|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 19:49:54 GMT -4
Also, the CSM had RADAR to track the LM and the LM had RADAR to track the CSM. Also, they were tracked by the Manned Space Flight Network. While the LM was on the surface of the moon it was tracked by the CSM rendesvous RADAR. So why wouldn't a satellite equipped with RADAR not have the same capabilities today?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 19:14:39 GMT -4
I am having a hard time with this one. Please walk me through this. RADAR can detect fixed objects. Space based RADARs can even track cars, along with boats and planes. Radar is a radio signal so the return can be amplified. So the RADAR would bounce off the LMs, rovers, etc. and would be received and amplifed but nothing would show.
Bob B. - Radar has far lower resolution than optical instruments. If you can't see it optically, you sure as heck won't see it with radar.
So, if I can see a plane then It won't show up on RADAR?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 18:54:56 GMT -4
What would they get if they did RADAR the moon? Would they get any signs of the LMS, rovers, and ALSAPs or would it just be a blank screen?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 18:52:45 GMT -4
Phantomwolf - inconceivable, Try this experiment. Stand a quarter (if if you are British a New Pence, or if an Ozie a 20c or if none of the above, a coin that is slightly bigger that your thumb) on it's edge with the "heads" side facing you. Walk about 25 paces. Now read the date on the coin. This is the same problem as seeing objects a few metres across on the moon.
Wouldn't it show up on RADAR?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 18:43:03 GMT -4
Have any satellites used RADAR to find the LMs and Rovers left on the moon. Some radars have ranges over 100 miles. Wouldn't these items show up on radar with their angles and metal components?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 18:10:55 GMT -4
Even if they can't get a good picture of the LMs or the Rovers or the hundreds of miles of rover tracks, will they have anything that will detect metal. So one could discern the locations of the descent stages, rovers, alsaps, etc.?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 17:00:03 GMT -4
Will LRO have the capabilities or will it just be another satellite that won't have the resolution, or orbit, or altitude, or mission directive?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 13:01:23 GMT -4
Looking at AS15-84-11324 I see the light area but it looks like other light colored areas in the photo. It just looks indicatve of the natural surroundings. If you look at AS15-86-11600 it hard to believe that the surroundings of the LM with the lunar soil disturbed like it is would not show up in the satellite imagery but the exhaust disturbance from the LM would that I cannot see any proof of. Shouldn't I be able to see something in that photo or AS15-86 - 11598,11501,11599,11502 that coincides with the satellite photo.
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jun 27, 2007 13:02:36 GMT -4
Why can't I see this 165ft to 490ft lunar disturbance on the Apollo 15 lunar photographs?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jun 27, 2007 12:27:07 GMT -4
The Clamentine could distinguish the "suttle differences" around the LM. When viewing the Apollo 15 lunar photographs, the astronuats and the lunar rover noticeably disturbed the lunar soild all around the LM. Not subtle like the LM . Why didn't these unsubtle rover tracks show up?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jun 27, 2007 10:59:05 GMT -4
Viewing the Apollo 15 photographs I notice the ground around the LM looked undisturbed . The only disturbance of the lunar soil I can see from the actual lunar photographs is from the astronouts and the lunar rover. Shouldn't the photograph showing the 165ft to 490ft lunar disturbance also show the lunar rover and astronouts disturbance of the lunar soil?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jun 27, 2007 10:15:28 GMT -4
I noticed in the article of the Apollo 15 LM landing site, the anomoly that coincides with the LM landing site shows a 165ft to 490ft disruption in the lunar regolith. Is this a blast crater? Does this coincide with the actual lunar photographs at the Apollo 15 site, showing this blast crater if that is what it is?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jun 26, 2007 19:36:32 GMT -4
Is there anything that can be detected on the moon besides the laser reflectors? Can't they detect anything metal? Can they detect anything thermally? Like maybe the LMs or rovers giving off a different heat signature than the surroundings. Is it realy true that it is impossible to detect anything at all. Also didn't the command module circling the moon while the astronouts were on the moon have a lot of scientific instrumentations and cameras that could have recorded the proof?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jun 26, 2007 19:00:27 GMT -4
Maybe it all started July, 20 1969. With the Pardon given to Nixon. Listen to the Audio of the pardon. Ford clearly states July, 20 1969 through August 9, 1974. July 20 1969 is when they landed on the moon. Maybe something was on his mind? Nixon was cleared " for all offenses against the United States he, has committed or may have committed or taken part in....." Maybe the footage was all fake?
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Jul 2, 2007 20:12:29 GMT -4
The lack of billowing behind the Lunar Rover could be simulated on Earth. The Rover would have to be in an enlosed environment or building completely filled with Helium. Dust particles and dirt sinks faster in a pure Helium environment than it does in normal air. The United States with its vast storages of Helium at the time and connections with Hollywood would have been the only country in the world to pull off something of this magnitude.
|
|