Google Lunar X Prize |
Google Lunar X Prize |
Mar 28 2008, 08:53 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10226 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
Am I completely out of it, or is there no GLXP thread on here? I couldn't find one. Anyway, things are moving on it, so I thought we ought to have one.
For the record, I just turned down my second invitation to join a team. I'm staying as an interested observer on this - for now, anyway. There is a forum at the GLXP site as well as team info. There are a lot of people with half-baked ideas of how to go about it. The real professionals are not doing much on the forum, just working behind the scenes. At LPSC two weeks ago, Bob Richards of Odyssey Moon invited people to propose instruments to carry on their rover - targeted to a pyroclastic deposit, probably Rima Bode or Sulpicius Gallus. And I see they have now signed an agreement to carry Celestis's lunar burials to the Moon. Richards will be here next week, and I'll be spending some time with him. This whole thing is going to be interesting. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Apr 11 2008, 04:38 PM
Post
#2
|
||
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10226 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
I've been thinking about the Google Lunar X Prize in the context of protecting historic sites. Transorbital, Inc. had to guarantee its end-of-mission impact (for the Trailblazer orbiter) would not harm old sites, as a condition of getting government licenses to fly the mission. GLXP specifically encourages people to land close to and visit old sites. Are these incompatible?
I have made this map of the Apollo 17 site to suggest otherwise. A rover could land in one of two relatively smooth areas near the LM and drive to within a few tens of meters of the LM (and the ALSEP just to its west) without even crossing old LRV tracks and footprints. A very accurate landing system could find landing sites just SW or N of the LM and be within the GLXP minimum traverse distance of 500 m as well. I argue that most or all teams will need sponsorships and potential sponsors will not want the bad publicity that would come from and damage to the sites - purists might interpret that as including driving over old footprints. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
||
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd September 2024 - 10:49 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |