|
Post by scooter on Jul 8, 2005 0:00:08 GMT -4
Before the mission was cancelled, had a tentative landing area been located for this mission. Or, put another way, had 13 been successful, where would 17 have landed?
Or was all this kind of "flexible"? The landing sites were getting very interesting in the later trips.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jul 8, 2005 11:30:09 GMT -4
Here you go. It's fun (and a little sad) to imagine what "might have been"... ...Like 5 "J" missions instead of only 3! "sigh"
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Jul 9, 2005 5:48:33 GMT -4
I'm not intending to hijack your thread, Scooter, but something I've occasionally wondered is relevant while we're discussing moonlanding sites.
Were the insides of any larger craters ever considered as landing sites, and if so, why were they rejected?
It seems to me that some of the newer, deeper impact craters in the mountains may have provided good samples of bedrock, if somewhat shattered. However, they may have been less interesting for some other geological reason of which I'm unaware. Perhaps not providing the variety that, say, Taurus-Littrow did.
|
|