IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

11 Pages V  « < 8 9 10 11 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Soviet Luna Missions
Paolo
post Oct 12 2009, 07:02 PM
Post #136


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43 35' 53" N 1 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



I had never noticed that many of the side camera panoramic scans feature also at their edges the circular solar panel/bathtub cover


--------------------
I'm one of the most durable and fervent advocates of space exploration, but my take is that we could do it robotically at far less cost and far greater quantity and quality of results.

James Van Allen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Oct 21 2009, 06:47 PM
Post #137


Bloggette par Excellence
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4361
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



I just got a few diagrams from Sasha Basilevsky that might help us figure out the nature of the geometric distortion in the Lunokhod panoramas...can anyone help me figure out which of the cameras on the diagrams is (are) the one(s) that produced the posted panoramas?
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
 


--------------------
My blog - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hungry4info
post Oct 21 2009, 07:57 PM
Post #138


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1003
Joined: 26-July 08
Member No.: 4270



I'm pretty sure the last one was used, but I am not 100% sure.


--------------------
-- Hungry4info (Sirius_Alpha)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Oct 21 2009, 08:24 PM
Post #139


Bloggette par Excellence
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4361
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



So does that mean
- they had a 30 degree field of view, covering elevations from 0 to minus 30 degrees at the center of the view?
- they panned on an axis tilted 15 degrees down from horizontal, so if they rotated 90 degrees to one side, they'd cover elevations of (slightly less than) +15 to -15 degrees?
- the panoramic cameras were on the two sides of the rover, positioned 10 degrees toward the rear?
- if the last is true, and if they cover 180 degrees side to side, then the panoramas from the two cameras should overlap in back of the rover but not in front, where there were stereo cameras mounted?


--------------------
My blog - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Oct 21 2009, 08:49 PM
Post #140


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5534
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



The overlap area at the back, if any, is probably lost behind the rover body at the end of the pan.

A few pans show a round object with a concentric pattern on it - that's the top of the side-looking panoramic camera seen by the fore-and-aft-looking camera just above it, where it was looking downwards at the middle of its view.

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Oct 24 2009, 09:11 PM
Post #141


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5534
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



This is a comparison of one of the new Lunokhod 1 panoramas with a Lunar Orbiter mosaic (courtesy our pals at Google). Parts of the highlands west of Promontorium Heraclides are visible on the horizon. I can't be certain yet that this match is right but it looks pretty good.

Phil

Attached Image


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ngunn
post Oct 24 2009, 09:40 PM
Post #142


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3093
Joined: 4-November 05
From: North Wales
Member No.: 542



I'd been wondering if anyone was working on this since first seeing that spectacular skyline. That looks pretty convincing, right down to one of the pair of little craters in the gap between mountains just left of centre in the panorama.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peter59
post Dec 18 2009, 10:33 AM
Post #143


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 529
Joined: 20-April 05
From: Poland
Member No.: 299



Information for those who know Russian language. Two interesting monographs are available online:

Peredvizhnaya Laboratoriya na Lune Lunokhod-1. Tom 1. (Mobile Laboratory Lunokhod-1 on the Moon. Vol.1.). 1971. Ed.: Vinogradov, A. P. Moscow, Nauka. 128 p. (In Russian) (166 MB)

Peredvizhnaya Laboratoriya na Lune Lunokhod-1 . Tom 2. (Mobile Laboratory Lunokhod-1 on the Moon. Vol.2.). 1978. Ed.: Barsukov, V. L. Moscow, Nauka. 183 p. (In Russian) (130 MB)

http://planetology.ru/panoramas/materials....anguage=english


--------------------
Free software for planetary science (including Cassini Image Viewer).
http://members.tripod.com/petermasek/marinerall.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Dec 18 2009, 08:20 PM
Post #144


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4193
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



THANKS!!!!!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kenny
post Mar 19 2011, 04:47 PM
Post #145


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 383
Joined: 1-May 06
From: Scotland (Ecosse, Escocia)
Member No.: 759



Attached Image


This Luna 20 photo has been seen elsewhere, and is in Phil's Atlas of Lunar Exploration as part of a panorama, but perhaps the identification of the drill hole has not been made before.

Note this version is a mirror-image of the way Phil displays it. The identification of the drill hole was done by reputable Soviet space journalist Peter Smolders in his 1973 book "Soviets in Space".

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Mar 19 2011, 07:22 PM
Post #146


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5534
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



The mirror image business complicates all interpretations of the Luna and Lunokhod images. I first became aware of it when I compared Lunokhod panoramas with maps of small areas in those Lunokhod books linkled just above - they only made sense if the panoramas were reversed. But the Luna 9 and 13 panoramas are not reversed relative to their site plans. So what's the story with everything else? I reversed the Luna 20 panorama because the two end sections had to point in specified directions, but the middle section is not so certain. I drew my plan of the Luna 21 landing site backwards by mistake (compared with the LRO image now available) for this reason. An unambiguous statement from Russian colleagues would be very useful!

Phil


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kenny
post Mar 19 2011, 08:45 PM
Post #147


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 383
Joined: 1-May 06
From: Scotland (Ecosse, Escocia)
Member No.: 759



Close up of the dril hole area, from a better photo supplied by Dave Harland.

The presumed hole is the black spot in center. Or perhaps more accurately, the white oval ring around it is the diameter of the hole, and the black patch is the far wall of the hole in shadow.
Attached image(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Mar 20 2011, 12:14 AM
Post #148


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4193
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



I made mosaics with the fragments I could find. I had a version I posted once upon a time that extended to the horizon on the right, but I was less than sure that I had connected those images correctly, so I made a separate panorama out of them (the last image in the blog post). http://planetimages.blogspot.com/2010/03/luna-20.html


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kenny
post Mar 20 2011, 01:58 PM
Post #149


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 383
Joined: 1-May 06
From: Scotland (Ecosse, Escocia)
Member No.: 759



Very nice panos. The pair on your blog illustrate the ability of the arm to move left-right (in azimuth) and both shots are seen to have been made post-drilling - assuming Smolders was correct in 1973, and his white box does indeed enclose the hole. Phil's atlas has a nice photo which convincingly shows the same area before drilling, and it looks quite different.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Phil Stooke
post Mar 23 2011, 04:14 PM
Post #150


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 5534
Joined: 5-April 05
From: Canada
Member No.: 227



Kenny asked me this question privately, but I thought the answer might be of more general interest so (if you'll forgive me, Kenny) I will post it here.

I tried to identify the Luna 20 landing site in my lunar atlas, based on a proposed match between the surface images and Lunar Orbiter images. It was the same position suggested earlier by George Burba. Kenny asked how far I was from the LROC position. I hadn't checked, so here is my answer after a careful comparison of the images. I was about 7 km out! That is comparable to the uncertainties at most lunar sites until you can narrow it down with images. Needless to say, my image analysis was off, and I will have to go back into the pictures and try to figure out why. Oh well, at least I tried!

Phil

Attached Image


--------------------
... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

11 Pages V  « < 8 9 10 11 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd July 2014 - 05:52 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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 a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.