Originally posted by IX-777
jra: A couple quick examples from one of my previous posts showing mountains rather near the LM:
You really need to start using higher resolution photos...
For the first image you linked to:
Which shows the LM and part of the shadow
which shows the rest of the shadow.
For the second image:
Now those are much nicer and clearer to look at than those tiny thumbnail images you had. Like we both agreed that the surface of the Moon isn't
perfectly flat. There are many rises and depressions along the surface and in these photos I see a slight rise in elevation of the surface towards
South Massif, where the LM's shadow is. You can clearly see that this small rise is cutting off our view of the base of South Massif.
Take a look at photo 22518 that I linked to above and take note of the small cluster of 3 rocks in the middle of the image at the top of the small
rise and of the other rock (named "Geophone Rock") on the right, near the edge of the frame. Now compare that to a photo taken from higher up,
inside the LM looking in the same direction. AS17-147-22481
can see that the Lunar surface actually continues behind those rocks and that we still can't quite see the base of South Massif.
Not sure if it was you or someone else that suggested the mountain to be 5-6km away - it seems ludicrous to me for this mountain to be that far
away with nice and smooth flat ground all the way.
Clearly the ground isn't smooth or perfectly flat as I have shown in the above photos. And that you can't even see the base of the mountain due to
the uneven surface cutting off our view of it. Things are a lot further away then they appear. Heck, even the astronauts themselves had trouble
judging distances while on the Moon. For example, remember that rock I called "Geophone rock"? It's that rock on the very right edge of photos
22518 and 22481. Well it's actually about 180m away from the LM. Here's a close up.
It's actually quite a large boulder. You should also take note that South Massif in the background hasn't changed much in size or appearance even
though they've moved closer to it and the uneven surface is still making it difficult to see the base of the mountain. And here's a photo
) taken near "Geophone rock", looking back towards
the LM. Note that you can't even see the very bottom of the LM, due to the uneven surface.
And yes I am aware of landing close to a mountain not being a good idea, I am not suggesting they did land close to the mountain, I am
suggesting that the background is rather false.
Were the backgrounds false, then how do you explain the parallax when you flip back and forth between two or more images, taken in different spots,
looking at the same location? Here's one example made by ngchunter from Apollo 15.
. The rapid flipping between two images is a bit hard on the eyes, but
try to focus on the mountains in the background and you'll see a 3d like effect created. If the backgrounds were fake, you would not get this effect
Originally posted by zorgon
But they have Energia which is a really great vehicle
NPO Energia is still around, but the heavy-lift Energia rocket is no longer produced. Only two were made and launched.
This is the Mars-Energia rocket Notice anything unusual in the decals?
They sold us out I tell ya
Umm... that image is from this site
and it was made by a guy in Australia named Krzys Kotwicki. It is not
an official Energia or NASA image in any way shape or form.
Even Robert Bigelow is launching his space station modules from Russia...
Because it's cheaper and he didn't need a large rocket to launch Genesis 1 and 2. However Bigelow aerospace plans to launch the Sundancer space
habitat module on a Falcon 9 and possibly launching there Orion lite capsule on either a Falcon 9 or Atlas V.
I wonder when they will pull those two functioning shuttles out of storage
The Russian Shuttles you mean? Buran (the only function shuttle) was destroyed in a hanger collapse and Ptichka is now the property of Kazakhstan, and
sits in the MIK Building at the Baikonur Cosmodrome. Believe me, I wish the Russian shuttle program was never cancelled and were still operational, as
I really like them. They had the potential to be a really good space craft, but sadly we'll never know.
[edit on 12-9-2009 by jra]