It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Apollo Hardware Spotted!

page: 27
58
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


The image below is the most recent LROC image, made with the two photos from the left and right cameras. For posting the image was reduced to 25%. The resolution (of the un-resized image) is 83 centimetres per pixel.



I don't think it's a bad camera.




posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 

What would the point be of going back in an Apollo-style mission? Apollo was simply a "get to the Moon for the sake of getting to the Moon" program.

I suppose they could have gone back in the late 1970s, then again in the 1980s using the Apollo-style equipment that was already designed. However, due to the very short-sightedness of the Apollo program, I think that would have been a waste of taxpayer money.

Could they have been back to the Moon again by now if -- say -- in 2000 they would have decided to redo an Apollo mission? Sure -- I think so. However, if they went to the Moon again in an Apollo-style mission using the Apollo-era designed equipment, then I as a taxpayer would have felt "bilked". If NASA is going to spend money to go to the Moon again, they need a new program with newly designed equipment and longer-term goals -- such as eventually going to Mars using the new Constellation Moon Program missions as a knowledge base and the Ares V heavy-lift vehicle.

Going to the Moon in an Apollo-style mission just to say "we're back on the Moon again" would have been a huge waste of money.

[edit on 8/7/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Thanks ArMap.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think 83 cm per pixel is just about as good as many Google map satellite images (although I think some Google map satellite images are around 50 cm per pixel).

I wouldn't call the LROs camera crappy, either.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Dude, nice picture with all it's shortcomings. But so what.
I could send you a photo of the golden spike from 1865 and I am sure I would impress you more.
It would be a picture of something we could both understand.
I guess your image is one of the moon from the LRO I don't see you mention that.
Never the less I have read a lot of your posts and appreciate your fencey (middle of the road) tactics.
I wish I could be a little more like you.
But I am not. I take these subjects seriously.
I have walked the wing tip of a U2 in the nam over forty years ago.
My dad sank Nazi subs almost 70 years ago and my younger brothers are still employed today trying to make this country better (the USA) and stronger.
.For the money son that photo is meaningless.
I am sure there are some here thtat think it's a keeper but I am releasing it and looking for bigger fish.
NASA is the largest crap photo gallery I have ever seen. Period.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

I have walked the wing tip of a U2 in the nam over forty years ago.
My dad sank Nazi subs almost 70 years ago and my younger brothers are still employed today trying to make this country better (the USA) and stronger.


Why do you mention this? What does this information have to do with the topic of this thread?


Really, I am curious about why you tell us this, and I am sorry if this is kind of (or very) off topic.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Soyle I read about two lines of your last post reply to me. And now I am going straight to the point with you.
Any worthwhile scientific or military stratigy evolves on the previous modus operendi.
If it fails you regroup.
If it suceeds you go to plan TWO.
IF you say man set foot on the moon. Well then you continue from that point foward.. You do not retreat and pray that the people that support you will not notice.
sorry about sp.

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 


It is in reply to the fact that you seem to think, the link you provided me was a camera image of worth. My bad. It was not.
Maybe I should have told you what all (most of the posters here have told the op).
What worthless crap.
Sorry for trying to be delicate with you.
You type like you need it.
Tokyo Rose and you are very familiar . snip


[edit on 7-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Try taking my X Y math altogether and deny it.

You didn't put any numbers to it nor did you support those non-existent numbers with justification. Until you do that you've got nothing to argue with. On those grounds I "deny" it.

[edit on 7-8-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
IF you say man set foot on the moon. Well then you continue from that point foward.. You do not retreat and pray that the people that support you will not notice.

Congress cut the funding for the program and canceled it. NASA didn't make that decision, the people's representatives did; there was no longer the political willpower to continue the level of funding Apollo needed.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Maybe I should have told you what all (most of the posters here have told the op).
What worthless crap.

And yet you and the "majority" (heh) of other posters here can't seem to back up that opinion with fact. The fact of the matter is that we've NEVER had images of the moon this high in resolution from any lunar probe ever launched before, and we accomplished this with a smaller budget than other mapping probes like MRO.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 

Perhaps that image is worthless to you, but images of the lunar surface that are at least 80 cm per pixel are far from worthless to the planners of the next manned missions to the Moon.

I'm pretty sure that the end users of this imagery is very excited about the resolution and detail in the LRO photographs -- and that's what matters. I suppose many average people would be unimpressed with a CAT scan or an MRI image of a brain, but a neurologist would find it quite valuable.

On the other hand, I happen to find the LRO images very interesting so far, but that's just me.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
IF you say man set foot on the moon. Well then you continue from that point foward.. You do not retreat and pray that the people that support you will not notice.

Congress cut the funding for the program and canceled it. NASA didn't make that decision, the people's representatives did; there was no longer the political willpower to continue the level of funding Apollo needed.



Your right and wrong at the same time I'm impressed thats hard to do!

NASA decided to stop the Apollo missions Originally three additional lunar landing missions had been planned, as Apollo 18 through Apollo 20. However congress cut the budget for NASA after all they all ready went to the moon. At its peak NASA was consuming 5.5 % of the national budget at the Apollo close in 1973 1.1%. The biggest reason they stopped missions is the Saturn 5 rockets they were hugely expensive and NASA decided its better to spend money to build a reusable launch platform AKA shuttles.

The thing NASA didn't realize is the final version of the shuttle was much more limiting than originally planned but alas it was to late they all ready moved there eggs to that basket. Now there trying to leave the shuttles behind since as we now know it killed space exploration.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Maybe I should have told you what all (most of the posters here have told the op).
What worthless crap.

The fact of the matter is that we've NEVER had images of the moon this high in resolution from any lunar probe ever launched before, and we accomplished this with a smaller budget than other mapping probes like MRO.

Can you quote the budget of subcontractors who cooked five "Apollo landing sites LRO" images from the PNG files, and their expenses on Adobe CS4; and do the expenses include exclusive access to the actual LRO PDS files?

[edit on 8.8.2009 by bokonon2010]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 




It is in reply to the fact that you seem to think, the link you provided me was a camera image of worth. My bad. It was not.


You must be confusing me with someone else, I have not provided you with any links in this thread.



Sorry for trying to be delicate with you.
You type like you need it.


I have no idea what you mean by that.



Tokyo Rose and you are very familiar . snip


Well, at least I could Google "Tokyo Rose" to find out what that was all about. I'm Norwegian, I hadn't heard about her before. But thanks for finding a new way of calling people disinfo agents, it is refreshing with some new terms now and then.


And in case there are other people out there who doesn't know who "Tokyo Rose" was, here you go: Tokyo Rose

[edit on 8/8/09 by ziggystar60]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 


Sorry zig
It was late, another poster had just called me a liar.
I quess I pulled the trigger on the wrong target.
Thanks for the way you handled it.
All I am trying to make understood here is that the LRO camera could be better than it is.
It is possible!!!!!



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Drag
I enjoyed your last post.
It is people like you that look at both sides of the coin that gives me hope for the future.
star and thumb wiggle
More folks need to be aware of the money spent on projects like this lro.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
I could send you a photo of the golden spike from 1865 and I am sure I would impress you more.
I doubt it, but as I have no idea of what you are talking about, can you send me that photo? At least it could help me to understand why you think that would be more impressive. Thanks in advance.


It would be a picture of something we could both understand.
Does that mean that you do not understand the Moon photos? Is that it? Or do you not understand the idea behind taking those photos?


I guess your image is one of the moon from the LRO I don't see you mention that.
Does that mean that you did not read the first sentence?


I take these subjects seriously.
I have walked the wing tip of a U2 in the nam over forty years ago.
My dad sank Nazi subs almost 70 years ago and my younger brothers are still employed today trying to make this country better (the USA) and stronger.
Now is my turn to say "so what?"


.For the money son that photo is meaningless.
I think that the problem is that this mission (the LRO, and more specifically the LROC) was not made to show the Apollo landing sites, it looks like they thought of using it thinking that it would help convince some people that they really went to the Moon (it shows that they do not know ATS
), so they used the intermediate phase, before the start of the real data gathering mission, to show those places.

Considering that those photos are just an added "bonus", the money spent with them was very little when compared with the cost of the whole 12,000 GB of photos they are expecting to get from the primary mission.


NASA is the largest crap photo gallery I have ever seen. Period.
Then why do you keep on looking?



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 

Perhaps that image is worthless to you, but images of the lunar surface that are at least 80 cm per pixel are far from worthless to the planners of the next manned missions to the Moon.

I'm pretty sure that the end users of this imagery is very excited about the resolution and detail in the LRO photographs -- and that's what matters. I suppose many average people would be unimpressed with a CAT scan or an MRI image of a brain, but a neurologist would find it quite valuable.

On the other hand, I happen to find the LRO images very interesting so far, but that's just me.


Soyle
I guess well said.
But please listen to yourself.
What you are saying is--- in order to appreciate NASA imagery, you should be of the brain surgeon caliber.
You see that leaves a whole lot of people just sitting around in the waiting room.
I think it is that frustration of us common folk that tends to push us to be Devil's advocate. But not in an evil way.
You see I have frequented hardware stores for about sixty years.
I was attracted to this thread to see some hardware.
I have seen none.
So I guess it's off to med school for me.
Oh wait. I will just donate that money directly to the NASA imagery department instead.
Then they can get a better camera and then everybody can get into the OR with you.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

I was attracted to this thread to see some hardware.
I have seen none.


Same here - And I haven't seen any hardware yet either..

Here is the best that the NASA-huggers can offer:


(this cluster of pixels is given as proof that Apollo 15 landed on the moon... NASA-huggers
)



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 



But please listen to yourself. What you are saying is--- in order to appreciate NASA imagery, you should be of the brain surgeon caliber.


You've misunderstood. He says nothing of the sort.

He's explaining that the people for whom the images are actually for (NASA) will find them valuable. He uses the MRI Scan image as an example that it won't make a great wall poster, but it's certainly valuable to medical staff.



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join