Shouldn't it drop more altitude at earlier times then gradually slow down as it approaches it's required orbit altitude?

Good observation there nj mooch. It could be from moon mascons or mass concentrations in an area the craft is orbiting on the far side. There was found to be more area of mascons on the far side than our side of the moon. Curious as to why that is, but that is what is reported.

Mascons are positive gravitational anomalies due to crust difference of the moon. In other words, some spots on the moon have more gravity than other areas. I would venture a guess this could have an effect on the craft as you observed the approach time since it was found to cause earlier space craft to dip to-wards the moon surface as they orbited over the anomalies.

reply to post by WorldShadow


That is interesting. It would seem that EM power would be a more likely candidate that gravitational power (or, electrogravitics, if you will). Crustal thickness would seem to need to have a very large degree of disparity relative to locale to create such drastic interactions, would it not?

reply to post by scepticsRus


i dont doubt there will be pictures that are let out for public consumption and then there will be pictures kept back for "scientific" evaluation that we might never ever be allowed to see.

I like John Lear's style. Plenty of panache and ain't afraid to back up what he says. Someone should try and get him elected... that'd be "a revolution" I would find 100% worthwhile. Senator Lear of the Great State of Nevada (my all-time fav) is addressing the joint session, Senator Lear, you have the floor! (And potentially a huge political following).

Cheers,

Vic

Originally posted by yfxxx
But it's no surprise that his "First Officer" has to try and come to the rescue!

I beg yer pardon? When that spaceship is finished, I will be the Captain

And by the way ... it's better anytime to sound like a high-school physicist than like a complete ignoramus in the field (as JL does).

Nice of you to admit that . but John never claimed to be a physicist , and neither did I. That's why I have a research team




"At a point 43,495 miles from the Moon, lunar gravity exerted a force equal
to the gravity of the Earth, then some 200,000 miles distant." Herr Wernher von Braun
('Time' magazine, July 25, 1969.)


"At a distance of 43,495 miles from the Moon, Apollo 11 passed the
so-called 'neutral' point, beyond which the lunar gravitational field
dominated that of Earth."
('History of Rocketry & Space'--1969.)

But then this thread was started for the Japanese moon probe so lets stick to that one

[edit on 15-10-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by WorldShadow

 

That is interesting. It would seem that EM power would be a more likely candidate that gravitational power (or, electrogravitics, if you will). Crustal thickness would seem to need to have a very large degree of disparity relative to locale to create such drastic interactions, would it not?

The jaxa selene probe sent has a function to deploy the two micro satellites, Relay Satellite (Rstar) and VRAD Satellite (Vstar). These satellites are designed to measure the lunar gravitational field. Now thats interesting. Jaxa quote "the Rstar and Vstar satellites will be exclusively used for gravitational-field observation".

Perhaps the near side is hollowed out in certain areas after all. and the dark surrounding debris field is the Oceanus Procellarum where apollo 12 landed. Just my opinion.........

Originally posted by WorldShadowI would venture a guess this could have an effect on the craft as you observed the approach time since it was found to cause earlier space craft to dip to-wards the moon surface as they orbited over the anomalies.

Guessing you need not...

Told you I did previous page

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Gravity 'bump' map of the Moon



"If you were standing at the edge of one of the maria, a plumb bob would hang about a third of a degree off vertical, pointing toward the mascon,"
- Konopliv (NASA)

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by WorldShadowI would venture a guess this could have an effect on the craft as you observed the approach time since it was found to cause earlier space craft to dip to-wards the moon surface as they orbited over the anomalies.

Guessing you need not...

Told you I did previous page

Gravity 'bump' map of the Moon

Indeed you did. But in my defense, I had not read your statement till after I remarked first upon nj mooch. The honor still goes to zorgon though.

Best regards,

Originally posted by scepticsRus
glad im not the only one to think that anhinga. For a minute i thought i was going crazy ....

I would love to hear what john lear says about them as well.

The moon can look like this through a cheap telescope - so no need to think it's CGI or anything. It certainly IS low res however...

Jimbo

Originally posted by zorgon

"At a point 43,495 miles from the Moon, lunar gravity exerted a force equal
to the gravity of the Earth, then some 200,000 miles distant." Herr Wernher von Braun
('Time' magazine, July 25, 1969.)


"At a distance of 43,495 miles from the Moon, Apollo 11 passed the
so-called 'neutral' point, beyond which the lunar gravitational field
dominated that of Earth."
('History of Rocketry & Space'--1969.)

Fine. And this figure ("43,495 miles") is perfectly compatible with a moon surface gravity of 1/6 of earth, as can be calculated by correct use of the equations of Newtonian mechanics.. But if you enter the number in equations which are not applicable for the problem at hand, as John Lear does, you'll get - unsurprisingly - wrong results for the moon's mass (and thus gravity).

As you said, John Lear is not a physicist, yet he claims he knows better than every physicist and astronomer since several hundred years! In his moon gravity calculation, he simply makes a very basic mistake - and you, Zorgon, apparently try to defend this stupid mistake. Does it disturb you that you look like John Lear's sock puppet?

Regards
yf

reply to post by yahn goodey


I hope we get to see them all goodey, lets face it, there isnt any reason NOT to show the ones that are scientific unless there IS something to hide.

But i guess time will tell

Originally posted by WorldShadow
Indeed you did. But in my defense, I had not read your statement till after I remarked first upon nj mooch. The honor still goes to zorgon though.

LOL Credit I was not seeking, only pointing to the data... in case you missed it.

However I was remiss in adding the actual link

Bizarre Lunar Orbits

To NJ Mooch

Hey nice to see you back... thought maybe them thar Aliens had beamed you up like the Energizer Bunny


BTW any one seen that 'Rabbit' since that happened

[edit on 15-10-2007 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


So the info Zorgon posted states that an orbiter at 100km will eventually crash into the surface. So why is the Selene orbiter getting ready to go into a 100km circular orbit? Did they not get the memo from JPL or NASA? This mission is supposed to last one year, so how can the Japanese maintain a 100km circular orbit for that long?

Maybe the 2 birds it let go are there to make sure what the gravity is so Selene can stay far enough away so it doesn't crash. This is a primary reason to have them and a secondary reason would be for future mission gravity mapping. This idea isn't listed on the Jaxa site anywhere but it makes sense to me. We won't know if this is the case unless they release the true final orbit altitude. Maybe they will also list the speed but i'm not going to hold my breath on that one.

I'm going to guess that speed will keep it in a circular orbit at 100km but i'm not an expert in this area. Can someone use a formula with the weight of the orbiter that is listed against an orbit @ 100km to figure out how fast it has to go with 1/6 Earth gravity? Can you figure out the speed for 2/3 Earth gravity as well? I cannot find any speed info on this orbiter, so is that info classified? If it is not available I have to ask why not? Would that small bit of info show what the real gravity of the Moon is? I hope you see what this can lead to since there might be another number that comes up.

Bottom line is a 100km orbit has already proven to be fatal. Unless Selene can adjust itself for an entire year it will crash based on this, so that makes me wonder if the year long mission will require constant maneuvers that will eat up power. That is negated by the Jaxa site since it says that the maneuver stage is going on right now, and it doesn't list any further maneuvers. Does it even have the ability to alter its orbit after the current maneuver stage?

Is the info posted on the Jaza site legit? How fast would this orbiter have to go to stay in a 100km circular orbit? Do they post speed info anywhere?

This is something that I was wondering about and i'm glad my post made waves. I also use open source info on this mission so i'm still able to discuss it. You'll figure out if that changes when I stop posting.

reply to post by johnlear


Well I would call that a comprehensive type history.

I am quite chuffed I share at least 1 maybe 2 types there, I did all my ab initio training in a K13 and have flown a Blanik off the wire but only P2 though as it was a site I was visiting, actually I am making an assumption here that at least one of those Blanik types is a sailplane I am not familiar with the model numbers.

Other interesting types I recognise is a Connie and a Tri-motor talk about varied, I think I am going to have to look some of the others up.

Originally posted by NJ Mooch
This mission is supposed to last one year, so how can the Japanese maintain a 100km circular orbit for that long?

Maintaining enough speed and pushing it "up" if it gets too low, as usual.

I cannot find any speed info on this orbiter, so is that info classified? If it is not available I have to ask why not? Would that small bit of info show what the real gravity of the Moon is? I hope you see what this can lead to since there might be another number that comes up.

If we know the altitude and the time it takes to make a complete circular orbit then it is easy to know its speed. And the weight (or, more precisely, the mass) is irrelevant.

I also use open source info on this mission so i'm still able to discuss it. You'll figure out if that changes when I stop posting.

What do you mean by that? It could be because I need some sleep, but I do not understand what you mean.

reply to post by ArMaP


I used these 2 sites to figure out some numbers.

home.att.net...
This got me the orbital velocity of 1.634 km/s

www.convert-me.com...
This converted it into 3654 mph

So if there is another speed listed that is slower there will be a problem for Selene. This can only be discussed if Jaxa lists the speed info. I cannot find it.

Is there a way to find out the speeds used for the info Zorgon posted? That way we can check to see if that info is reliable.

reply to post by NJ Mooch


As far as I can see the bottom line is fuel, when that runs out then it will probably be another heritage site on the moon.

Rstar and Vrad I can't see how they are going to last for long though as I could not see any propulsion systems on them.

Well, rather than spend all that money to actually go to the Moon, maybe they just built a really huge model of it according to photos, and they have a little camera zooming over it pretending to take pictures. The Japanese are known for their expert model making skills, so if anyone could pull it off, it would be them. They could also have done it with CGI, but a model is so much nicer.

There's a little conspiracy theory for you.

[edit on 15-10-2007 by Nohup]