Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: ESA moon mission

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    29,167
    SMART-1

    The important question is, of course, whether or not it will take good enough photos of the landing sites to make out the descent stage.

    (And what's the emphasis on Apollo 16? It wasn't the last mission!)
    Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    32
    In addition to the descent stages, I wonder it can spot the areas where the S-IVB's crashed. Would that be acceptable proof for the HB guys?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    6,275
    Maybe it's because A16 was almost exactly 30 years ago, whereas A17 was a bit less than 30 years ago... but why that should matter is a bit mysterious.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    304
    "I wonder it can spot the areas where the S-IVB's crashed. Would that be acceptable proof for the HB guys?"

    Doubt it, it'd just prove something crashed there, just like the 'lunar surface anomaly' at the A15 landing site only proves something landed there, not that it was a LM which carried astronauts.

    And you reckon when we do get pics of LM descent stages, that the HBers will say 'fine, something landed there, but were they manned modules? can we see footprints?'... and in the end, theyll claim it was some tiny robot rover that went around pressing down with a boot....

    I dont think we'll ever win [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

  5. #5
    Guest
    A push up (from page 20?) by HUb's 486/100 ? maybe
    anyway it rekindles my lunar theory that the moons two faced
    the HEAVY [Basalt] side faces Earth & the Light
    {Andisite}[Granite] side's the far side!
    So its clear to me.. any theory of lunar formation
    MUST account for the TWO faces of the moon..
    And of course for me the Pacific Basin Origon
    of the Moon [YOUNG MOON] FITS THE SCENERIO!
    anyway not that lunar rocks themselves are not the same age as Earth Rock.. of course THEY ARE Earth rock
    its just that the so called "ORBIT" {tradjectory} of the moons realitivly New.. ei contemparanious with Astroids as debries /solid planet {well?}

  6. #6
    Guest
    MUST account for the TWO faces of the moon..
    And of course for me the Pacific Basin Origon
    of the Moon [YOUNG MOON] FITS THE SCENERIO!

    This has been discounted of recent years. The Pacific Ocean is way to young (60 odd million years) to have been involved in the formation of the Moon.

    It was a fairly good theory till continental drift came along.

    Glen

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    3,162
    Here's some more stuff on SMART plus some other moon missions

    http://www.space.com/businesstechnol..._020923-1.html


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,452
    Calcium on the Moon
    Billions of Tonnes of water to be found ??
    http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=16902
    http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/2760.asp
    http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=17063

    France scientists will be working with NASA in future, and ESA plans a joint Lunar mission with India

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    29,167
    Quote Originally Posted by Manchurian Taikonaut
    India Daily is not a good source for reliable information. Note the links on that page to articles about weather manipulation and getting technology from UFOs.
    Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

  10. #10
    Guest

    20050627


    15 minutes into yestrdays PBS/opb Astronomy program
    The Dark
    segment of "DARK" Matter dark ENERGY
    ?

    %%% 2:28 PM 6/26/05 sqU/O^ie(A'misH {yeah? Hi Hi (HiHo)'s} AstronomY?
    Just reWatched "Dark Matter : Dark Energy" OPB/PBS Local CH10 11 to 12
    -----------
    V.R. 1/3r Solar v=.5Mm/h about center
    .A convert 24e7 years to hours 24e7Y * 365.24 d/y * 24 h/d = 2.1e12 hrs
    B. RT=d R=.5e6Miles/hr T=2.1e12hr D= 1e18 Miles Circ / PI = .335e18 Dia
    Radius for Solar Orbit computed to be equal to 167.41e9 "Miles"


    the STATEment: Sun's velocity about the CENTER of GALAXY = 1/2 Million "MILES" per Hour was what gets my attention...
    ? are there other numbers for Solar SPEED in Galatic Orbit ?

    Back2Ill-:L+ http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=17063

    1. the Xray plot for 1/15/05 reminds me a lot of the plot on TV yesterday
    2: my first nit is the X-Axis which i see marked strangly
    3: the brown line where the BLUE dash points away from travels back in time

    4: for now theres no 4


    ; http://www.sel.noaa.gov/ftpdir/plots...50115_xray.gif

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnno
    "I wonder it can spot the areas where the S-IVB's crashed. Would that be acceptable proof for the HB guys?"

    Doubt it, it'd just prove something crashed there, just like the 'lunar surface anomaly' at the A15 landing site only proves something landed there, not that it was a LM which carried astronauts>
    I thought they were sent towards the sun. I seem to remember a year or two ago that one of these things might have been mistaken for a NEO hazard.

    I think only the N-1 LOK was to use a 'crasher' stage.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    20,108
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnno
    "I wonder it can spot the areas where the S-IVB's crashed. Would that be acceptable proof for the HB guys?"

    Doubt it, it'd just prove something crashed there, just like the 'lunar surface anomaly' at the A15 landing site only proves something landed there, not that it was a LM which carried astronauts>
    I thought they were sent towards thesun. I seem to remember a year or two ago that one of these things might have been mistaken for a NEO hazard.

    I think only the N-1 LOK was to use a 'crasher' stage.
    Some were, some weren't according to the articles on the object at the time. I think that was over 2 years ago, I loved watching the orbit simulations on it. Was it proved that that's what it was? I think I remember the experts saying that there was some question about it.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    29,167
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnno
    "I wonder it can spot the areas where the S-IVB's crashed. Would that be acceptable proof for the HB guys?"

    Doubt it, it'd just prove something crashed there, just like the 'lunar surface anomaly' at the A15 landing site only proves something landed there, not that it was a LM which carried astronauts>
    I thought they were sent towards thesun. I seem to remember a year or two ago that one of these things might have been mistaken for a NEO hazard.

    I think only the N-1 LOK was to use a 'crasher' stage.
    Some were, some weren't according to the articles on the object at the time. I think that was over 2 years ago, I loved watching the orbit simulations on it. Was it proved that that's what it was? I think I remember the experts saying that there was some question about it.
    Analysis of the reflection spectrum showed signs of titanium, and the white paint on the stage was titanium-based, so most considered this conclusive evidence that it was an Apollo third stage.
    Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,133
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnno
    "I wonder it can spot the areas where the S-IVB's crashed. Would that be acceptable proof for the HB guys?"

    Doubt it, it'd just prove something crashed there, just like the 'lunar surface anomaly' at the A15 landing site only proves something landed there, not that it was a LM which carried astronauts>
    I thought they were sent towards the sun. I seem to remember a year or two ago that one of these things might have been mistaken for a NEO hazard.

    I think only the N-1 LOK was to use a 'crasher' stage.
    S-IVB impacts

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamlet
    The Apollo 11 and 16 LM's were jettisoned into (temporary) lunar orbits.
    I wonder how temporary? Wouldn't that be an archeological find! I guess that's how the ascent stage wound-up back on the surface in Futurama; here and here (note the sign in the background).

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamlet
    The Apollo 11 and 16 LM's were jettisoned into (temporary) lunar orbits.
    I wonder how temporary? Wouldn't that be an archeological find! I guess that's how the ascent stage wound-up back on the surface in Futurama; here and here (note the sign in the background).
    Actually, that was an afterthought of the producers (the sign, that is). They forgot exactly what happened to the landers, and didn't bother to check on it, until it was too late to do much of anything but add the sign to explain things.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,452
    http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/obj...objectid=37626
    more on it
    http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMSDE1A6BD_index_0.html
    SMART-1 will look for water (in the form of ice) on the Moon.
    http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/SMART-1/SEMDNPV4QWD_0.html
    To save precious xenon fuel, SMART-1 uses 'celestial mechanics', that is, techniques like making use of 'lunar resonances' and fly-bys.
    http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEM4711DU8E_index_0.html

    http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=2003-043C
    http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimed...cfm?IM_ID=2523

  18. #18
    Guest

    20050712 he he


    20050714 sorry it took a while for me to find this

    Candy's clues wher not 2 illuminating

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    29,167
    HUb', your link doesn't work and it messes up the page (making everything scroll off to the right). Please edit or remove it. Thanks.
    Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    841

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,452

Similar Threads

  1. German Mission to the Moon
    By Tuckerfan in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2009-Aug-14, 10:10 PM
  2. Fly me to the moon: Private company plans moon mission!
    By Vega115 in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 2004-Feb-05, 01:20 AM
  3. New moon mission
    By HypersonicMan in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 2004-Jan-19, 02:27 PM
  4. New moon mission
    By HypersonicMan in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2004-Jan-10, 06:02 PM
  5. CNN: India's Moon Mission
    By Chip in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2002-Aug-13, 08:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
here
The forum is sponsored in-part by: