LCROSS Lunar South Polar Cabeus Crater impact Mission

[andrew_t1000]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I am simply astonished over most of the comments regarding the LCROS impact.
Seriously, last night there was a half full moon!
The "plume" would have been faint even with a new moon!
I walked home just after midnight, the moon washed out the Megallanic Clouds, even the Milky Way, which is normally quite bright and looks almost 3D here, was washed out!
If any of the people that are saying they couldn't see anything with a 6" telescope or larger, had even bothered to think about what they were doing, they would have organised some kind of occlusion mask to block out the light from the moon.
After all the hype leading up to this event, NASA should have timed the impact to occur on the NEW MOON!
Then all the idiots that are bitching about cost would have seen a pretty flash.
This sort of perceived anticlimax after months of hype does NASA no good at all.

This mission was never about a damn light show for the plebs!
Hopefully the LRO will get the data we need.

 

[Zipi]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Interview of NASA's James Oberg:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljPm_mdImK8[/youtube]

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I am simply astonished over most of the comments regarding the LCROS impact.
...snip....
After all the hype leading up to this event, NASA should have timed the impact to occur on the NEW MOON!
Then all the idiots that are bitching about cost would have seen a pretty flash.
This sort of perceived anticlimax after months of hype does NASA no good at all.

Uhhh, you do realize that a new moon occurs when the moon is between us and the sun, so IT WOULD BE DAYLIGHT

 

[job1207]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

It is not every day, that CNBC carries a space event. Someone in NASA crunched the numbers and said that folks west of the Mississippi would be able to see the event with a 10" telescope or greater.

I am sure that physics applies to the moon, and the ejectate went somewhere. They are searching for it, in the data.

Now, that part of the Moon looked pretty dry to me. Just sayin.

 

[Imtiazk]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Thank you very much Wayne,

I am still having computer problems & NASA TV crashed my computer, so I could not watch the announcement.

Cabeus A Crater, Earth based S Band RADAR image. Much of the terrain shown here is in permanent darkness. I still say LCROSS is going to hit cryonically cold but ice free dry regolith.

Andrew Brown.

What made you say that, Andrew ? It seems you were spot on a month before the crash. What did you know which the NASA people didn't know ?

 

[radarredux]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

This sort of perceived anticlimax after months of hype does NASA no good at all.

This mission was never about a damn light show for the plebs!

There were two major problems IMHO: (1) NASA overhyped it to begin with, so from most people's perspective it was a dud, and (2) they immediately had a press conference with nothing to tell the press.

 

[radarredux]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Uhhh, you do realize that a new moon occurs when the moon is between us and the sun, so IT WOULD BE DAYLIGHT

It needed to be at a new moon during a solar eclipse as the shadow passed over one or more major observatories.

 

[radarredux]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I am sure that physics applies to the moon, and the ejectate went somewhere. They are searching for it, in the data.

I seem to recall that within the last few months/years another lunar spacecraft crashed into the moon with negative results on the debris cloud.

Ironically, this comes immediately after a press conference and a series of papers discussing significant amounts of H2O or OH in the upper latitudes of the Moon. It's like suddenly there is lots of water everywhere except where we expected it to be.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Again, radarredux, can we wait until the data comes in before we assume there is no water there?
Sheesh!!

 

[radarredux]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

One of these OMG moments. CNN interviewed Keith Cowing and the reporter just made me cringe.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/tech/2 ... g.intv.cnn

 

[radarredux]

LRO Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission.

Again, radarredux, can we wait until the data comes in before we assume there is no water there?
Sheesh!!

Well, there were two negative results so far -- the visual experience that NASA hyped, and the press conference immediately afterwards with nothing to report.

And while I generally agree with your point, I think NASA has done a terrible job of communicating this time around. For example, this mission pretty much had one goal: dig up a debris cloud and search the data for signatures of water. I would expect NASA to have developed simulated data streams for testing purposes, created pattern matchers to look in that data stream for the information of interest, tested the pattern matchers against the simulated data streams, and had those pattern matchers online as the data came streaming in.

If the results were going to be so subtle that it would take major computer systems dozens or hundreds of hours to crunch the data to tease out the minute signatures of interest, or if it was going to take human subjective analysis to reach a conclusion that some ambiguous signal means there is water, NASA should be up front about it.

But NASA encourage people to watch the event live (either to go out with your own telescope or watch it on TV), and then immediately held a press conference with no results. Then for them to turn around and say "Oh, but all the scientists are happy" I think is misleading.

I think they should be upfront and say, "We didn't get what we expected" (which is a perfectly fine result in science), "and we are now analyzing the data to figure out what we did get. Unexpected results are sometimes the most interesting because it leads us to something new."

The failure is NASA's communication about the mission, not the mission itself.

 

[radarredux]

LRO Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission.

Random speculation:

(1) I'm still predicting that the amount of H2O that might have been dug up by LCROSS is much less than what NASA hoped for or expected (i.e., they may still report some, but not in significant amounts).

(2) One of the hypotheses for the large amounts of H2O or OH recently found across much of the Moon is that the Hydrogen ions (i.e., protons) from the Solar winds collides with the Oxygen in the Lunar surface to create H2O and OH.

If (2) is correct, then the permanently shadowed craters at the Lunar poles (which may also be blocked from receiving the stream of Hydrogen ions) may ironically be the worse place to look for water on the Moon.

Just a wild prediction.

 

[andrew_t1000]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I am simply astonished over most of the comments regarding the LCROS impact.
...snip....
After all the hype leading up to this event, NASA should have timed the impact to occur on the NEW MOON!
Then all the idiots that are bitching about cost would have seen a pretty flash.
This sort of perceived anticlimax after months of hype does NASA no good at all.

Uhhh, you do realize that a new moon occurs when the moon is between us and the sun, so IT WOULD BE DAYLIGHT

Wow! Really?
So you're saying the moon is never in the sky, when it's dark, showing just a thin sliver of illuminated disk?
For real?
I must have hit my head harder than I thought, 'coz I could have sworn I've viewed the moon like that a number of times!
I'll dig up some photo's and post them! I have some great shots of the last Venus/Moon conjunction.


Anyway, congratulations!
Once again you have totally missed the point I was making!

After all the hype and hysteria, NASA should have realised that Joe Bloggs would have been out with his 6 pack and trusty 4" Tasco.
Better viewing conditions would have been had AFTER the moon had waned a tad more.

Maybe I should spend less time observing the night sky and more time thinking up dumb/smug/rude comments to post.

Wayne, I hate to say it, but for a moderator, you really are not very moderate!

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Well excuse me for being accurate. A crescent moon, is not a new moon. That's what you said. A thin sliver is not a new moon.

I unsdestand what point you were attempting to make, but it's just as wrong. The poles are lit up just as much with a crescent moon as with any other non-new moon. So as far as viewing a faint plume of ejecta, it would have made no difference. ANd NASA mad it quite clear that as a minimum, a 10" scope or greater would have been required; even that turned out to be an underestimate. Anyone out there with a 4" Tasco was out there to drink the beer, not see anything

And FYI, being a moderator has nothing to do with me being moderate in my personal posts. It has to do with maintaining some semblence of order on the site. They are completely different functions.

moderate and moderate have two different meanings

 

[nimbus]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I think they should be upfront and say, "We didn't get what we expected" (which is a perfectly fine result in science), "and we are now analyzing the data to figure out what we did get. Unexpected results are sometimes the most interesting because it leads us to something new."

They didn't expect anything. They didn't know what they had. They did say they were analyzing to figure out what they did get, and aren't going to get wet with guesses before that's done.
The only unexpected was the lack of visual substance.. That was only a public pleaser from what they said. The instruments were pretty much all spectrographic, not visual. That's where the science is.. They didn't crash those craft to make a pretty picture for newspaper front pages.

 

[frodo1008]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I have to agree with nimbus, MW, and others that are saying that just because this did not turn out to be spectacular from the public standpoint certainly did not make it a failure!!

As for the water being there or not, why not at least wait until all the data is analyzed first before making judgments one way or the other? Besides, even if this particular crater does not have appreciable water in it, it does not mean that others do not!

I doubt if we will ever know until we can send either rovers or human beings into all such craters to find out truly. And even if there is no appreciable water, there is still plenty of oxygen and valuable minerals on the moon. Easily enough to be able to exploit the moon to be the main source of space age materials to build the infrastructure of a true space faring civilization.

 

[spacegopher]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Did anybody else carefully look at the NASA video of LCROSS impact? I can see the impact! Albeit, it is not the dramatic one that everyone else was looking for, and I've been waiting on this forum to see if anybody else might comment that they also saw it.

If you look very closely at the NASA video (as shown on this website), you'll see it, but you need to have your eyes trained at a specific point on the video or you'll miss the 2.5-3 second event. Start by looking directly below the dimpled crater on the crater rim of Cabeus crater and slightly more than halfway down into the blue-violet shadow and then just slightly to the left. At precisely the 01.21 time mark of the video, you'll see a pinpont dark spot appear for about 2 seconds, followed by a quick brightening for about half a second, and then followed by a redarkened pinpoint spot at the 01.23 mark which lasts for another second or less. If you replay this several times, it will be quite obvious and evident to you that this is indeed the observed impact. And it occures precisely at the time that the sound voice on the video announces the "mark" of impact, and it is precisly at the location advertised for impact. I've found it interesting that comentators on the video saw nothing (along with everyone else), although this is not unexpected considering how small the "dot" is on the video frame. If you also see what I have observed and described, please comment to confirm.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Welcome to Space.com spacegopher. Yes that was noted a page or so ago shortly after the impact time. I was one of a few that noticed it.

 

[Imtiazk]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Did anybody else carefully look at the NASA video of LCROSS impact? I can see the impact! Albeit, it is not the dramatic one that everyone else was looking for, and I've been waiting on this forum to see if anybody else might comment that they also saw it.

If you look very closely at the NASA video (as shown on this website), you'll see it, but you need to have your eyes trained at a specific point on the video or you'll miss the 2.5-3 second event. Start by looking directly below the dimpled crater on the crater rim of Cabeus crater and slightly more than halfway down into the blue-violet shadow and then just slightly to the left. At precisely the 01.21 time mark of the video, you'll see a pinpont dark spot appear for about 2 seconds, followed by a quick brightening for about half a second, and then followed by a redarkened pinpoint spot at the 01.23 mark which lasts for another second or less. If you replay this several times, it will be quite obvious and evident to you that this is indeed the observed impact. And it occures precisely at the time that the sound voice on the video announces the "mark" of impact, and it is precisly at the location advertised for impact. I've found it interesting that comentators on the video saw nothing (along with everyone else), although this is not unexpected considering how small the "dot" is on the video frame. If you also see what I have observed and described, please comment to confirm.

Well I did observe a tiny red splash only in the infra red images for about 2/3 seconds [ starting at 1:22 ] . But it was , I thought, on the rim of the dimpled crater, i.e., above the centaur target. It seems to me that is not what you are saying. If someone could pinpoint on an image the exact impact spot, then next time we could train ours eyes exactly on that spot.

 

[jakethesnake]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I think all the disappointment of the NASA’s Lcross mission is understandable, but as I look at story after story on the internet the negativity towards NASA in my opinion is nothing short of ignorant venting.

We are so used to instant gratification that it has conditioned most to react without patients.

NASA tried something that had merit in the eyes of most every scientist on the planet, and even if nothing is found does that mean we should never try again? Come on people to fail is to learn and to succeed is to learn even more.

For those to call this a failure will undoubtedly look pretty… well… yes I will say it... STUPID!

Keck saw something and the reason Lcross was there was to witness the impact due to the dynamics and the unknowns.

My prediction is that a wealth of information is to come; we have not heard what Hubble saw and we have not heard what LRO saw so… sit back and chill!

I can’t wait to address those who have stuck their proverbial foot in their exceptionally large mouths at such an early stage.

Remember patience is a virtue and ignorance is most certainly bliss!

 

[Booban]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I think they should be upfront and say, "We didn't get what we expected" (which is a perfectly fine result in science), "and we are now analyzing the data to figure out what we did get. Unexpected results are sometimes the most interesting because it leads us to something new."

They didn't expect anything. They didn't know what they had. They did say they were analyzing to figure out what they did get, and aren't going to get wet with guesses before that's done.
The only unexpected was the lack of visual substance.. That was only a public pleaser from what they said. The instruments were pretty much all spectrographic, not visual. That's where the science is.. They didn't crash those craft to make a pretty picture for newspaper front pages.

They wanted a 'plume'. It was supposed to kick up dirt and water. Why shouldn't a good impact be visible? If we didn't see a plume, maybe there wasn't a plume, which means less to spectographically see as well. Now all the 'fake moon landing people will have more ammunition.

 

[hewes]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

Remember patients is a virtue and ignorance is most certainly bliss!

Can I quote you on that? Please?

 

[access]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

I think they should be upfront and say, "We didn't get what we expected" (which is a perfectly fine result in science), "and we are now analyzing the data to figure out what we did get. Unexpected results are sometimes the most interesting because it leads us to something new."

They didn't expect anything. They didn't know what they had. They did say they were analyzing to figure out what they did get, and aren't going to get wet with guesses before that's done.
The only unexpected was the lack of visual substance.. That was only a public pleaser from what they said. The instruments were pretty much all spectrographic, not visual. That's where the science is.. They didn't crash those craft to make a pretty picture for newspaper front pages.

They wanted a 'plume'. It was supposed to kick up dirt and water. Why shouldn't a good impact be visible? If we didn't see a plume, maybe there wasn't a plume, which means less to spectographically see as well. Now all the 'fake moon landing people will have more ammunition.

There's no doubt that anyone who truly believed it was going to be like the animation released of the mission is going to be disappointed but face it the Cabeus crater is 98 km in diameter that's similar to Corsica. Yes it is a rocket stage dropped from orbit but there wasn't any explosion on impact, so really we're talking about a small meteor strikeand that's not going to launch the kind of massive plumes people may have been expecting.
Yes it is a little disappointing but hopefully we'll get some info soon and see if it hit anything of value.

 

[andrew_t1000]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

The thing that I find most frustrating is the "it cost $79 million" bitching.
Wasn't that the combined cost of LRO and LCROS?
Essentially the Centaur stage was "free", I mean it had done it's job getting the LRO to lunar orbit.
From what I've read on the LRO and LCROS sites, the LRO is way more complex and I would have thought that was where most of the money was spent and where the bulk of science and observations will take place.
Can someone clear this up for me?

As an aside, I am pleasantly surprised at the level of interest here in Australia!
I live in a small country town and being perceived as the resident geek, people have been asking me all kinds of questions about the LCROS mission!
When farmers and truckers ask about something like this, with genuine interest, it makes me proud to be an Australian.
I had my netbook at the local pub and played the video and had a heap of people watching!
The media here didn't put a negative spin on the mission the way US media seemed to.
I played a few of the whacko US interviews for everyone and they couldn't believe the idiot questions!

 

[job1207]

Re: LRO/LCROSS Mission

We know that there is water all over the moon. It would be nice to find lots of it in one place, but well, maybe not.

This "bombing,"was HYPED by NASA. Someone miscalculated. The ejectate was not obvious, by any means, even to the professional observers.

We will know if this result is somehow meaningful in the next few days.