• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why no pictures from the Moon?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
bigi said:
I've not seen may highly detailed pictures from our Moon since the 1970s.

I'd be nice to see the craters and other formations.

We pretty good cameras now and few missions have gone there for past 40+ years.

Do you have any sources of more modern pictures?
Click to expand...

They have recent pictures from the Lunar reconnaissance orbiter but those are from lunar orbit.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/LROMoonImages_archive_1.html

You also have the Chinese lunar rover pictures.

http://www.space.com/23786-china-moon-rover-mission-photos-change3-lander.html
 
Ken g6 said:
I'm correcting you for your own good! ()🙂 Before Buzz Aldrin does it his way:

buzz-aldrin-punch-o.gif
Click to expand...

I remember hearing about that. I laughed. Sucks for Aldrin though. I'd be pretty pissed too if I invested my entire life in something awesome, only to be hounded by the cognitively disadvantaged for the rest of my life.
 
The simple truth is that the only manned craft for the past 40 years were all in the shuttle program. The NASA space shuttle was merely an orbiter platform designed to work on satellites and nothing more. The solid fuel boosters only had enough fuel to get the orbiter into orbit.

The Saturn V rockets used in the Apollo missions were multiple stages used for the much longer trip.

IMG_2172.jpg


We haven't been back to the moon because after the Saturn Vs were no longer produced, we simply didn't have a platform to get there. Images taken from satellites or telescopes are the best we can get and they are going to have some interference.... It's sick to think of those guys in the top of the Apollo rocket....a very small payload to a hell of a lot of rocket fuel.
 
The whole thing is a hoax. Not just the moon landings, the moon itself is fake. It's a holographic projection from our alien overlords used to cover up their hideous anal probing experiments causing gravity fluctuations on earth.
 
T9D said:
Cause we never go there anymore. We can see everything there is to see from earth with telescopes
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but from what I understand we can't even see the shit WE left behind on the moon with telescopes. If that is still true it's pretty far away from "everything there is to see".

Not to mention the other half, you know, the dark side of the moon?
 
CZroe said:
I have it on good authority that he's hiding something else (sentient burritos and tacos under a shield).
Click to expand...

Naw, gotta be good old fashioned American apple pie and burgers, if it was burritos and tacos we would have bombed the shit out of the moon by now.
 
Darwin333 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but from what I understand we can't even see the shit WE left behind on the moon with telescopes. If that is still true it's pretty far away from "everything there is to see".

Not to mention the other half, you know, the dark side of the moon?
Click to expand...

The other half of the Moon is called the far side. It gets sunlight just fine.

As far as telescope resolution. This article gives a good explanation of arcseconds and resolution of the Hubble at lunar distance, it is about 200 meters so a object would have to be larger than 200 meters to be seen by Hubble on the lunar surface.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/08/12/moon-hoax-why-not-use-telescopes-to-look-at-the-landers/#.VLdHKyvF_Tc
 
Scarpozzi said:
We haven't been back to the moon because after the Saturn Vs were no longer produced, we simply didn't have a platform to get there. Images taken from satellites or telescopes are the best we can get and they are going to have some interference.... It's sick to think of those guys in the top of the Apollo rocket....a very small payload to a hell of a lot of rocket fuel.
Click to expand...

To take humans BEO you either need a big rocket or Propellant Depots. In theory a Falcon Heavy could launch a Dragon capsule on a free return trajectory around the Moon.

Below is a article from ULA discussing how you could use existing Commercial rockets to launch Propellant depots and then launch propellant to do crewed missions beyond Earth orbit. However NASA wants a big rocket again so we are sending Billions to develop and build the SLS. Going beyond Earth Orbit is really a exercise about moving propellant since about 70% of your Mass when you leave Earth orbit will be propellant.

http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Exploration/AffordableExplorationArchitecture2009.pdf
 
Was the original question really "Why haven't any pictures been taken from the moon since we last went there?"

Don't let anyone tell you there are no dumb questions...
 
Carson Dyle said:
Was the original question really "Why haven't any pictures been taken from the moon since we last went there?"

Don't let anyone tell you there are no dumb questions...
Click to expand...

It was really more a question why NASA hasn't sent a rover like Curiosity to the Moon since we last left in 1972.
 
Brovane said:
The other half of the Moon is called the far side. It gets sunlight just fine.

As far as telescope resolution. This article gives a good explanation of arcseconds and resolution of the Hubble at lunar distance, it is about 200 meters so a object would have to be larger than 200 meters to be seen by Hubble on the lunar surface.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/08/12/moon-hoax-why-not-use-telescopes-to-look-at-the-landers/#.VLdHKyvF_Tc
Click to expand...

Dark is a relative term in this context. Just like the term "black hole" is a relative term and "dark matter" is a relative term, you know why they are called dark or black? The answer is very simple, we can't see them. Same thing for the "dark side" of the moon or the "far side" of the moon, same shit and we can't see any of them from where we are.

So, semantics my friend.
 
Brovane said:
To take humans BEO you either need a big rocket or Propellant Depots. In theory a Falcon Heavy could launch a Dragon capsule on a free return trajectory around the Moon.

Below is a article from ULA discussing how you could use existing Commercial rockets to launch Propellant depots and then launch propellant to do crewed missions beyond Earth orbit. However NASA wants a big rocket again so we are sending Billions to develop and build the SLS. Going beyond Earth Orbit is really a exercise about moving propellant since about 70% of your Mass when you leave Earth orbit will be propellant.

http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Exploration/AffordableExplorationArchitecture2009.pdf
Click to expand...

It has always been rather depressing to me that of all technology, manned space flight is THE premature ejaculator of them all. We started by putting a man ON the moon, then we started boldly going where hundreds have gone before (LEO) and now we can't even get there without hitchhiking.

Seeing what we did from scratch, knowing nothing, and figuring it out in a decade, now we can't even get back into low earth orbit in a decade.
 
T9D said:
Honestly what more is there to see though? More of the same. I'm sure they have pointed space telescopes at it also. Probably see any piece of dust they want. Once they had the rocks brought back they know the composition. Doubt it varies much from one end to the next. No value in it to spend billions more when they have better things to use the time and resources on I'd imagine.
Click to expand...

Impossible to say without actually looking....

We don't find oil by picking up a rock off the ground and analyzing it, why should we treat the moon any different?

What more is there to see you ask, I reply with "the unseen". That's what science generally does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top