Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter - Will we finally see the Moon Base?

Well how about that, Scientific American actually says BOMB

NASA's mission to bomb the Moon
www.scientificamerican.com...

Go figure... and people wonder what we are on about and call us nuts.

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by zorgon

The resolution settings were those I requestes at the USGS mapper. It does not always give you the resolution asked for

See page 4 for the resolution of the High Resolution camera that "mapped the entire surface of the Moon at resolutions never before attained."


Not sure where you get the one band from

"Clementine completely mapped the lunar surface in 14 discrete spectral bands ranging
from the near ultraviolet (0.415 µm), through the visible spectrum, to the far infrared (9.5 µm)."

Page 7 Official Report LLNL Paper
www.llnl.gov...

High-Resolution Camera This 1.1-kg camera operates at visible wavelengths (0.415 to 0.75 µm)
with silicon CCD technology combined with a compact, lightweight image intensifier. A six-position, spectral filter wheel provided imagery in discrete spectral bands.

As an example of the cameras capability, Figure 13 shows an image of Earth taken by the high-resolution camera from lunar orbit at 1250 km above the surface of the Moon and at a distance of 384,000 km from Earth. During the lunar-mapping portion of Clementine, the camera produced high resolution images for mineral typing of the lunar surface.



Visible wavelengths



BTW that small Earth above was the master image used to create THIS

MOON FROM EARTH











[edit on 21-6-2009 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon
Not sure where you get the one band from

I think I got it from one of the images.

I don't know if you know it, but the IMG files have several metadata fields inside them, including information about the camera, and in one of the images I have from the UV/VIS camera, with 5 different channels, it has the wavelengths and bandwidth for each channel, and they are like this:

A - 415 - 40
B - 750 - 10
C - 900 - 20
D - 950 - 30
E - 1000 - 30

From the above wavelengths, only the first is inside the visible range, 750nm is already ultraviolet.

The Reiner Gamma image I posted, for example, comes from the Near Infrared camera, and the original image has 6 channels, like this:

A - 1100 - 60
B - 1250 - 60
C - 1500 - 60
D - 2000 - 60
E - 2600 - 60
F - 2780 - 120

There are some wavelengths missing (3) to reach the 14 you mentioned, so I think they may be in the visible spectrum, but I haven't seen any reference to other wavelengths.

Although off-topic, more information about the wavelengths used on the photos from Clementine.

For the UV/Vis camera.

The filter center wavelengths (and bandpass widths (FWHM)) were 415 nm (40 nm), 750 nm (10 nm), 900 nm (30 nm), 950 nm (30 nm), 1000 nm (30 nm), and a broad-band filter covering 400-950 nm.

For the Near Infrared camera.

The filter center wavelengths (and bandpass widths (FWHM)) were: 1100 nm (60 nm), 1250 nm (60 nm), 1500 nm (60 nm), 2000 nm (60 nm), 2600 nm (60 nm), and 2780 nm (120 nm).

For the Long-Wavelength Infrared camera.

The LWIR camera consisted of a catadioptric lens with an aperture of 131 mm focused onto a mechanically-cooled (to 65 K) Amber HgCdTe focal-plane array (FPA). The FPA had a broad-band response from wavelengths of 8000--9500 nm.

For the High-Resolution camera.

The set of filters consisted of a broad-band filter with a bandpass of 400 to 800 nm, four narrow-band filters with center wavelengths (and bandpass width (FWHM)) of 415 nm (40 nm), 560 nm (10 nm), 650 nm (10 nm), and 750 nm (20 nm), and 1 opaque cover to protect the image intensifier.

All the above taken from here.

So, it looks like the only images that could be close to true colour were the one from the high-resolution camera.


Edit:
This is one high-resolution photo from the Reiner Gamma area, with a resolution of 20 metres per pixel.



(edit of the edit )
You can see that this image is made by several images, that is one of the reasons why those 1.8 million photos are not "visible", they were joined to make bigger images.
[edit on 21/6/2009 by ArMaP]

[edit on 21/6/2009 by ArMaP]

A little off topic is okay as LRO is still a day away from lunar insertion so we have time to kill

Originally posted by ArMaP
So, it looks like the only images that could be close to true colour were the one from the high-resolution camera.

Well color me purple but isn't one high res camera "that could be close to true colour" all we need per mission?



PS I am going to frame that response Took you 2 1/2 years to say that. Progress

Id love too see some google earth or bing maps type high res images of the moon.
IMO There are so many oddities that have surfaced over the years that a much more closer and documented scientific research is warranted.
The fact that there seems too be a very low level atmosphere and moon quakes shows something is afoot there at the very least.
Some of the Clementine color images are just loaded with weird anommolies in and around certain craters as well.
Heres a couple of moon images id love too see close up and high res

Originally posted by zorgon
Well color me purple but isn't one high res camera "that could be close to true colour" all we need per mission?

The problem is that the images you have posted were not taken with that camera.

reply to post by VType


Give me the coordinates and I will look for the original images, maybe they are higher resolution than those (or maybe not), but one thing is certain, they will not be colour images, all the images have independent channels.

UPDATE

Smooth Sailing to the Moon

June 21, 2009 - Things continue to go smoothly as LRO cruises towards the moon. LRO is now 339, 838 km from the Earth.



lro.gsfc.nasa.gov...


Nice graphic Looks like they missed

[edit on 22-6-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


Nope. They didn't miss. Playing catch-up wouldn't work too well. They're heading it off at the pass.



[edit on 6/22/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage

I want them to have a close look at this spot...






Since your feet are on the ground, what would you suggest would be a valid rational on that one?

BTW Nice to see you back

Originally posted by zorgon
reply to post by Phage

I want them to have a close look at this spot...

Since your feet are on the ground, what would you suggest would be a valid rational on that one?

BTW Nice to see you back

Why whats so interesting about this spot? Looks rather dull please enlighten me Zorgon.

Originally posted by zorgon

The LRO objectives are to finding safe landing sites, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment, and demonstrate new technology.

lro.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Find safe landing sites? But didn't we already do that with Apollo? Sounds like deja vu...

We found a few safe landing sites, but we need more. I suppose we could go back to a few of the same locations we went to before, but I suspect we would want to primarily go to new locations to see new things.

We want to set a moon base up at one of the poles where it the sun permanently shines (therefore we don't have to worry about 14 day -long periods of darkness). The landing sites they are looking at are primarily at the poles. Apollo never went to the poles.

The South Pole might be a good location for a Moon base since the Sun always shines on parts of the pole and water ice may occur in a the dark craters there.

[edit on 6/22/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
We

You are NASA?

wZn

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
We want to set a moon base up at one of the poles where it the sun permanently shines (therefore we don't have to worry about 14 day -long periods of darkness). The landing sites they are looking at are primarily at the poles. Apollo never went to the poles.

We? Who is this we?

NASA doesn't seem to be interested in that..

NASA may abandon plans for moon base
www.newscientist.com...

water ice may occur in a the dark craters there.

Yup said so in the Pentagon press release 1996 posted a few times



[edit on 22-6-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


So technically is there "life" on the moon due to water alone?

Perhaps Solvent is from another ET group wanting to muscle in on the Orion group?

wZn

Well if they're not gonna be open about microbial life and the real cause of the methane plumes on Mars then I fail to see why they would be so open about water ice in the poles.

I just wanna know when we're gonna get those darn pictures!

reply to post by no1dea


Nope been there done that... just want a rational for them to look

Okay a little promotion for the other side of the Fence...

JRA started a thread on the LRO target request. Jack from Pegasus has submitted two and we will post any followup in JRA's thread in the science section

Pop in and check it out... he has all the info on how to file a specific request

LRO/LROC Target Observation Request
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Skeptics and debunkers might enjoy this thread by Kano

Moon Landing Conspiracy, will the LRO Accomplish anything?
www.abovetopsecret.com...


UPDATE

We have turned on decontamination heaters on the LRO Camera to drive out moisture and any other volatiles before we turn on LROC.

LRO is approaching lunar distance and a rendezvous with the moon on June 23 at 5:47am, when our orbit insertion burn will begin.

lunar.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Well that is good news no water spots to create anomalies

MORE UPDATE

LCROSS lunar swingby video stream coverage will begin approximately 5:10 a.m. PDT on Tuesday, June 23, 2009. First video data from the LCROSS spacecraft will come in at 5:20 a.m.

www.nasa.gov...

[edit on 23-6-2009 by zorgon]

I am unable to view the live stream on NASA's website from work.

How good is the quality? Would we be able to see something if there really is something?

www.nasa.gov...

reply to post by bilb_o


Don't know... but I won't be able to be up to catch it... Anyone out there can record it? I assume it will be available on playback later

5:10 a.m. PDT on Tuesday, June 23, 2009