NASA's Artemis Moon Mission is Just hours from Launch ... Again.

a reply to: gortex

It's pretty much eniltirely down to that, with a side order of Nixon not wanting Kennedy's legacy outshining him.

They beat the Russians, the moon is dull to look at, there are other things to spend money on - not least a space program that can deliver tangible benefits much more quickly.

Anyhow, the bird has flown - let's go back to the moon!

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

a reply to: gortex

I'm glad it was a successful launch and will be watching the flight and orbit every chance I get.

originally posted by: zandra
a reply to: gortex
It's just incredible that after more than 50 years no human being set foot on the moon. There must be something very strange going on there

I'm old enough to have been around when Apollo ended. There was public outcry that the moon program was too expensive and useless (useless because once we got there, why keep going?) and that the money was better spent on social programs. The 1970s political climate were all about welfare, housing, ending poverty, and other social programs.

The public simply no longer wanted the expensive Moon exploration programs to continue and let their elected officials know that.

And the public also stopped finding the Moon program interesting. They grew bored of it and wanted NASA to move on to other things -- which NASA did with the Space Shuttle, planetary exploration (the Voyagers, Viking Mars Landers, etc.), Skylab (which eventually led to the development of the ISS), and Earth environmental programs.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Well Artemis has flown the coop It was an impressive launch, but Artemis is essentially obsolete from the moment it was launched . It is too expensive at 4 billion at pop when one factors in the development costs, which took twice as long and cost twice as much as projected. If Musk and Space X can get Starship operational then Artemis is dead Starship costing a fraction of what each Artemis launch does. being reusable and capable of being rapidly turned around (have to see about that) while Artemis has to be custom built for each launch ..

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: lambros56

I don’t believe any of this no more.
I did all my life. Watched the first one as a teenager but sadly I think there’s so much proof it didn’t happen.

Here's a picture of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module Eagle still sat on the Moon as seen by the Indian Space Agency's Lunar orbiter.

It happened mate.
en.wikipedia.org...#/media/File:Chandrayaan-2_Apollo.jpg

Are you sure? That looks like a three-legged, unmanned Surveyor spacecraft. And there are no footprints around the spacecraft.

en.wikipedia.org...

Was a good launch. Watched from a few miles south of Jetty Park, still could hear and feel it plenty. Glad we got to see it, still hedging my bets that this will be the one and only launch of it. Maybe now that it's gone up the FAA will finally allow some action on Starship.

a reply to: Ove38

Are you sure? That looks like a three-legged, unmanned Surveyor spacecraft. And there are no footprints around the spacecraft.

Here's a picture of the Apollo 11 site taken by NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter , looks like the same place to me.
www.space.com...

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ove38

Are you sure? That looks like a three-legged, unmanned Surveyor spacecraft. And there are no footprints around the spacecraft.

Here's a picture of the Apollo 11 site taken by NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter , looks like the same place to me.
www.space.com...

Yes, that's a fuzzy picture of the same place. Impossible to identify the spacecraft, and what about the missing footprints ?

a reply to: Ove38

The LRO orbits 50 km above the Moon , footprints are small.

Pictures from Orion Spacecraft , I like the one of Commander Campos sitting at the controls Boldly going but Planet Earth is blue and there's nothing I can do.

www.space.com...

a reply to: Ove38

If you're finding it impossible to identify the spacecraft it's because you don't want to.

Maybe you could try going to India's Chandrayaan website and download the original image, process it yourself. That's how I got these images:

The descent stage is clearly identifiable, and the trails in the Apollo 12 image are also clear and obvious. They aren't visible in the Apollo 11 image because they spent less time walking around and the lighting is different. The rocks, small craters and scientific equipment are in exactly the same place as they are in the Apollo photographs and video.

This is what a 3 legged probe actually looks like:

It's Surveyor from the same Apollo 12 image.

See also:



Which is my response to the idiotic 3 legged claim when the only version of the Apollo 11 Chandrayaan image was a poor quality screengrab from an ISRO webcast.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ove38

The LRO orbits 50 km above the Moon , footprints are small.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Ove38

... They aren't visible in the Apollo 11 image because they spent less time walking around and the lighting is different. ...

How come footprints are visible in a NASA photo www.universetoday.com...

But not in Indias photo of the same site ? upload.wikimedia.org...

a reply to: Ove38
Probably difference in the distance the photos were taken and the camera resolution

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Ove38
Probably difference in the distance the photos were taken and the camera resolution

Indias Orbiter High Resolution Camera had the best resolution among any lunar orbiter mission to date.

a reply to: Ove38

Read my piat properly and don't cherrypick.

Lighting and the amount of activity. Did you conveniently ignore the Apollo 12 image that shows them very clearly?

Why aren't you mentioning the TMC camera from both Chandrayaan missions that show the disturbed ground from human activity at Apollo 14, 15 and 17? Or China's?

Why link to the low resolution version of the photo when you could get the high resolution version directly from India's site and process it yourself?

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Ove38
...Why link to the low resolution version of the photo when you could get the high resolution version directly from India's site and process it yourself?

Why not insert a link to your high resolution version ?
if this is not a good enough link upload.wikimedia.org...

Could it be because there are no footprints at the site ?

a reply to: Ove38

Google not working where you live?

Register here:

pradan.issdc.gov.in...

Download the shapefiles for the OHRC, import them into google Earth to find the ones you want. Process the images.

You can do the same for the TMC images.

Chandrayaan 1 TMC images are here:

webapps.issdc.gov.in...

Both Indian probes confirm human activity at Apollo sites. As do China's probes. And Japan's.

I supplied you with my processed version of Apollo 11 and 12's images. Apollo 12's show the trails very clearly, becauese the lighting is better. You seem to keep forgetting about the Apollo 12 image that does show trails, so here it is again:

Apollo 11's don't because the lighting isn't favourable and because the trails aren't as well worn. There are similarly lit ones by the LRO that also don't show clear footpaths, see here:

www.lroc.asu.edu...

Regardless of the ability to see the paths, the images also how experimental equipment and small rocks and craters that were photographed and filmed by Apollo but not known about in advance of the landing. The Wiki image is a poor resolution screengrab of a webcast. It does not show the level of detail that the OHRC images actually have, but it still shows details that were not known about prior to the landing.

None of this is difficult if you're prepared to engage your brain and put some effort in.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Ove38

Google not working where you live?

Register here:

pradan.issdc.gov.in...

Download the shapefiles for the OHRC, import them into google Earth to find the ones you want. Process the images.

You can do the same for the TMC images.

Chandrayaan 1 TMC images are here:

webapps.issdc.gov.in...

Both Indian probes confirm human activity at Apollo sites. As do China's probes. And Japan's.

I supplied you with my processed version of Apollo 11 and 12's images. Apollo 12's show the trails very clearly, becauese the lighting is better. You seem to keep forgetting about the Apollo 12 image that does show trails, so here it is again:

Apollo 11's don't because the lighting isn't favourable and because the trails aren't as well worn. There are similarly lit ones by the LRO that also don't show clear footpaths, see here:

www.lroc.asu.edu...

Regardless of the ability to see the paths, the images also how experimental equipment and small rocks and craters that were photographed and filmed by Apollo but not known about in advance of the landing. The Wiki image is a poor resolution screengrab of a webcast. It does not show the level of detail that the OHRC images actually have, but it still shows details that were not known about prior to the landing.

None of this is difficult if you're prepared to engage your brain and put some effort in.

There are no images with higher resolution of the Apollo 11 site, in your India links.

This is the best resolution upload.wikimedia.org...

And there are no footprints at the site

Your "lighting isn't favourable" and "the trails aren't as well worn" explanation doesn't hold water

a reply to: Ove38

I can only assume that you're too lazy to follow the simple instructions to get the images for yourself.

Here, I'll make them easier to read for you:

Register here:

pradan.issdc.gov.in...

Download the shapefiles for the OHRC, import them into google Earth to find the ones you want. Process the images.

Follow those simple instructions and you'll find them. Unless you really try hard not to.

You'll need software capable or reading raw IMG files. Look carefully on their site and you might find one, but Photoshop will do. If you really pay attention, you'll notice how much I've had to brighten the image there.

Don't forget to look for Apollo 12 as well. You keep forgetting those.

My expalanation as to why Apollo 11's tracks aren't visible, whereas Apollo 12's are, hold water extremely well, unlike your excuses for not being able to find the raw images and process them yourself.