|
|
Post by tkw251070 on Sept 3, 2009 19:43:55 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 3, 2009 20:57:03 GMT -4
Great to finally see Apollo 12 from the LRO.
Can't wait for the closeups to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Sept 4, 2009 1:51:17 GMT -4
How much better can they get?
Really - how much lower will the LRO orbit get, and will that orbit take it over the landing sites?
|
|
|
|
Post by thetart on Sept 4, 2009 4:19:43 GMT -4
Best photo yet. If they are going to get even better then this is going to be a good discussion topic with the HBs.
|
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 4, 2009 4:35:58 GMT -4
well the photoshoppers had practice since they did the 11, 14, 15, 16 and 17 ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Sept 4, 2009 12:20:46 GMT -4
Would the last Hoax Believer please turn out the lights?
|
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Sept 4, 2009 13:39:29 GMT -4
Would the last Hoax Believer please turn out the lights? Well with mistakes like this: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8237558.stmThat could be a while. Even money that some HB will recycle these stories in six months without referencing the original source.  |
|
|
|
Post by bodrius on Sept 4, 2009 18:27:56 GMT -4
I was comparing this photo with the one you can see in google earth, but there you can't see any sign of Apollo 12. No Intrepid's DS, no tracks, no Surveyor 3. I don't think the moon landings are fake, but I just don't understand this... Are google's pics pre-Apollo photographs or what?  |
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Sept 4, 2009 18:53:45 GMT -4
Probably that image does not have as high a resolution as the LRO images.
|
|
|
|
Post by bodrius on Sept 4, 2009 19:20:46 GMT -4
Probably that image does not have as high a resolution as the LRO images. Yes, it does. You can see even the small craters in both. Compare:  |
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Sept 4, 2009 19:34:13 GMT -4
Okay. What is the resolution for the Google picture? If it's a Clementine image, Clementine's resolution was 7 to 20 meters per pixel and the LRO's resolution is 0.5 meters per pixel. Or maybe I'm just getting confused about numbers again.  |
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Sept 4, 2009 21:14:01 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Sept 4, 2009 21:21:31 GMT -4
Yes, it does. You can see even the small craters in both. Compare: The Google image on the right probably came from Lunar Orbiter before either Surveyor III or Apollo 12 landed. It has artifacts like those in many LO images. Until recently, Lunar Orbiter pictures were still the best available of much of the moon. |
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Sept 4, 2009 21:36:23 GMT -4
The Apollo layers of Google moon were made from:
Apollo 11: Lunar Orbiter images IV-085-H1 (regional) and V-076-H3 (VHR) (local)
Apollo 12: Lunar Orbiter images IV-125-H3 (regional) and III-154-H2 (VHR) (local)
Apollo 14: Lunar Orbiter images IV-120-H3 (regional) and III-133-H2 (VHR) (local)
Apollo 15: Apollo Panoramic Camera image AS15-P-9814
Apollo 16: Apollo Metric Camera image AS16-M-0161
Apollo 17: Apollo Panoramic Camera image AS17-P-2309
Lunar Orbiter photographed the moon prior to Apollo landings, and the above list gives details as to which sites used the LO images.
|
|
|
|
Post by bodrius on Sept 4, 2009 22:54:05 GMT -4
So google's photos were taken before the landings. That's what I thought, thanks.
|
|
