It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Kailassa
reply to post by zorgon
I'm disappointed, Zorgon, to see you jumping to obviously incorrect conclusions like this. Chandrayaan-1 has been orbiting the Moon since November 2008 at a height of 100 kilometres. Each orbit has taken the spacecraft approximately 2 hours. That's well over 2000 orbits it has made in that time. All without being sucked into the Moon's gravity well or having trouble "staying afloat".
The reason for lifting the craft to 200k was given in the article you referred to.
The spacecraft in this higher altitude will enable further studies on orbit perturbations, gravitational field variation of the Moon and also enable imaging lunar surface with a wider swath.
They are getting a different view in order to gain more knowledge.
Of course it will be interesting to learn what is causing this anomaly, and accurate data on it will help any future moon missions.
Originally posted by spikey
To actually double the original flight programme orbital altitude though...it tells me that things are being percieved as *quite* significant in certain mission control rooms around the world. Whilst it makes perfect sense to do it, it also smacks of 'backing right off, until we get the first clue of what we are dealing with here'. If you see what i mean.
Originally posted by Flux8
The far side of the moon should have a much higher iron content than the near side, (because of the higher frequency of meteor hits throughout it's existence).
Originally posted by Wertdagf
All of this secrecy stuff is only making me angry.
"... The two hemispheres have distinctly different appearances, with the near side covered in multiple, large maria (Latin for 'seas,' since the earliest astronomers thought, wrongly, that these plains were seas of lunar water). The far side has a battered, densely cratered appearance with few maria. Only 2.5% of the surface of the far side is covered by maria, compared to 31.2% on the near side..."