posted on May, 8 2012 @ 11:23 AM
reply to post by Zippidee
However, we can only build a .5 meter per pixel telescope for viewing the surface of the moon....
Given sufficient budget, then satellites similar to what the DIA and CIA and every other 'alphabet agency' have currently in orbit around Earth could
be sent to orbit the Moon.....with the same sort of image resolution clarity.....it's a matter of money.
If the DoD wanted to spend upwards of several Billion dollars, then it would get done.....NASA doesn't have that sort of budget.....not to waste that
much of on such a frivolous mission. They devote their tiny sliver of the Federal budget that they are allowed to maintain many other projects.
The LRO camera was not
designed to "prove" the reality of Apollo.....and any imaging conducted by Hubble of the Moon obviously is not for that
purpose, either (Hubble will be doing spectroscopic imaging, not optical, visual holiday snapshots).
The LROC's mission was to terrain-map the Lunar surface. For that purpose, 0.5 m resolution is more than sufficient, to provide extremely detailed
that there is a camera on-board, and that most of the major Apollo hardware is able to be resolved at that resolution, is just a
bonus. Although, it would seem safe to presume that in the backs of many of the designers' minds, they were excited to be able to image the Apollo
sites....anyone would naturally think that way, since it was just a perk of the main mission.
edit on Tue 8 May 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)