My question would be, why should the lunar rover always make highly visible tracks? Is every square inch of the lunar surface exactly the same? Has
anyone examined if every single footprint of the astronauts are visible?
But lets break this down a little more scientifically. Lunar rover is 457 pounds, both astronauts complete with their life support was about 800
pounds, it carried about 100 pounds of communication equipment, 120 more pounds of scientific and photography equipment, and at most hauled another 60
pounds of lunar rock samples, so even fully loaded, (which we clearly see it always is not), we have a grand total 1,537 pounds. Divided by 4 rover
tires thats 384 1/4 pounds on each tire, less than that of one astronaut foot walking, as one would assume a foot would hit the ground one at a time
while walking and not only applying more weight per footprint that each tire, we have to add the downforce momentum of the act of walking, while the
tires are always in contact in a slower roll, so additional downforce would be minimized making the astronauts footprint applying more pounds per
square inch of downforce than the rover tires rolling.
Not good enough yet? What is the actual boot print area compared to the tire footprint? Well I don't study such things but the tires are 9 inches
wide and I doubt the boots are anywhere near that. It goes to the old high school thought exercise, that a 120 pound woman wearing high heels is
applying more downforce per square inch to the pavement each step than an 80,000 pound 18 wheel tractor trailer. No I'm not going to present the
calculations for that. It's why we use hammers to drive nails and not flexible mesh doughnuts.
Observing the very design of the wheels we also see a mesh, and I assume at certain slower speeds in travel the fine regolith would also be sent in a
ballistic trajectory through the mesh right back over the path laid down, I'm sure adding to some of the track diffusion. But I can't look at every
singe image an analyze what went on that's ludicrous! I wasn't there to peer at the ground measuring lunar tire tracks. Some photos I have taken I
can't explain some unusual looking things upon close examination but I know I took them and survived the anomaly, as me typing is evidence.
I just find it silly that someone looks so closely at every singe photograph from the Apollo missions from his armchair and is going to tell me that
something is wrong or missing and that person likely never did any off road quad running. If they did, did they backtrack to see if every tire tracks
were always apparent? Its just silly for people to analyze such things in my opinion, especially from photographs, especially on a light diffused
So for instance when the astronauts before they loaded the 60 pounds of lunar samples on to the rover, taken their combined 800 pounds of themselves
off, the additional 120 pounds of scientific and photography equipment off, and slowly rolled the now about 547 pound rover, distributed to 4 wheels,
at lunar gravity, with negligible downforce of the rolling wheels, in an undefined tire footprint we know at least is 9 inches wide, we have about 27
real pounds of weight supported per tire footprint that I'm sure at 9 inches wide even if only 3 inches long is 27 square inches so we have a
realistic ONE POUND PER SQARE INCH to leave an impression.
To me that's not very impressive. I'm not that impressionable to concern myself over such trivia. Tire track photographic analysis is to me a very
flimsy 'smoking gun' to blow any regolith on the Apollo moon hoax theories. In fact I find it childish.
Encyclopedia Astronautica Lunar Rover specs.