|
Post by drewid on Oct 29, 2009 15:41:38 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by tkw251070 on Oct 29, 2009 16:29:41 GMT -4
I've been checking where the LRO is, and noticed it is moving over the Apollo sites again. I thought last night they will soon release 17, and within 1 hour it was up. It's passed over 11 and should image the others in the coming days. lroc.sese.asu.edu/whereislro/It won't convince the conspiracy crowd. TK
|
|
|
Post by seemoe on Oct 30, 2009 3:13:48 GMT -4
understatement of the century (no offense )
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Oct 30, 2009 13:09:59 GMT -4
I'd guess that the foot and rover tracks show up so much better in the new picture because of the higher sun angle rather than just a lower orbit for LRO.
|
|
|
Post by seemoe on Nov 6, 2009 4:29:31 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Nov 6, 2009 12:37:07 GMT -4
Could you possibly change these images to links? There is a rule about not posting images larger than 400x400 pixels here.
|
|
|
Post by seemoe on Nov 6, 2009 12:49:48 GMT -4
yeh sorry - thought it would resize automatically
|
|
|
Post by gonetoplaid on Nov 8, 2009 3:31:04 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by randombloke on Nov 11, 2009 10:10:29 GMT -4
Given that the LRO is going to end up doing several passes of each site now that it's in its scientific orbit, how feasible would it be to interpolate multiple slightly offset views to see if we can get any additional information?
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Nov 11, 2009 17:20:20 GMT -4
Pretty feasable. Averaging is easy to do.
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Jul 28, 2010 14:52:12 GMT -4
I first took a snapshot of a simulated descent stage (quite well detailed 3D model) sitting on the lunar surface at Tranquility Base (exact coordinates, with simulated landmarks as well). Very nice work! One question - did you account for the angle at which the LMs sat on the surface? They were usually a few degrees off level, and the actual figures are given in the mission reports. I don't know if this will make much difference in the resulting shadows, but it just might at the lower sun elevations.
|
|