Japan Moon Mission KAGUYA (SELENE) not releasing HD images of far side of the moon

Originally posted by lo_fye
The images you found are all on the NEAR side of the moon...

Check again. The little map in each of the images I linked to, shows them as being on the far side. I even double checked some of them, and they are indeed on the far side.

Originally posted by kenton1234
Well to go back on topic. Why is it that the KAGUYA or for that matter the Clementine probe take photos of the lunar landing sights? It would have been a very simple thing to do.

They did image the landing sites. The camera's didn't have the resolution required to see them in detail however. Next month NASA will be launching the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and it will take images at a resolution of 0.5m/pixel. More than enough to see the larger hardware left behind from Apollo.

Originally posted by bismarcksea
30 METERS A PIXEL???!!!??? We can take pictures from Earths orbit that can tell what brand of cigarette you are smoking but we can only get 30 meters a pixel resolution on the moon????

As ArMaP pointed out. I said 10, not 30. And I highly doubt one can take images from orbit that can see what cigs you're smoking. You'd probably need to get something around 1cm/pixel res or less in order to identify the packaging.

And not all probes are built equal. Depending on the size of the probe, and the goals of what it's trying to accomplish, super high resolution isn't always needed or wanted.

Originally posted by TortoiseKweek
I couldn't have said it any better! Just look at Google earth and the resolution there - which is available for the public to see. I mean I can see my folks house in South Africa, swimming pool, and all - and yet we get 30M/pixel??

The higher resolution images in Google Earth are generally from aerial photography and not from satellites.

Originally posted by Jim Scott
I can get better pics of the moon from my back yard than are presented by the Clementine Lunar Browser.

I'm sorry, but I highly doubt your claim, but please do post an image if you can.

Originally posted by zorgon
People are of the mistaken impression that NASA is still a public agency, but they are not and have been under the DoD for some time...

That makes no sense. The DoD already has there own separate space program. It has a higher budget than NASA. They don't even always give accurate budget information and they can keep there projects completely classified. Why would the DoD want to manage two space programs? Sometimes there are joint missions or projects between NASA and the DoD, but NASA is not operating under the DoD.

There is one thing that has bothered me over the course of the last few lunar probe missions from the different countries.

We’ve all seen some pretty respectable high resolution earth images (such as the previously posted National Geographic image) from civilian satellites and we have heard many rumors about higher military capabilities (whether true or not).

I develop advanced imaging systems for a living and operate some very large telescopes for fun which gives me an uncommon perspective on this subject.

Here is the crux of the matter. Because there is apparently no atmosphere on the moon and much lower gravity, two things should become apparent.

1. Imaging probes should be able to orbit 30 or more times closer to the surface of the moon than imaging satellites orbiting the earth. This alone would provide orders of magnitude increase in resolution but also:

2. Because there is apparently no atmosphere there should also be a huge advantage regarding image clarity because there is not 100+km of air, dust, water vapor, pollution and turbulence to contend with.

I haven’t done the research yet to come up with actual numbers comparing imaging systems of the same capability orbiting the moon or the earth but if the space agencies don’t start showing us images that completely knock our socks off they will certainly have some very difficult questions to answer.

Just an added note to my previous post. The first surveillance satellites from over thirty years ago were very capable of providing usable images for military purposes. I can't imagine that anyone would bother spending the money to send a modern probe to the moon that wasn't capable of imaging on a level that was at least par with tech that was available at the beginning of the space race. Maybe I'm missing the mark there but it just wouldn't make sense to me when you can buy 30 megapixel camera from Wallyworld for a couple hundred bucks.

www.youtube.com...

here some footage i just took!

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by TortoiseKweek
You mean to tell me that we can not get better quality photos with modern tech?

This is not a photo, it's a HD video frame (as you can see by it's size), and, as you probably know, individual video frames look worse than photos of the same resolution because video gives more importance to the moving image and less to detail.

Ok, I'll admit that (done some video editing myself), but Armap let's look at the situation in all honesty. Are we no able to produce high resolution images of the moon as we can do of the Earth?

reply to post by Grifter.be


I'm getting this when trying to view your Youtube video:

"The URL contained a malformed video ID."

Could you provide the name of it so I can find it with the Youtube search engine?

I'm getting that message a lot lately with Youtube videos posted here. Any ideas as to why?

reply to post by dainoyfb


I'm getting the same message:

"The URL contained a malformed video ID."

Please send a valid link or video title so we can search for it

Thanks!

reply to post by Erasurehead

The discussion has advanced beyond the cigar-shaped object, but I would like to throw something in about it. beyond simply saying, "Yeah. It looks like a crashed alien ship."

It is interestering that it looks a lot like a modern, nuclear submarine, doesn't it? That cigar-shape is a strange shape for a deep space vehicle, wouldn't you agree? Why would aliens go to the trouble of thinking in those terms in creating their space ships. In other words, would a slick ship be necessary? It would not seem so.

There is that band around its front that indicates--if nothing else--a difference in its structure at that point. Humm. Some nuclear subs were stretched to include "missle bays."

But could it be a sub? On the Moon? Build and sold to us taxpayers as a standard nuclear sub and floated away fron Groton, Connecticut, as a sub, but maybe it really was a ship that was already a true "space" ship that needed nothing but a nuclear-powered l(UFO-inspired) lifting device that was able to lift it from the water to the Moon?

But, hey, that was the efforts of generation or so ago. Today, we have refined the technique with triangles and etc. The only question is why didn't they park the old thing on the back side. And so, we come back to the simple observation that maybe it is a crashed or abandoned ship. Have we solved nothing here, or just looked a little deeper into the shadow box?

It's amazing how NASA proves bases and ships on the moon in a reverse way of course Keep up the bad work boys!

that picture is cool

i reckon there is some kind of colaboration between sections of governments for sharing and controlling highly sensitive and important information, and if there was or is a plan to disclose that information, it will probably only happen after they are sure that aliens mean us no harm as such, um 'duh', and that every one is finally willing to accept it as fact and not fiction. So like governments for every major country would have an important role in maybe protecting that knowledge from the public eye, as well as sharing it with other joint organisations as part of the cover up or for the eventual disclosure of all alien related materials.

The idea that this cigar shaped object laying on the far side of the moon is of alien origin has been debated before here on ATS. Usually the talk gets around to the so-called Apollo 20 mission which was sent to investigate it and the highly suspicious videos posted on youtube which supposedly showed the craft in great detail and the recovery of an alien. . .
While I have huge doubts concerning the reality of an Apollo 20 mission I have, as of yet, not seen anyone who can explain what the cigar shaped craft is. And please, before you start, don't try to tell me it's a dune! The nose of the object can clearly be seen to be sticking out over a sharp decline in the lunar landscape. To my eyes this looks like a physical object of great size.

reply to post by jra
"They did image the landing sites. The camera's didn't have the resolution required to see them in detail however. Next month NASA will be launching the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and it will take images at a resolution of 0.5m/pixel. More than enough to see the larger hardware left behind from Apollo."


They say that every time they send up a probe. The camera didn't have enough resolution required. The next cameras are going to be so much better. Just wait until next time with a little more tax money we will be able to see lots more. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Look at google earth. With google earth I can see my kids bicycle in the drive way and even my mailbox. Yet with Americas Clementine, the Japanese Kayuga and India's Chandrayaan-1 and all we're getting are the exact same type of photos taken by the Apollo astronauts. They not only didn't just "have the resolution required to see them in detail" they didn't have the resolution to see them at all. Or at least that's what were being spoon fed by the NASA folks.
It's all a bunch of horse $#!t. Millions of dollars and I can get the exact same quality from the old moon mission photos.

reply to post by Grifter.be


Thank you for that video. It just proves that we can see the exact same type of photos from a back yard telescope. The photos being given to us by the DoD/NASA space agency is a waste of time and mental thought. Yet some folks aren't going to believe anything they see, even with their own eyes, unless they see it on television first.

Personally I think the suppression of these japanese images was always a no brainer. I believe Japan wants a seat at the table of nations already in contact with ET. The only way they could demand a slice of the technology and knowledge pie was to launch their own mission.

For me the japanese mission was never about science. It was simply a way to blackmail the other members of this exclusive club into letting Japan join.

S&F

reply to post by guppy


A reply to Guppy with regard to the three blurred images you posted.
When I tried to zoom in on the blurred areas I got this error message.....

ERROR! in tweak-zone
Tweaked 10 times and then gave up
file is lua0639b.078
path is /archive/projects/clementine/reformatted/lun078/luxxxxxx/luxxxxxb/luxxxxxb.tar
/afs/cmf/www/clementine/.newrowcol 327 174 lu415.flt
Fileready is D

Strange huh?

Originally posted by jra
Next month NASA will be launching the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and it will take images at a resolution of 0.5m/pixel. More than enough to see the larger hardware left behind from Apollo.

That is what I am waiting for, whole-heartedly.

I will reserve judgment until we get a peak of those LRO images next month. I think it will bring much needed clarity to this issue.

Regards,

reply to post by jra

"The higher resolution images in Google Earth are generally from aerial photography and not from satellites."


Wrong! Images from google earth are generally from 'landsat satellite imagery'. When the question of why we were getting better photos of our backyard than those of the moon came up they quickly put forward disinfo agent Mark Aubin to explain that the images were from kites, hot air balloons and even remote controled toy airplanes. Then they started updating the google earth images using these methods to back their story up.

" And I highly doubt one can take images from orbit that can see what cigs you're smoking."

Wrong! My brother, serving in Iraq, told me that not only can you see what brand of cigarettes they are but you can read the surgeon generals warning on the package as well. Those photos are not from a balloon or kite they are from a satellite orbiting in outer space.


[edit on 29-5-2009 by kenton1234]

I recall watching a video describing how our satellites can zoom in on a key (a house key for example). It was said the satellite can take a detailed photograph of the key so it can be used to make a exact copy. It was a video about spying, probably spy satellites. I'll try find the video.

reply to post by tribewilder


they'll be done soon with editing out the ruins on the moon...

I was told the hd mapping of the moon would be done 1st quarter of 2008.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by reject]

Originally posted by tim1989
I recall watching a video describing how our satellites can zoom in on a key (a house key for example). It was said the satellite can take a detailed photograph of the key so it can be used to make a exact copy. It was a video about spying, probably spy satellites. I'll try find the video.

This is very true. And they are giving us photos of the moon no better than the photos we got from the late 60's.

Originally posted by reject
reply to post by tribewilder

 

thyy'll be done soon with editing out the ruins on the moon...

Well so far they've givin us blurred out photos with the excuse that its a software glitch.