can we see the moon rover and lander base from earth?

[shadow735]

So yeah we can take cool pictures of other galaxies and gas clouds but can we zoom into the areas of the moon where we landed and zero in to take pics of the moon lander base and moon buggy?<br />I havent seen pictures of that, something like that should put a sock in the moon conspiracy nuts...<br />Has this already been done? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[hal9891]

So far there is no telescope or spacecraft that would have a good enough resolution to see the stuff we left on moon, but Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter with camera resolution of 0.5m will be able to resolve Apollo hardware.<br />(And silence those conspiracy nuts once and for all hopefully<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div style="text-align:center"><font style="color:#808080" color="#999999"><font size="1">"I predict that within 100 years computers will be twice as powerful, 10000 times larger, and so expensive that only the five richest kings of Europe will own them"</font></font><br /></div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Actually, the really devoted nuts wouldn't believe we succeeded even if you took them to the moon. <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

FYI: If you are interested in seeing what LRO's cameras will be able to do, check out the images from MRO. Its HIRISE camera is essentially the same camera carried by LRO. It took pictures of the MERs that were clear enough you could almost make out the shape of the rovers. Considering that a MER is way smaller than an Apollo lander, the same resolution should result in some nice pictures. Please note that I don't know if the orbits (and hence resolutions) will be comparable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[chode]

The LRO images should have much better resolution than the MRO images, since LRO will orbit at about 50 km altitude, while MRO is around 250 km (to avoid atmospheric decay issues). You should be able to see the descent stage, experiments, lunar rover, and probably even the tracks of the rover on the surface.<br /><br />Regards

 

[qso1]

At one time, it was claimed that the Paranal observatory would be able to image the lunar module descent stages once its full interferometry capability was operational and images of lunar mission artifiacts will presumably be forthcoming if the Paranal claim is true.<br /><br />I wish I had a source for you but unfortunatly I don't.<br /><br />Paranal observatory should be operational as an interferometer pretty soon if not already. The fact that a telescope system on earth might image lunar mission artifacts might change the minds of a few HBs as opposed to probes in orbit which HBs are likely to say are faked as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[billslugg]

qso1<br />We talked about Paranal here in March. At Paranal's max separation of 200 meters, it could resolve two point sources on the Moon 1.2 meters apart, which might show the decent stages.<br /><br />Bill Slugg <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Thats the reason I opened with "At one time". I also mentioned that because I haven't seen any recent claims to that effect. The same thing happened with Hubble prior to its launch. The imaging P.I. gave a 50 50 chance of Hubble imaging an extrasolar planet.<br /><br />So far, the smallest extrasolar body Hubble has imaged are brown dwarfs. I'm kind of leaning towards Paranal not being able to image the descent stages in any meaningful way. It might image them and astronomers will probably have to point them out to the general public if such images are ever attempted. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Can they take stereoscopic pictures? If so, when you view them in 3D, you might see a few pixels floating about the background. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

Conventional stereoscopic 3D type pics partly depend on the two images to be combined being partially offset as the result of parallax. In the case of a telescope looking at the moon. I imagine this could be done so long as they can get two images offset enough to build the 3D image from. This would involve the telescope being rotated far enough (By Earths rotation) to produce enough parallax to build a 3D image from. That would be an interesting way to observe lunar artifacts. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Which is why I conceived of something that I nicknamed the "Gene Shoemaker Memorial Binocular Telescope" or GSM. It was a little overly complex, but if built, would be quite capable. The name was derived because it would specialize in objects inside the solar system. One of its primary tasks would be the search for possible Earth impactors.<br /><br />The core of the telescope was a big huge (100+ meters across) ring parallel to the ecliptic. The outside of the ring would have a track on it. Along the track would run a car with a platform that could be tilted. The platform would have onboard two telescopes that would be permanently aimed in the same direction. (The only exception would be that the parallax would be adjustable.) I wanted to aspect ratio of the objective diameter to the distance between the objectives to be the same as the human eye. That would result in the best quality stereoscopic images.<br /><br />I wanted to fund the scope by selling some of the time to let the average person log on via the Internet and make their own observations. They could take pictures and have them turned into holographic images that could sit on the coffee table, wall, or office desk. If any PI or other professional objected, I would tell them "Feel free to use another scope." Incidentally, that is effectively how HST is funded. NASA just doesn't know how to deal with the objections.<br /><br />I don't know if GSM would do any better than a traditional multi-element scope like Keck or not. Between that and the sheer size and complexity, I gave up on it. It would be cool though. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

Not a bad idea at all. I like the name too. I imagine NASA must get an enormous amount of requests for Hubble time. I'd keep the idea close at hand in case you change your mind or find an investor. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

There would be some huge structural issues that would need to be solved before it could be built. That would be a tremendous amount of mass that you would be swinging around and all supported by that ring. No site on Earth that I know of would allow the ring to be built vertical. If you could build it vertically, you would reduce the stress on it by at least 10x. You would also need some powerful motors to move that heavy car around -- especially after you move the car close to the horizon in any direction.<br /><br />BTW: With the correct telescopes mounted on the car and modern adaptive optics, GSM would be great for observing Mars. As such, it might be handy for your novel. Let me know if you need help with it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

More than likely the structural issues could be overcome. Seems these days its more whether the monetary issues can be overcome. Thanks for offering to help with my GN. The one about mars I finished awhile back and am currently working on getting my new website up and running.<br /><br />I will definetily keep you in mind if I need any future assistance or possible revisions to my finished stuff.<br /><br />I did actually have a chapter in the GN where astronomers were looking at an earthlike world with a telescope I named the Bruno telescope or Brunoscope for short in honor of you know who. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Actually, I misstated when I suggested that you have GSM look at Mars in your novel. I should have suggested that they look at Phobos and Deimos. Both are targets that are tough to image with probes like MRO or Mars Express. The moons move too fast and in inconvenient orbits. Yet, in your story, I assume your astronauts want to visit one or both moons. Do they wait until they reach orbit around the moon to look for a landing site? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

In the story, they observe both moons from the mother craft but land on mars. During the lunar base building phase, the telescope images the site including the crew, although the crew is not more than a couple of fuzzy pixels that have to be identified by the astronomers. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[docm]

Pic of Apollo 17 LEM from CM....<br /><br />Pic of LEM from lunar ground level.... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>During the lunar base building phase, the telescope images the site including the crew, although the crew is not more than a couple of fuzzy pixels that have to be identified by the astronomers.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />They image the lunar base from where? A telescope on Earth? Or something like LRO? Did your novel take into account cameras like HIRISE? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

I never did elaborate much on the scope beyond its name. At the time, I started with an earth based scope similar to the Paranal scope. I'd have to reread that part of my book to see where I brought in the Bruno scope which was a space based telescope though I didn't specify where in space it was located but it may have been the one that I portrayed imaging the lunar crews.<br /><br />I mainly wanted to show readers that imaging lunar crews may be possible in the near future. I wouldn't be suprised to see it actually happen provided the Constellation program gets far enough to put lunar crews on the moon. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>