Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter - Will we finally see the Moon Base?, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 25 times

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 12:05 AM by Sam60

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

Regarding the flag pictures, I wouldn't think they could take a picture from orbit with sufficient resolution to visualise the flag.

Or, do you disagree?

[edit on 21-6-2009 by Sam60]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 12:20 AM by watchZEITGEISTnow

reply to post by Sam60

Well to be honest I'd think mike or zorgon could answer that much better than me - personally I think they should easily be able to take those kind of pictures...(going on todays technology and knowledge).

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 12:23 AM by Sam60

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

I think we'll find it's not possible as yet.

Later on, I'll have a look through the info in the links in your signature. That should keep me going for a while!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 06:11 AM by easynow

reply to post by zorgon

factoid about the LRO , i thought was interesting

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera
Two narrow-angle cameras (NACs) on the Lunar
Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) will make high
resolution black-and-white images of the surface, capturing
images of the poles with resolutions down to 1 m
(3.3 feet). Up to 10% of the lunar surface will be imaged
with the NACs. A third, wide-angle camera (WAC), will
take color and ultraviolet images over the complete lunar
surface at 100 m resolution. These images will show
polar lighting conditions, identify potential resources and
hazards, and aid selection of safe landing sites.

lro.gsfc.nasa.gov...

so this means they will have 10% of the surface overall and only the polar regions in high resolution pictures ?

the 100m resolution is probably for Google Moon.

any idea what the ratio was on the past L.O. missions ?

edit to add this...

www.dailymail.co.uk...

[edit on 21-6-2009 by easynow]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 06:34 AM by reugen

The obvious question is why so many nations suddenly want to map out and explore the moon. After the Apollo program (and Clementine) it has been pretty silent, then China, Japan and India made a run and now the US again with the LRO. The NASA LRO is equipped with a different slew of instruments and also a very good camera compared to the JAXA Kaguya (Selene) which didnt have one it seems, it had a resolution of 10meters/pixel while the NASA LRO will be able to take pictures with a resolution of 1 meters/pixel.

Difference in orbit compared to Kaguya:

LRO will spend at least one year in low polar orbit around the Moon, collecting detailed information about the Lunar environment. The LRO payload, comprised of six instruments and one technology demonstration, will provide key data sets to enable a human return to the Moon.

The JAXA Kaguya moon images and HDTV was a big disappointment, to the public at least, since we get to see none of the high res images we expected. /End.

[edit on 2009/6/21 by reugen]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 07:21 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
You must think it a bit odd no photos of a flag on the nearside - or any of the past Apollo equipment has been seen? Does this not skewer NASA into the realm of just being a tad deceptive?

For all of those that keep on talking about seeing the flag on the Moon, I thought it would be better to compare it with a known situation.

This is the US flag on Liberty Island, and I think we all can agree that is much bigger than the one left on the Moon.

This is the best we can get from Google Maps, and it's even resized to at least 200%.

Now imagine that small flag that was left on the Moon, do you still expect to see it on satellite photos?

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 08:40 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by easynow
so this means they will have 10% of the surface overall and only the polar regions in high resolution pictures ?

That's the problem, full coverage with high resolution takes time, and apparently they are not interested in it.

the 100m resolution is probably for Google Moon.

There is no need for that, I think Clementine photos have full coverage at 100 metres per pixel or even 10 metres per pixe.

any idea what the ratio was on the past L.O. missions ?

No, but I will check.

edit to add this...

www.dailymail.co.uk...

[edit on 21-6-2009 by easynow]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 08:55 AM by no1dea

Originally posted by zorgon

But jack from Pegasus has good reason to believe he knows where the missing Lunokhod 1 Russian rover is (based on a laser signal return) so we submitted that. Will report if we have any success.

So I figured it was my duty to hold up the end of the conspiracy nuts

ZORGON, I find it hard to believe anything on the living moon website when the main page has an image of what is supposed to be a reactor or energy system. It isn't the fact that this is claimed but the fact that the picture is shown out of context.

When viewing the the correct orientation you have a different impression.

Rotate that picture correctly! Ofcourse that won't be done as that would render it useless just like photographs of supposed trees, again rotate correctly so we can see that they are just bolders with long shaddows.

No i am not an agent! I just dont like BS.

You my friend promote BS! and you know it!!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 09:11 AM by easynow

reply to post by ArMaP

That's the problem, full coverage with high resolution takes time, and apparently they are not interested in it.

yes it seems that way.

There is no need for that, I think Clementine photos have full coverage at 100 metres per pixel or even 10 metres per pixe.

well according to the video i posted on page one, they are adding it to Google Moon and it appears that this new addition to the data will be marked as such. info at around the 4:30 mark

www.youtube.com...

No, but I will check.

thanks , i will look forward to what you find out. i was just curious to see the comparison of the different missions. it might not mean anything but then again it might show some weakness of this new mission. my expectations are that they will be similar but it would be nice to know the facts

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 09:28 AM by easynow

reply to post by no1dea

the picture is shown out of context.

the full picture of the moon shown....puts that anomaly in the correct perspective if you ask me.

NASA is even using the same color perspective now in their videos

@ Zorgon..

pay no attention to trolling. Pegasus website is awesome ! i have learned alot from the information you have provided and will always be thankful you took the time to do this for everyone.

[edit on 21-6-2009 by easynow]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 09:39 AM by no1dea

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by no1dea

the picture is shown out of context.

the full picture of the moon shown....puts that anomaly in the correct perspective if you ask me.

NASA is even using the same color perspective now in their videos

@ Zorgon..

pay no attention to trolling. Pegasus website is awesome ! i have learned alot from the information you have provided and will always be thankful you took the time to do this for everyone.

[edit on 21-6-2009 by easynow]

Lol, Are you blind? I expected zorgon support system to kick in though. Deny Ignorance!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 09:39 AM by mikesingh

Originally posted by Sam60
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

Regarding the flag pictures, I wouldn't think they could take a picture from orbit with sufficient resolution to visualise the flag.

Or, do you disagree?

Talking of Chandrayaan, considering the TMC's res of 5m, anything smaller than this would not be easy to identify. The Apollo missions had left some small scientific instruments on the Moon, but these would be difficult to spot unless there were larger than 5m. And there are none bigger than that!

Probably the Apollo Moon buggy? But considering that the frame was 10 feet (3 m) long with a wheelbase of 7.5 feet (2.3 m) and a maximum height of 3.75 feet (1.1 m), you'd still not be able to see it!

And what of the MIP? Considering that its dimensions are 14.76 inches x 14.76 inches x 18.5 inches, there is absolutely no way the MIP can be photographed by the TMC!

Cheers!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 09:48 AM by no1dea

This is the best we can get from Google Maps, and it's even resized to at least 200%.

Now imagine that small flag that was left on the Moon, do you still expect to see it on satellite photos?

Good point, also worth noting is that that image would have been taken with an aircraft and not by sattelite!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 10:08 AM by strNick

Here is Jules Verne crater:

On the right rim of the crater we clearly see what appears to be a huge tower or statue, buildings, and, of course, road (10 miles long).
Now we have the point of reference - Jules Verne crater.

LRO images.

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 10:15 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by strNick

...we clearly see what appears to be a huge tower or statue, buildings, and, of course, road (10 miles long).

Well.....maybe you 'clearly' see these things, but I sure don't.

In the lower left corner I do see a Picasso-esque smiley face.

Prove me wrong!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 12:30 PM by Raider of Truth

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

Why is everyone saying they are bombing the moon? lol!
it's a non explosive spent fuel canister which is impacted at high speed to lift a dust cloud 6 miles high.. but imo it's more like to wake up the Space Station inside.... to many probes crashing into it are gonna really piss off our cosmic brothers!

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 12:47 PM by no1dea

reply to post by Raider of Truth

That is because alot of people like to distort the facts and sensationalise to cause interest in something that is not real.

That is Ignorance!

[edit on 21-6-2009 by no1dea]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 01:16 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by Sam60
Regarding the flag pictures, I wouldn't think they could take a picture from orbit with sufficient resolution to visualise the flag.
Or, do you disagree?

Those flags have been on the surface for 40 years. I bet the solar radiation has turned then to dust a long time ago

Originally posted by Sam60
I think we'll find it's not possible as yet.

Well before you believe that such resolution is not possible look at this image from Ikonos on Earth. Ikonos is orbiting above 400 miles

dilaup warning

BIG picture wait for four scans to complete

Tsangpo River, China

[edit on 21-6-2009 by zorgon]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 01:20 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by Raider of Truth
Why is everyone saying they are bombing the moon? lol!

WHY?

Because the British TELEGRAM said so

"Nasa prepares to bomb the moon"
www.telegraph.co.uk...

And since we have to keep the title intact when posting news items here at ATS... THAT is why

Now there are two threads on the bombing so lets keep that there

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This one is for tracking what LRO will do...

(or what it won't do

)

UPDATE:

Nothing new today... they still have the same article up

En Route to Moon!
lro.gsfc.nasa.gov...

[edit on 21-6-2009 by zorgon]

reply posted on 21-6-2009 @ 01:25 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by drsmooth23
Essentially, from a summer solstice view; from stone henge or such, the sun MAY appear to be in between earth and the "center" of the milky way.

Ah That would be the Galactic alignment touted by astrologers, not the universe