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 |
![]()
Post
#196
|
|
Solar System Cartographer ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10197 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 ![]() |
Shan, that location is quite far east of where we might expect Luna 9 to be. I think the Soviet idea of uncertainty for this site was about 30 km and this would be right on the outer edge of that or even a bit beyond it. It's not impossible but I would be happier if it was further west.
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 PD: 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) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#197
|
|
Junior Member ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 38 Joined: 7-October 20 Member No.: 8895 ![]() |
Shan, that location is quite far east of where we might expect Luna 9 to be. I think the Soviet idea of uncertainty for this site was about 30 km and this would be right on the outer edge of that or even a bit beyond it. It's not impossible but I would be happier if it was further west. Phil Phil, These might be the side modules which got jettisoned before landing and also there is another similar rocket plume marks to the North East of the region (Both got jettisoned about 74km from the surface) https://quickmap.lroc.asu.edu/query?extent=...AyAbwF8BdC0yioA I believe it's somewhere to the east of the region but need to look into those.. or in that area itself..as that hill would be still visible from that area, but I need to keep looking into it.. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#198
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2091 Joined: 13-February 10 From: Ontario Member No.: 5221 ![]() |
Some more estimates in this article, including a map of dispersions: https://www.space.com/spacex-falcon-9-moon-...-one-month-away
North of Mare Orientale, so still a chance of impact on on the near side, depending on the solar pressure, other noise (and also lunar libration). |
|
|
![]()
Post
#199
|
|
Solar System Cartographer ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10197 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 ![]() |
Unexpected turn of events... it's not the DSCOVR upper stage, it belongs to the Chinese Chang'e 5-T1 mission launched slightly earlier than DSCOVR.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/02/act...o-hit-the-moon/ Don't worry, we still get a crash! 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 PD: 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) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#200
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2091 Joined: 13-February 10 From: Ontario Member No.: 5221 ![]() |
Fascinating... I wonder where DSCOVR s upper stage went, then!
How different are the empty masses of the upper stages, for comparison, since the crater produced might be a bit different too? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#201
|
|
Junior Member ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 38 Joined: 7-October 20 Member No.: 8895 ![]() |
Phil,
Whether this could be Surveyor4's retro rocket impact site? Location: 0.3870, 358.70 The landing target was estimated to be 0.43 N, 1.62 W (or 0.37 N, 1.55 W) for a soft landing and 0.47 N, 1.44 W (or 0.469 N, 1.086 W) for a ballistic crash (From the below link, is it possible it would have crashed 0.3870, 358.70) https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/...on?id=1967-068A Surveyor4 Impact : Quickmap link |
|
|
![]()
Post
#202
|
|
Solar System Cartographer ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10197 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 ![]() |
Hi Shan. Give me a few days to consider this. It's certainly possible but there are other dark spots in the area.
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 PD: 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) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#203
|
||
Solar System Cartographer ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10197 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 ![]() |
OK, I have been pondering this. Ponder, ponder - there, I just did it again.
Here is my guess for Surveyor 4: This shows the Surveyor 4 target as it evolved from before launch to after launch (when they had a better idea of the trajectory and could shrink the landing ellipse) and where tracking suggested it actually went. The failure came at or just before the end of the retro burn, which did most of the job of bringing it to the surface, so it should be fairly close to the tracking location. The site I zero in on shows two little dark spots. When you start looking at the high sun LROC NAC images there are a surprising number of little dark spots and it is not at all easy to decide which to pick. My rationale is that the retro burn was probably completed and the failure occurred when the small vernier thrusters took over from the retro system. Therefore I assume the retro engine fell to the ground as expected rather than exploding into fragments. So I was looking for a place where there were two dark spots, one for the lander and one for the retro rocket system. The one I found has two spots about 200 m apart, which is roughly what we see for the two where we know we have it right from before/after images (Surveyor 3, Surveyor 6). But other searches might find different candidates. Shan's point is close to the target but quite a long way from the tracking location. So I still prefer mine for the time being. But I will change my mind if someone finds a better candidate. 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 PD: 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: 25th June 2024 - 03:16 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. |
![]() |