China lands Jade Rabbit robot rover on Moon

wmd_2008
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

What part of Scotland was that ?

This was taken in Scotland

Moon about to rise with Jupiter above it f3.5 10 secs iso 1600

Stunning! My pics were taken at a friend's place just south of Oban. Can't remember the exact settings. For the stars picture I was resting the camera on the car roof - my tripod was too far away in the van!

GaryN
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

That landing video looks even better when it's the right way up (and in HD).

At the very end, don't we see the lunar surface material being blasted sideways by the engine? The animation the Chinese used shows the surface material being blown away from under the lander from even higher up, but I haven't seen any recent images showing any sign of disturbance under the lander.

i.dailymail.co.uk...

We do, and as I've said elsewhere the dust behaves exactly as it should do in no atmosphere and low gravity.

The whole 'no blast crater' thing is another non-argument for me (not that I'm suggesting that this is your argument): You don't approach your landing site with your engines on full, or you don't land. Also, as there was dust being disturbed right up to the landing point, clearly not all the dust has been blown away by whatever minimal engine force is being used at the end.

IamSirDrinksalot

surfinguru

Daedalus

another thing...everyone is talking about mining the bejesus out of the moon....unless they're planning to replace the mass they remove, with something else, i foresee problems with this plan..

That's always my first thought when I hear people discussing mining the resources of the moon. The moon has such a significant daily impact on our world, how can anyone in their right mind think that changing the current equilibrium is ok?

In my small walnut brain, I would think less moon mass equals the moon moving out of earths orbit sooner than it would naturally do so. Now maybe if that mass is transferred to Earth, the Earth creates additional gravitational pull to offset the loss of moon mass???

I don't know, to me it just seems like a really, really bad idea to wholesale remove lunar mass.

Really, do you know what the mass of the moon might be? 81 billion quoted on the interweb.

Possibly the most we can mine on Earth is 80 thousand tonnes per day (based on Googles most efficient mines), mining at that rate, it would take over 2500 years to erode the moon to nothing.

But if you think how much could anyone really remove from the moon...

The Americans brough back 0.4 tonnes of moon rock over 3 years, if my shaky maths are right, that would take 200,000 days to mine or 550 years to mine 80,000 tonnes.

So lets say the Chinese, who cant do it on earth, can send a robot mining set up to the Moon (are you keeping up?).

And then lets say that the robot mining set up can run without human mechanical help for a while..and then, it mines and finds some resources which it can refine and put into transport boxes to be loaded into vehicles that can return to Earth from the Moon....

Perhaps now, you will stop worrying about altering the moons gravitational fields and creating tsunamis on earth.

Jeesus help me....

Thanks for the explanation. The breakdown was logical yet tainted with the smart ass comment at the end. Additionally, I never mentioned anything about "tsunamis." WTF? Anyway, thanks for putting the numbers in perspective. Now let's get to work mining the crap out of the moon!

MysterX

JadeStar

scotsdavy1

wildespace
The Planetary Society blog update: www.planetary.org...

A color image shot from a "monitoring camera" on Chang'e 3 after the landing:

Thought NASA said there was no colour on the moon?

Do you know what a filter is?

Do you absolutely HAVE to turn on the sarcasm all of the time? Do us a favour and give it a rest eh?

On the subject of filters, i doubt this cam had filters as it's just a monitoring / surveillance camera, a fairly low res cam for seeing what's going on with the craft. It's not mission specific or for anything other than checking the the immediate area of the lander iow.

The moon is not grey..there are many colours there, some are quite vivid too, from Earth it does look grey however, because of the distances involved. But even with a filter for darkening the image, it's quite obvious from that one still there are multiple colours present in that picture...browns of various hues, purples, violets and even greens, unless there were multiple filters over the lens that took that image, a single filter as an explanation for the colour in that picture doesn't work, as there's more than one colour.

Different minerals will present different colours.

There's no mystery about the colours on the moon, except perhaps the public being told on a number of occasions that the moon is grey...which isn't strictly accurate, as we can see.

edit on 14-12-2013 by MysterX because: added more info

Sorry but first the Moon looks various shades depending on it position in the sky low down a warmer white higher up it the sky a brilliant almost blue white.

Yes there are various colours on the surface but to bring them out in a photograph you need to OVER saturate the colours

Look here

Moon Colours

From the link.

The trick for color: Bump Saturation Is it that simple? Well yes and no. To reveal the colors of the moon you just have to bump the saturation when you process the photos.

Oh and ONE filter can effect ALL colours If you don't really understand how it works don't mislead others.

reply to post by wildespace


So you are saying it's my fault that according to you, the video on YouTube is the wrong way round, and heaven forbid, it wasn't in HD? Some people are never happy and find fault with anything....
There is no up or down in space so,why is it,the wrong way round? And anyway, I,never uploaded it to YouTube I only supplied the link.

scotsdavy1
Was watching it live on the English Chinese TV news channel ....will be good to see what they discover and hopefully don't censor it like NASA does ...

What do you think they censored ? After all you didn't understand why stars didn't show so what if you are mistaken about NASA hiding things!

scotsdavy1
reply to post by alfa1

 

Most photos of the moon in the early days were all in black and white even though they could have used colour instead. Colour ones show up more detail than b&w ones

REALLY if you don't know for sure check

Here is a link to the 70mm Hasselblad pictures taken during Apollo missions

70mm Hasselblad Image Catalog

Click on a mission and check what was taken don't you think about checking things yourself ?

OH and by the way b&w can show just as much detail as colour sometimes more!

reply to post by wmd_2008


For your sarcastic remark, I will answer you this one time.
I do understand why stars are hard to see from the moon, and if you don't believe NASA censor images then there is something wrong with your thinking.
For example,check their web camera live from the ISS. How come it goes blue a multitude of times and when it does show pictures of the Earth,,how come there is always a huge part of the ISS in the frames. I get a better picture using my CCTV camera at night,than some of the pictures we see today. Why does it not work half of the time either?
Why is there a lot of blurred images on pictures from the moon on NASA sites?
Oh I,forgot,,NASA tells,the truth,,the whole truth , and nothing but the truth.,give me a break!
Do,me a favour, go,and find someone else to bother because it's really childish when some come on and try to pick on a member for,their own amusement.
Takes more than this to annoy me.

reply to post by scotsdavy1


Provide links to the blurred images maybe they can be explained to you by a fellow SCOT!

Oh and I wasn't picking on you it was your comments if you check the link above from Apollo 4 all
missions had COLOUR film, You like to criticise them but can't take it yourself on here if you make a comment that is wrong people will correct you if I hadn't someone else would as for your cctv camera how often does that have to operate in orbit?

scotsdavy1
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

For your sarcastic remark, I will answer you this one time.
I do understand why stars are hard to see from the moon, and if you don't believe NASA censor images then there is something wrong with your thinking.
For example,check their web camera live from the ISS. How come it goes blue a multitude of times and when it does show pictures of the Earth,,how come there is always a huge part of the ISS in the frames. I get a better picture using my CCTV camera at night,than some of the pictures we see today. Why does it not work half of the time either?
Why is there a lot of blurred images on pictures from the moon on NASA sites?
Oh I,forgot,,NASA tells,the truth,,the whole truth , and nothing but the truth.,give me a break!
Do,me a favour, go,and find someone else to bother because it's really childish when some come on and try to pick on a member for,their own amusement.
Takes more than this to annoy me.

Actually, you seem pretty annoyed. I say this because rather than producing proof you simply moved the goal posts and then ran away. Just saying.

jaffo

scotsdavy1
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

For your sarcastic remark, I will answer you this one time.
I do understand why stars are hard to see from the moon, and if you don't believe NASA censor images then there is something wrong with your thinking.
For example,check their web camera live from the ISS. How come it goes blue a multitude of times and when it does show pictures of the Earth,,how come there is always a huge part of the ISS in the frames. I get a better picture using my CCTV camera at night,than some of the pictures we see today. Why does it not work half of the time either?
Why is there a lot of blurred images on pictures from the moon on NASA sites?
Oh I,forgot,,NASA tells,the truth,,the whole truth , and nothing but the truth.,give me a break!
Do,me a favour, go,and find someone else to bother because it's really childish when some come on and try to pick on a member for,their own amusement.
Takes more than this to annoy me.

Actually, you seem pretty annoyed. I say this because rather than producing proof you simply moved the goal posts and then ran away. Just saying.

I have as you say not 'ran away'. Do not see the point in answering stupid comments.

scotsdavy1

jaffo

scotsdavy1
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

For your sarcastic remark, I will answer you this one time.
I do understand why stars are hard to see from the moon, and if you don't believe NASA censor images then there is something wrong with your thinking.
For example,check their web camera live from the ISS. How come it goes blue a multitude of times and when it does show pictures of the Earth,,how come there is always a huge part of the ISS in the frames. I get a better picture using my CCTV camera at night,than some of the pictures we see today. Why does it not work half of the time either?
Why is there a lot of blurred images on pictures from the moon on NASA sites?
Oh I,forgot,,NASA tells,the truth,,the whole truth , and nothing but the truth.,give me a break!
Do,me a favour, go,and find someone else to bother because it's really childish when some come on and try to pick on a member for,their own amusement.
Takes more than this to annoy me.

Actually, you seem pretty annoyed. I say this because rather than producing proof you simply moved the goal posts and then ran away. Just saying.

I have as you say not 'ran away'. Do not see the point in answering stupid comments.

Looks to me you only think his statement is stupid because he challenged the assertions you made of NASA editing images. If your statement is true seems like you would prove it to me. But apparently it was just an accusation on your part. Just because someone believes something to be true doesnt make it true. Obviously you two believe the opposite so why is his statement or comments stupid but yours isnt?

Sorry but I don't need to prove an accusation which if you look it up, can be seen to be so. This post is about China landing a rover on the moon and is going off topic about something else which I am not prepared to discuss on this post. Unless anything is about what I originally posted here about the lander, then I will not discuss anything else. As you can see, many members are interested in the subject and I only made an observation which others want to blow up out of proportion like some do on other threads as well.

Do we really need to fill this thread with personal remarks and comebacks? You can message the hell out to each other privately, but let's keep this thread focused on China's mission to the Moon.

Here's an awesome fan-made video of Chang'e 3 landing, using their footage and LRO imagery: v.youku.com...


Six out of the eight pieces of scientific equipment deployed to the moon with the Chang'e-3 lunar mission have been activated by scientists and are functioning. www.astrowatch.net...

scotsdavy1

jaffo

scotsdavy1
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

For your sarcastic remark, I will answer you this one time.
I do understand why stars are hard to see from the moon, and if you don't believe NASA censor images then there is something wrong with your thinking.
For example,check their web camera live from the ISS. How come it goes blue a multitude of times and when it does show pictures of the Earth,,how come there is always a huge part of the ISS in the frames. I get a better picture using my CCTV camera at night,than some of the pictures we see today. Why does it not work half of the time either?
Why is there a lot of blurred images on pictures from the moon on NASA sites?
Oh I,forgot,,NASA tells,the truth,,the whole truth , and nothing but the truth.,give me a break!
Do,me a favour, go,and find someone else to bother because it's really childish when some come on and try to pick on a member for,their own amusement.
Takes more than this to annoy me.

Actually, you seem pretty annoyed. I say this because rather than producing proof you simply moved the goal posts and then ran away. Just saying.

I have as you say not 'ran away'. Do not see the point in answering stupid comments.

You are the one that made this comment

scotsdavy1
reply to post by alfa1

 

Most photos of the moon in the early days were all in black and white even though they could have used colour instead. Colour ones show up more detail than b&w ones

I showed you that from Apollo 4 they have HAD and used colour film you were WRONG but are the type that just wont admit it!

scotsdavy1
reply to post by alfa1

 

Most photos of the moon in the early days were all in black and white even though they could have used colour instead. Colour ones show up more detail than b&w ones

While it is true that some color images are good for some details, photographers (and even planetary imagery specialists) would tell you that black and white is an excellent imaging tool due to the contrasts and tonality of it. Some type of detail is better seen using black and white.

Color sometimes confuses the issue when trying to discern tonal differences between objects and materials. One of the reasons the Mars Exploration rovers (Opportunity and Spirit) sent back the raw imagery as gray scales, instead of having those gray scale images processed into color before the rovers sent the images back, is because the raw gray scale images could provide greater detail for some of the science they wanted to do.

The color processing for Spirit and Opportunity was done here on Earth, so they did have the advantage of color when they wanted it, but they also had the advantages that black and white offers (especially considering those black-and-white picture used to make the color picture were imaged through filters of various wavelengths).

In the case of Apollo, we are talking about film images, not the digital images from the Mars Exploration rovers, but the point about black and white being sometimes very useful still stands.


...and before you ask what I mean by "processing the color images from the gray scale raw images", please consult this post I made in another thread recently explaining that ALL digital cameras take black-and-white/gray scale images that are then processed into color:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by wildespace


From the page you link to:

Zhang He, deputy designer of the probe, said though the temperature disparity is greater than scientists had anticipated, all the equipment on the moon is in "perfect" condition,

Any idea what they mean by "disparity"?

wildespace
Do we really need to fill this thread with personal remarks and comebacks? You can message the hell out to each other privately, but let's keep this thread focused on China's mission to the Moon.

Here's an awesome fan-made video of Chang'e 3 landing, using their footage and LRO imagery: v.youku.com...

Six out of the eight pieces of scientific equipment deployed to the moon with the Chang'e-3 lunar mission have been activated by scientists and are functioning. www.astrowatch.net...

edit on 19-12-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)

what device did they use to take the video of the robot shot from overhead ??

to me...I smell a hoax

GaryN
reply to post by wildespace

 

From the page you link to:

Zhang He, deputy designer of the probe, said though the temperature disparity is greater than scientists had anticipated, all the equipment on the moon is in "perfect" condition,

Any idea what they mean by "disparity"?

I goggled it .. BAM 2s hit..

"a great difference"

Komodo

what device did they use to take the video of the robot shot from overhead ??

to me...I smell a hoax

The whole video is fan-made animation, so I suspect some sort of animation software was used for the overhead "video" of the lander/rover.

...But then again, I may be smelling sarcasm in your post.