Unmanned landing sites from LRO, Surveyors, Lunas, Lunakhods and impact craters from hardware impacts |
Unmanned landing sites from LRO, Surveyors, Lunas, Lunakhods and impact craters from hardware impacts |
Mar 25 2010, 04:54 PM
Post
#76
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 10-September 05 Member No.: 493 |
-------------------- |
|
|
Mar 26 2010, 05:30 AM
Post
#77
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8785 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
That's one of the clearest shots yet.
-------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 10:23 AM
Post
#78
|
||
Member Group: Members Posts: 236 Joined: 5-June 08 From: Udon Thani Member No.: 4185 |
The list at the LROC site states a preliminary position for Luna 18 at 3.760 N 56.655 E on image M119482862R pixel coordinates 3189 X 28221.
Given that the pixel coordinates relate to the raw image (flipped), this translates to coordinates 1875 X 28221 on the image as published, leading us to below position. Conform the same logic, Luna 20 can indeed be found on the same image at pixel coordinates 4086 X 29618, so hopefully my mathematics are correct. If this is indeed Luna 18, the craft seems to have landed on the edge of a crater, but how much damage it sustained is impossible to tell. Hopefully we get clearer images later. |
|
|
||
Apr 10 2010, 01:53 PM
Post
#79
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10231 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
I didn't know we had access to that image yet.
Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 03:11 PM
Post
#80
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 236 Joined: 5-June 08 From: Udon Thani Member No.: 4185 |
I didn't know we had access to that image yet. The site doesn't give you direct access to that image, but when I ran a search for it in the library the raw TIFF nevertheless showed up and could be downloaded. http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse/view/M119482862R Tried the same to get Surveyor 7 but that image as yet seems unaccessable. |
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 05:35 PM
Post
#81
|
||
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10231 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
Thanks for the tip!
I'm learning a lot here. Locating both those landers on that image, I find that they are further north than I had expected. Also, that raw image is south-up. If it's rotated 180 degrees it is right-reading - no further flip needed. When I compare the two landers - I mean the candidate Luna 18 lander as it's not confirmed yet - I find the 'Luna 18' is quite a bit smaller than Luna 20: Maybe it's not the right object, but large rocks are very rare in this region. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
||
Apr 10 2010, 05:45 PM
Post
#82
|
|
Senior Member Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
How far apart are they in the image Phil, is it possible that we are looking at a perspective issue here? No doubt that the Luna 20 candidate is a man made object, you can even discern the shadow of narrow cross-section antennas or whatever they are protruding from the top.
EDIT: Also, is it possible the impact caused it to embed in the regolith somewhat or some of the protruding devices to separate, giving it that smaller appearance? -------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 05:53 PM
Post
#83
|
|||
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10231 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
This is a locator image for Luna 20 and the Luna 18 candidate:
The black box (approx. 1500 m wide) has Luna 20 in the upper left corner and the Luna 18 candidate in the lower right corner. But while searching through the image I found this object: It's inside that large crater at the bottom of the locator image. It appears to be exactly the same size and form as Luna 20. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
||
|
|||
Apr 10 2010, 06:05 PM
Post
#84
|
|
Senior Member Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
Wow...good eye
-------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 06:15 PM
Post
#85
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10231 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
The large crater in that locator image is 4 km north of the expected landing site.
Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 06:47 PM
Post
#86
|
||
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10231 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
Here's the new comparison image. (PS I really ought to be doing some work around the house... but who can leave this stuff alone?)
Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
||
Apr 10 2010, 06:54 PM
Post
#87
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I can almost convince myself that the crash landing has caused the ascent stage to fall over to the north.
|
|
|
Apr 10 2010, 08:00 PM
Post
#88
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10231 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
If this is Luna 18 it obviously landed - rather than crashed - but presumably landed hard enough to do some serious damage to the spacecraft, especially its communication system.
The difference in shadow lengths between the two objects is related to local slopes - Luna 18 (my candidate for it anyway) is on a crater wall sloping toward the sun. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Apr 11 2010, 12:15 AM
Post
#89
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 236 Joined: 5-June 08 From: Udon Thani Member No.: 4185 |
If this is Luna 18 it obviously landed - rather than crashed - but presumably landed hard enough to do some serious damage to the spacecraft, especially its communication system. Impossible to tell whether your candidate or the 'official' candidate is Luna 18, we have to wait until they release some new images, preferably with a low sun angle. We should keep in mind that Luna 18 (like Luna 23) should have its ascent stage still on top (contrary to Luna 16/20), so it should be a lot higher (unless the thing has toppled over on landing and is lying on its side as might be the case with the official candidate). Probably Luna 18 can best be compared with Luna 23, but then we need two images with similar sun-angle. |
|
|
Apr 11 2010, 12:28 AM
Post
#90
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 28th September 2024 - 01:56 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |