Would the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter use MRO spare parts

[willpittenger]

I am hoping the same telescope design is used if nothing else. <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>

 

[nacnud]

On the surface that sounds like a really good plan, just up grade the CCDs. One question though, would this be able to provide a global coverage of images?

 

[CalliArcale]

Presumably. The way you get global coverage with a low orbit satellite is to put it in a highly inclined orbit so that over time, it can collect enough images that you can put together a global moasic of the entire planet (or moon, in this case). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[rybanis]

I would think you could do a polar orbit incredibly easily with the moon. Didn't Clementine do that? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

Yes, and for precisely the same reason. It's a mapping orbit. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>