Unmanned landing sites from LRO, Surveyors, Lunas, Lunakhods and impact craters from hardware impacts |
Unmanned landing sites from LRO, Surveyors, Lunas, Lunakhods and impact craters from hardware impacts |
Sep 7 2009, 07:51 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
I figured it was time to begin a thread like this, especially since some of us may still be looking for the Surveyor III retro motor casing (assuming the bright dot to the north of the landing site isn't it).
We ought to be seeing some of the other Surveyors fairly soon, I would think. We know most of their locations pretty accurately. Again, I think there is a lot to be gained, both from scientific and engineering standpoints, from detailed imaging of the Surveyor VII landing site, just to mention one. And I really want to see how visible the Lunakhod tracks are as opposed to the MET and LRV tracks. So... until we begin to see images of other unmanned hardware (or the craters caused by same), we could always discuss comparisons of Surveyor III surface imagery to the new LROC images of its landing site here. I'm especially taken by how you can resolve many of the blocks in Block Crater in the LROC image, which gives you a good feel for the explosive nature of the ejecta and roughly where in the ejecta plume a given block might have come from. Might be interesting/useful to apply this information to the samples taken at that location. -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 05:35 PM
Post
#2
|
||
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10256 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
Thanks for the tip!
I'm learning a lot here. Locating both those landers on that image, I find that they are further north than I had expected. Also, that raw image is south-up. If it's rotated 180 degrees it is right-reading - no further flip needed. When I compare the two landers - I mean the candidate Luna 18 lander as it's not confirmed yet - I find the 'Luna 18' is quite a bit smaller than Luna 20: Maybe it's not the right object, but large rocks are very rare in this region. 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 10 2010, 05:45 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
How far apart are they in the image Phil, is it possible that we are looking at a perspective issue here? No doubt that the Luna 20 candidate is a man made object, you can even discern the shadow of narrow cross-section antennas or whatever they are protruding from the top.
EDIT: Also, is it possible the impact caused it to embed in the regolith somewhat or some of the protruding devices to separate, giving it that smaller appearance? -------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:48 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. |