Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Moon NASA Space Science

NASA Reveals New Images of Apollo Landing Sites 269

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the looks-like-photoshop-to-me dept.
sighted writes "Sharp new images from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter show the Apollo 12, 14 and 17 landing sites in amazing detail, including the last foot trails left by astronauts on the lunar surface." These pictures were grabbed after the LRO dropped its orbit from 50km above the surface to 25km.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA Reveals New Images of Apollo Landing Sites

Comments Filter:
  • by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @02:40PM (#37319570) Journal

    That image is a hotlinked, bigass JPEG.

    A bunch of admins are probably running into the server room with fire extinguishers at this moment. And hopefully one with a Scottish accent is yelling over a cell phone that the server is overloaded and can't take any more.

    • by teridon (139550)
      Not sure if serious...

      NASA's main web site is served by Akamai; I doubt they'll have an issue.

      # dig www.nasa.gov

      ; <<>> DiG 9.6.-ESV-R4-P1 <<>> www.nasa.gov
      ;; global options: +cmd
      ;; Got answer:
      ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 3588
      ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 5, AUTHORITY: 9, ADDITIONAL: 0

      ;; QUESTION SECTION:
      ;www.nasa.gov. IN A

      ;; ANSWER SECTION:
      www.nasa.gov.
      • Oh good for them. It bogged down pretty hard when the article was first posted but I was finally able to load it about a minute ago.

    • Re:Poor NASA server (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Artraze (600366) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @02:50PM (#37319702)

      Eh, it's only 1MB (which is actually quite large considering uncompressed would be 1.8MB by my estimate). Given how carelessly pages are designed these days, you're probably saving 100+ requests and 1MB of data by them not linking the page...

      But hey, you don't have to listen to me; check out http://analyze.websiteoptimization.com/ [websiteoptimization.com]
      Total HTTP Requests: 312
      Total Size: 1828125 bytes

      Woohoo! Slashdot is doing them a favor.

  • Wait (Score:5, Funny)

    by eclectro (227083) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @02:42PM (#37319604)

    FTA;

    The images do not line up perfectly because of differences in lighting conditions, angle of the LRO Camera, and other variables.

    Like being on a different sound stage??

  • There's no stars in the photos! Obiously they're fake and the moon landing was a hoax!

    On a more serious note, I love these photos. I'm fascinated by the moon landings. Just looking up at the night sky and seeing the moon and thinking humans have set foot there, when a little over 100 years ago the idea of flight was only a dream.

    • by Dunbal (464142) *
      Yeah, then I think it's been 40 years and we've achieved precious little else except cargo trips to low earth orbit that blow up once in a while, and an "international space station" which no one ended up wanting to pay for, was plagued with delays and budget cuts, and despite being much more expensive has not really achieved much more than Skylab; and I get depressed. Oh and we put some toy robots on Mars.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by murdocj (543661)

        Yeah, what have the Romans ever done for us?

        Except roving around for kilometers on Mars.

        But yeah, other than Mars Rovers... oh, and orbiting Saturn.

        Yeah, but other than Mars rovers and orbiting Saturn... oh, and orbiting Mercury. And ongoing missions to interstellar space. And a mission to Pluto. And orbiting an asteroid. And private space travel. And starting work on manned trips to asteroids...

        But yeah, other than that, what have the Romans ever done for us?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by osu-neko (2604)

        Yeah, then I think it's been 40 years and we've achieved precious little else...

        Correction: Since then, we've done a lot of important and useful work instead of wasting time on spectacular Cold War PR missions.

        NASA has achieved a lot more every year since then than they did on the Apollo missions. Sorry if it wasn't sexy enough for you, but the real work rarely is...

        • by segedunum (883035)

          NASA has achieved a lot more every year since then than they did on the Apollo missions. Sorry if it wasn't sexy enough for you, but the real work rarely is...

          Really? Wow, I must have missed all those achievements that put man further into space as opposed to crashing unmanned probes into things. Oh wait............

          • What you missed is the ability to live day in, day out, month in, month out (now 10 years) in .... space. You know, that hostile place where we will have to live for ....years.... when (if?) we get motivated to move out of LEO. Yes, I'd like sexier things, bigger targets, more expansive visions but you only get what you pay for.

            We are much better at mundane station keeping than we were before the ISS. Hopefully we can put that knowledge to use before we forget it.

    • by Gravatron (716477)
      There is no such thing as the moon.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    the Apollo 18 landing site!

    • the Apollo 18 landing site!

      and 19 and 20 [wikipedia.org] as well.

      These missions were cancelled partly because hardly anybody was watching on TV any more (hence budget cuts because there were no votes to be had by supporting the program). I was one of those who watched every mission that went to or around the Moon, even getting up at weird hours to watch live footage from Apollo 8 and 11.

      • by Randseed (132501)
        Thank you for your service, sir. (Think about it.)
      • I wonder if the same dumb-asses who canceled the Moon landings due to Nielsen ratings were working with the fucktards who canceled Star Trek due to (horribly flawed, completely and totally inaccurate and meaningless) Nielsen ratings.

        It's hard to argue the credibility of a ratings system that shit-cans a TV show which later goes on to spawn more spin-offs than a sane person can keep track of.

  • Some ugg boots, a remote sandy beach, and photoshop and I could do the same thing!

    • Yeah, those doubters will not be silenced by this, it doesn't look convincing enough, looks more like a bad photoshop job. Try harder NASA, this is crucial, we need to dismiss those confusions, more.. we need to annihilate any last shadow of a disbelief about the landing, otherwise it only makes things worse.
      • Or we need to ignore and marginalize dumb-fucks who get all of their information from other dumb-fucks.

      • Try harder NASA, this is crucial, we need to dismiss those confusions, more.. we need to annihilate any last shadow of a disbelief about the landing

        Why? Just ignore those bozos and move on (or punch them in the face, Aldrin-style.)

        otherwise it only makes things worse.

        What 'things?' There's no requirement for NASA to spend tax dollars to placating morons.

    • Some ugg boots, a remote sandy beach, and photoshop and I could do the same thing!

      Add a Sports Illustrated model or two and you have the makings of a great reality TV show.

  • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @02:50PM (#37319704)
    The 'never went to the moon' crowd will only believe it when the can see it with their own eyes. Which is fine by me. Take them there and let them look. Jjust remember no helmets now, the visors could be ultra high def curved monitors.
    • by ClintJCL (264898)
      You just made them wear no helmets so that you could explain why you killed them to hide the secret that the moon landing was faked!

      :D

    • by 19061969 (939279)
      ...which should raise the mean IQ of both deniers and everyone else....
    • LOL. I'm picturing how fast an ordinary person with a brain would sort out that the monitor wasn't tracking his head movements.

    • by segedunum (883035)

      The 'never went to the moon' crowd will only believe it when the can see it with their own eyes. Which is fine by me. Take them there and let them look. Jjust remember no helmets now, the visors could be ultra high def curved monitors.

      Going back there to verify what was done is the whole point of science, so the unintentional irony is quite funny.

  • by smooth wombat (796938) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @02:53PM (#37319742) Homepage Journal

    What the hell do they need to use Flash to display images? What moron thought a simple picture file would be enhanced by embedding it within another piece of software?

    Rule #2 of IT that should never be broken: Never let a web designer design your web page.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by darkshot117 (1288328)
      You know you can click the link to the actual image right? The flash part is just showing a slider comparison between high and low res older pictures.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by RollingThunder (88952)

      How, exactly, can we get that cool comparison-slider, without using something like Flash or HTML5?

    • by Matheus (586080)

      Please mod parent down to 0 for the reasons stated by my siblings... an idiot does not deserve a 5.

      The slide comparison is a useful tool and I'm happy to have it.

  • How sad is this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sunking2 (521698) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @02:58PM (#37319792)
    When our space program is reduced to trying to impress us all by looking 40 years in the past.
    • Re:How sad is this (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Beelzebud (1361137) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @03:01PM (#37319848)
      About as sad as the fact that a sizable chunk of the population needs proof, because they're too fucking idiotic to appreciate one of the biggest accomplishments of our civilization. If you had told people in the 1970's that this is how it would turn out, they would have laughed you out of the room.
      • If it makes you feel any better, the only moon landing deniers I know are 50+ years old.

      • by sunking2 (521698)
        And why do they need proof? Because in 40 years we haven't matched the accomplishment. We're going on two generations removed from the event. It's hardly mentioned in the history classes and we all know the state of the education system so in many places it probably isn't mentioned at all. There are very very few deniers, but scores of those who are ignorant to the fact, and human nature will put those who don't know as knee jerk naysayers.
        If you can't maintain progress, the achievements of the past fade
        • by 0123456 (636235)

          And why do they need proof? Because in 40 years we haven't matched the accomplishment.

          The Moon Hoaxers were publishing books almost as soon as Apollo 17 splashed down.

        • Because in 40 years we haven't matched the accomplishment.

          Largely because there's no need to. There is little if anything the moon of any economic value, and certainly nothing worth the cost of getting there. There's no more cold war pissing contest adversaries, so that motivation is gone.

          We got what we needed from the original mission: enough scientific data to verify the leading theory about how the moon was formed. If we ever need to get more moon rocks, advances in robotics and automation now make it possible to achieve everything Apollo did and more with unma

          • by segedunum (883035)

            Largely because there's no need to.

            If you can't verify and follow up your achievements, and allow others to follow as good science demands, then you've achieved zilch. I've never really fathomed why we should treat the moon landings any different from many early explorers who claimed that they'd climbed mountains and reached summits with photos to prove it.......until people went where they supposedly went and found out that the photos weren't taken where they said they were. It was on TV though, and nothing that comes down the tube is ever

      • by gad_zuki! (70830)

        >About as sad as the fact that a sizable chunk of the population needs proof

        Sizable chunk? Citation please.

        Moon denial is a very minority position, like 9/11 truther (most of whom I've only seen on slashdot)

        • by ArsonSmith (13997)

          Moon landing denial, 9/11 truthers, birthers, and AGW people are all kind of a scary vocal minority trying to say that government and business is out to get us.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by steelfood (895457)

        The problem is that since then, too many conspiracies have popped up. There've been too many government cover ups, too many covert operations, too many things that the government does that goes against the will of the people.

        People no longer believe in what the government says. People can no longer trust the government to be of the people, for the people, and by the people. Why do you think radical movements like the tea party have gained popularity recently? Why do you think that every presidential electio

        • The first conspiracy theories regarding the moon landings appeared right after the moon landings ended. The movie Capricorn One, which depicts Sam "Jack McCoy" Waterston as one of three astronauts going to Mars who are Shanghaied into a faked landing. Of course, NASA can't keep a secret so they try to have the astronauts killed. You see how hard it is to keep a secret when even fake NASA can't do it? =)

        • by GrahamCox (741991)
          There've been too many government cover ups, too many covert operations, too many things that the government does that goes against the will of the people.

          Yes, and we know about them because sooner or later (usually sooner) they all came to light - someone leaked information, spilt the beans to the press, or just plain got caught. And when those conspiracies to get unravelled, they are usually laughable in their breathtaking arrogance and incompetence. To me, this proves that the moon conspiracy theori
    • If the US economy hadn't been pillaged by 1%ers and bled dry by the specter of some religious nuts who live in caves, they'd be in a space-faring dickwaving competition with China right now. Sad to think of what could have been...

    • by gad_zuki! (70830)

      Whats sad is attitudes like yours. The moon landing was a 150 billion dollar expense that didn't do much other than to show the Soviets that we could burn money faster.

      For a TINY, TINY fraction of that money we are funding COTS which is funding all these private companies who will be tomorrow's leaders.

      That's ignoring all the space science that's going on and the incredible missions NASA casually puts out. Hell, look at the NASA launch calendar from this year and last. Pretty amazing stuff that won't be on

      • by Teun (17872)
        Then it was 150 billion dollars well spend.

        If only GW would have spend a fraction of what became the Iraq war on an other moon or even Mars mission the US would have been admired by youth the world over, including the Muslim world.

        • by Kittenman (971447)
          Hear hear. Us rest-of-the-world folk admired the things that the US did, and were capable of doing back in the late 60s and 70s. That's why a lot of the world emulated the States. Then you (the States) seemed to lose your way.

          Step back into the limelight. The world needs you.

          • by ProfBooty (172603)

            We're broke and shipped away much of our wealth!

            I can only hope that Americans become more optimistic and want to take up big things once again.

  • Let's just admire the new photos of humanities first forays to the Moon, and forget about the deniers. There is no point in the latter, because they will never be convinced. The thing that really matters is presenting ever better photos (i.e. evidence) as our technology improves so that future generations won't be tarnished by the cynicism and denial of conspiracy theorists.

    • The technology to get these shots is no less impressive. Too bad many folks take such advances for granted, they don't even realize what an accomplishment is to get photos at this resolution and instead concentrate on the 'scandal' of the purported hoax. We don't deserve to rule this planet.
    • I think about how sad it is that stupid people with little minds have boxed themselves in to a world where we never went to the Moon.

      It's almost worse than believing in a sky fairy that prevents you from understanding science. It's like believing in a . . . . bullshit fairy that prevents you from understanding reality.

      I mean, there are people going to their grave thinking one of the most spectacular achievments of all history was fake. It's very sad. What a boring little world they want to inhabit.

    • If FOX NEWS decided to take up this issue it wouldn't matter how much evidence you have or how many scientists agree.
      FOX NEWS helped give credence to the conspiracy in the late 90s, almost like an experiment in how much they could do. I bet a sizable number of these people come from back in those days; just imagine how much harm they could cause if they continued putting such idiocy on their "news" channel... This was my thinking when I was introduced to the fake moon landings on Fox in the late 90s. We've

    • by jovius (974690)

      Let's just admire the new photos of humanities first forays to the Moo

      That's not a Moon.

    • by segedunum (883035)

      The thing that really matters is presenting ever better photos (i.e. evidence) as our technology improves so that future generations won't be tarnished by the cynicism and denial of conspiracy theorists.

      Ahhhhh, so that's why we've never seen anything first-hand of the greatest achievement in the history of mankind. We didn't have the technology to photograph the moon well enough.

  • *Whew* (Score:4, Funny)

    by jomama717 (779243) <jomama717@gmail.com> on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @03:04PM (#37319892) Journal
    Cernan and Schmitt were probably sweating this release out, thinking the image might reveal the ridiculous number of donuts they pulled in the moon buggy.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      or the fact that Shepard forgot to rake his footprints in the sand trap.

  • by perpenso (1613749) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @03:05PM (#37319902)
    The U.S. Congress is authorized by the Constitution to issue Letter of Marque and Reprisal. I say Congress should issue one to Buzz Aldrin and let him punch moon hoaxers in face. That includes some of the idiots posting around here, Jay and Silent Bob style tracking them down and ringing the doorbell on their Mom's house. ;-)
  • wow... I'd seen the older, older, pictures but they were so horribly blurry that somebody might as well have sneezed on the image. But seeing these, I'm impressed that the tracks are still quite so visible. In fact, I can't help but think that astronauts pretty much scarred the otherwise pristine (as impacted soil goes) surface.
    Still better than a giant Pepsi logo, I suppose :)

    Hopefully they'll get even higher resolution images at some point - I want to know where those golf balls landed.

  • Where is the RTG [wikipedia.org]? I'm sure the future lunar colonists will want to be able to locate the RTG. If just to secure it. (FYI, this was part of the ALSEP [wikipedia.org] experiment package)

    -molo

  • How far they went over what kind of surfaces. Not all the that may have been determinable from the films and telemetry.
  • by dpbsmith (263124) on Tuesday September 06, 2011 @04:08PM (#37320616) Homepage

    ...that we can see so clearly where we've been, but can't go there again.

    Of all the things ever predicted by science-fiction writers, did any of them predict that after we'd gotten to the moon, we'd let grass grow on the Saturn launching pads?

    "History records that the first successful voyage to the Moon was made in 2316 by Grzchopeng M'bennypacker. Some enthusiasts insist that unidentifiable metal fragments in the Taurus-Littrow valley are human artifacts, and are evidence that the United States reached the moon centuries earlier, but professional historians dismiss these as unproven speculation, and do not accept Frafnar Otsumix's alleged "decoding" of binary files alleged to be in what Otsumix calls "jpg" format. In any case, even if a handful of crude United States spacecraft somehow--by design or accident--managed reach the moon in the twentieth century, it is of no importance as nothing further came of it."

  • So where did this "Apollo 18" land?

    We are just getting a historical documentry about Apollo 18 in the theatres, and they show us new pics of some older Apollo flights, but come on, let's see some Apollo 18 pics!

    • by mark-t (151149)

      I'm sorry to have to shatter your reality, but Apollo 18 was not documentary... That they are calling it one is nothing more than a means that the creators are using to hype their movie.

      It is about as factual as Star Wars.

      • I'm sure Hollywood has taken some license with the story, but I don't think it's fair to call it pure fiction. The actual Apollo 18 moon landing is just as real as any of the other moon missions, they were all filmed on the same soundstage in Studio City...

        Hold on, what's Buzz Aldrin doing here? Buzz, why? ... NOT IN THE FACE ... Oh the humanity...

      • by roc97007 (608802)

        On the way to work this morning I heard on the radio someone say that he really liked Apollo 18 as a horror film, but the only thing wrong with it is that wayyyy too many people are going to believe the footage is authentic.

  • Anybody have any idea what happened to the Japanese orbiter that was also supposed to be taking good high resolution images of the moon?

Bus error -- please leave by the rear door.

Working...