PDA

View Full Version : Science U.S. Shoots for the Moon, This Time to Stay


Donger
06-18-2009, 09:58 AM
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1905344,00.html?cnn=yes

Say this for the U.S. space program: we may have spent the last 40 years mostly ignoring the moon, but when we go back, we go back with a bang. Later today — if weather conditions and hardware permit — NASA will launch its much-anticipated and deeply imaginative Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), the first American spacecraft of any kind to make a lunar trip since 1999. Not only will LRO help us study the moon in greater detail than ever before, it should also give us our first look at the six Apollo landing sites since we abandoned the historic campgrounds two generations ago.

In the last few years, the moon has once again become the hot place to go. Three countries with little spacefaring history — Japan, China and India — have all sent probes moonward since 2007, and China in particular has made it clear it plans to return, first with more robot ships, then with astronauts. (See a photo survey of the world's most competitive space programs.)

In 2004, the U.S. restarted its own lunar program, when former President George W. Bush announced a new commitment to have astronauts back on the moon by 2020 and on Mars in the years after. There was surely some political motivation in Bush's election-year proposal, but it was followed up by hard-headed planning and real NASA action. With the shuttles scheduled to be mothballed by 2010, the space agency has committed itself to building and flying a lunar-capable manned ship by 2015, and though the Obama Administration is currently reconsidering the entire lunar program, so far it's still on track. The goal is to station astronauts on the moon for months, not days, to conduct lunar studies and as training for later attempts to live on Mars. As NASA knew in the 1950s, however, before you can send humans to the moon, you need to send robotic scouts. And that's where the LRO gets involved. (Video: First broadcast from the moon.)

The 13-ft.-long, two-ton spacecraft is not designed for a landing, but rather will settle into a low lunar orbit just 30 miles (48 km) above the surface, or about half the altitude at which the Apollos flew. The ship will be fairly stuffed with scientific instruments, one of the most important — if least sexy sounding — of which will be its laser altimeter. The altimeter will bounce laser beams off the lunar surface and, by measuring the speed at which they reflect back up, calculate the moon's topography to within inches. That's critical since long-term lunar stays require finding not only hospitable places to land, but hospitable places to establish a home. (See the space moon race.)

"We're going to measure the topography with the level of detail civil engineers need when they're building a building," says Jim Garvin, one of the lead developers of the LRO and the chief scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, which will run the mission.

Just as important for choosing where to homestead is knowing the local weather — or at least the local temperature. Nobody pretends that the moon will be a thermally comfortable place to live, but few people realize just how punishing its climate extremes are — a torch-like 250 degrees F (120 C) during the day and a paralyzing -382 F (-230 C) at night. What's more, says Garvin, "The moon goes through this dance every 28 days." Those kinds of cycling extremes can be murder on hardware, and until we know more about the hot-cold rhythm we can't build properly to withstand it.

Easily the most exciting piece of hardware aboard the ship, however — for lay lunarphiles at least — will be the camera. Even the best reconnaissance photography before the Apollo visits missed things, which is why Apollo 11's landing almost came to grief when Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin found themselves piloting their lander over an unexpected boulder field just seconds before touchdown. That's less likely to happen this time, thanks to a camera that can visualize objects as small as a few feet across. What's more, since the LRO will be in a polar orbit instead of an equatorial one — or, vertical rather than horizontal — the moon's 28-day rotation will eventually carry virtually every spot on the surface beneath the camera's lens.

"The moon will essentially walk around underneath the orbiter," says Garvin. "With the detail we get in the photographs, every picture will be like a mini-landing." That includes photos of the Apollo sites, all half dozen of which should have their portraits snapped. If NASA gets lucky, Garvin believes the first such images could be in hand by the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11, on July 20.

For all of LRO's versatility, one thing it can't do with much precision is look for water. That's a problem, since astronauts living on the surface will need plenty of the stuff, and bringing it all with them is out of the question. (A single pint of water weighs about a pound, and every pound you fly to the moon costs about $50,000.) LRO, however, will not be traveling alone. Launched on the same booster will be another entire spacecraft known as the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS).

Shortly after the paired ships enter space, LCROSS will separate from LRO and embark on its own trajectory toward the moon. LCROSS will lag behind, spending four months in a sweeping orbit that will carry it around both the Earth and the moon; throughout its flight, it will remain attached to its upper stage rocket, separating from it only during its final approach to the moon. The rocket stage will then speed ahead, aiming for a deliberate crash in one of several craters in the south lunar pole in which the LRO's sensors will have detected signs of water ice. The collision will send a debris plume as high as 6.2 miles (10 km) into space and the LCROSS itself, trailing four minutes behind, will fly through it. As it does, its instruments will analyze the chemistry of the plume, looking particularly for water ice, hydrocarbons and other organics that will break down as they are exposed to their first flashes of sunlight in billions of years. Shortly after that, LCROSS too will complete its suicide plunge, smashing into the ground just miles from the first impact site.

It will take about a year before the surviving LRO completes its more leisurely mission, and then another decade at least before humans are once again treading the lunar soil. LRO and LCROSS should play a big part in bringing that eventual return a little closer — and making it a lot safer.

Gonzo
06-18-2009, 09:58 AM
To the ship!

Donger
06-18-2009, 09:59 AM
Lift-off scheduled for 5:12pm EDT today. If successful, we'll finally have photographic proof of the Apollo landings (among other things).

BigVE
06-18-2009, 10:03 AM
QUOTE: "In the last few years, the moon has once again become the hot place to go. Three countries with little spacefaring history — Japan, China and India — have all sent probes moonward since 2007, and China in particular has made it clear it plans to return, first with more robot ships, then with astronauts."



I'm sure this is as much motivation as we need to make sure we keep up and keep an eye on China.

Pioli Zombie
06-18-2009, 10:05 AM
Since the beginning of time man has looked to find a way to destroy the moon. Here is hoping that day will come soon and our children and their childrens children will not to have to deal with that evil presense in the sky.
Posted via Mobile Device

Iowanian
06-18-2009, 10:07 AM
Cool. They're going to map the surface with LiDar.

This, in conjunction with the low altitude photography will produce some awesome stuff.

Katipan
06-18-2009, 10:09 AM
With all our new CGI crap and graphics we should totally be able to fake this landing much better.

Pioli Zombie
06-18-2009, 10:11 AM
Great. Another place to pollute with soda cans, Walmarts, McDonalds, and screaming kids.
Posted via Mobile Device

Donger
06-18-2009, 10:11 AM
With all our new CGI crap and graphics we should totally be able to fake this landing much better.

Grrr. While I suppose intentionally slamming into the lunar surface is technically a "landing," it's certainly not a very good one.

Iowanian
06-18-2009, 10:11 AM
Google would have street mapped it soon anyway.....and there would have been a race to find the best street view 'moonster' pics.

Katipan
06-18-2009, 10:12 AM
Grrr. While I suppose intentionally slamming into the lunar surface is technically a "landing," it's certainly not a very good one.

It's my baby's birthday and my psycho has her today. Forgive me if I'm ornery. :)

Frazod
06-18-2009, 10:12 AM
Well, it's about goddamn time.

Great Expectations
06-18-2009, 10:13 AM
Do people still really think that Armstrong walked on it?

Lzen
06-18-2009, 10:21 AM
Are there still people that are so gullible to believe that fake moon landing nonsense? :rolleyes:


As for the thread starter.......Awesome! :thumb:

"Bob" Dobbs
06-18-2009, 10:24 AM
Do people still really think that Armstrong walked on it?:shake: I'm simply amazed that this "debate" continues.

Donger
06-18-2009, 10:52 AM
It's my baby's birthday and my psycho has her today. Forgive me if I'm ornery. :)

Give her a kiss from Uncle Donger.

Donger
06-18-2009, 10:53 AM
Are there still people that are so gullible to believe that fake moon landing nonsense? :rolleyes:


As for the thread starter.......Awesome! :thumb:

Yes, but Buzz does not approve:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZOo6aHSY8hU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZOo6aHSY8hU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

ClevelandBronco
06-18-2009, 10:57 AM
Lift-off scheduled for 5:12pm EDT today. If successful, we'll finally have photographic proof of the Apollo landings (among other things).

The tin foil crowd will not believe photographic proof.

mlyonsd
06-18-2009, 11:01 AM
It would rock if they photo'd the lunar rover jacked up on blocks and the wheels were missing.

Lzen
06-18-2009, 11:29 AM
Yes, but Buzz does not approve:

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZOo6aHSY8hU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

:thumb:

Donger
06-18-2009, 12:27 PM
Here's a link to watch today's launch: http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

Discuss Thrower
06-18-2009, 12:36 PM
The tin foil crowd will not believe photographic proof.

God help us if the rocket blows up or some other malfunction happens.

Raised On Riots
06-18-2009, 01:06 PM
Be sure to air-brush all the good stuff out before public dissemination, m'kay NASA?

Buehler445
06-18-2009, 01:06 PM
Yes, but Buzz does not approve:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZOo6aHSY8hU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZOo6aHSY8hU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Holy shit that's awesome. Pretty nice shot there.

Braincase
06-18-2009, 02:01 PM
Let's do the Capricorn 6 thing and put O.J. Simpson on Mars.

Hydrae
06-18-2009, 02:26 PM
'Bout damned time!

FAX
06-18-2009, 03:12 PM
The moon landing has already been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Those wacky Japanese peeps launched some kind of crazy moon satellite that had 3D capability. From the photos, they were able to reconstruct a landscape as if it were viewed from the exact position that one of the astronaut peeps stood while taking photos on the moon. The perspective was identical ... and so was the geography. Slam dunk. Moon landings really happened. Sorry, tin hatters.

FAX

Bowser
06-18-2009, 03:16 PM
But what about the aliens that live there and warned us to never return?

FAX
06-18-2009, 03:18 PM
That part is problematic, Mr. Bowser.

Apparently, we have come to some kind of agreement with them. Probably traded some DNA or slaves for their underground cloning factory.

FAX

FAX
06-18-2009, 03:20 PM
Moon aliens are a bunch of bitches, anyhow.

I'm pretty sure that a corp of properly trained astropeeps could kick their asses right back into the fake crater they crawled out of. Once there, we can drop some flash bombs and blind their asses. And, if we can get them blinded, we can lash them onto a rocket and blast it off the moon toward the sun. Moon alien problem solved.

FAX

Halfcan
06-18-2009, 03:22 PM
Lift-off scheduled for 5:12pm EDT today. If successful, we'll finally have photographic proof of the Apollo landings (among other things).

That would be sweet.

Bowser
06-18-2009, 03:24 PM
Moon aliens are a bunch of bitches, anyhow.

I'm pretty sure that a corp of properly trained astropeeps could kick their asses right back into the fake crater they crawled out of. Once there, we can drop some flash bombs and blind their asses. And, if we can get them blinded, we can lash them onto a rocket and blast it off the moon toward the sun. Moon alien problem solved.

FAX

I like it! We shall call this "The Daffy Duck Initiative"!

Otter
06-18-2009, 03:26 PM
The moon landing has already been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Those wacky Japanese peeps launched some kind of crazy moon satellite that had 3D capability. From the photos, they were able to reconstruct a landscape as if it were viewed from the exact position that one of the astronaut peeps stood while taking photos on the moon. The perspective was identical ... and so was the geography. Slam dunk. Moon landings really happened. Sorry, tin hatters.

FAX

That's foil hats Fax.

Pioli Zombie
06-18-2009, 03:27 PM
Armstrong and Aldrin did not exist. Nobody was ever able to find their birth certificates.
Posted via Mobile Device

Hydrae
06-18-2009, 03:34 PM
But what about the aliens that live there and warned us to never return?

They did no such thing. Perry Rhodan negotiated the exchange of technology with them.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Rhodan

Donger
06-18-2009, 03:47 PM
Almost go time. She's fully-fueled and ready to go.

Donger
06-18-2009, 03:49 PM
Atlas V:

Bowser
06-18-2009, 03:50 PM
I had a girlfriend that had one of those....

FAX
06-18-2009, 03:50 PM
I sure hope NASA doesn't blow this one up.

Measure twice, cut once, NASA.

FAX

Donger
06-18-2009, 03:55 PM
I sure hope NASA doesn't blow this one up.

Measure twice, cut once, NASA.

FAX

There have been ~35 launches of the Atlas V alone. Of those, only one had a partial failure (premature upper stage cut-off).

I used to have that problem, too, but now I just think about baseball.

FAX
06-18-2009, 03:57 PM
Never doubt NASA's ability to blow sh*t up, Mr. Donger.

FAX

Donger
06-18-2009, 03:58 PM
Never doubt NASA's ability to blow sh*t up, Mr. Donger.

FAX

Oh, I don't, believe me. But this rocket is very reliable.

Launch delayed til 5:32pm for weather.

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:21 PM
Weather just went green!

Raised On Riots
06-18-2009, 04:21 PM
Need
Another
Seven
Astronauts

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:29 PM
T-4 minutes and counting!

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:31 PM
T-2 minutes. Vehicle internal power, computers controlling launch.

Pennywise
06-18-2009, 04:32 PM
30 seconds...

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:32 PM
T-20 seconds

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:32 PM
Liftoff!

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:33 PM
Bird looks good

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:34 PM
Mach 1

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:34 PM
Max Q

crazycoffey
06-18-2009, 04:37 PM
Yes, but Buzz does not approve:

<EMBED src=http://www.youtube.com/v/ZOo6aHSY8hU&hl=en&fs=1 width=425 height=344 type=application/x-shockwave-flash allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></EMBED>


I think that should be a perfectly acceptable retort to being called a coward a liar and a thief....

FAX
06-18-2009, 04:37 PM
What's next? Did it work?

FAX

Raised On Riots
06-18-2009, 04:40 PM
If we fail to get anything going with North Korea, they greys will shoot it down or destroy it so we can go to "war" with them.

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:42 PM
What's next? Did it work?

FAX

Still going.

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:43 PM
118 NM, 14,775 mph

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:45 PM
2 minutes to MECO

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:45 PM
16,800 mph, 1 minute to MECO

Donger
06-18-2009, 04:47 PM
MECO!

FAX
06-18-2009, 04:48 PM
Well, that's encouraging. Usually, if they're going to blow up they would have done so, by now.

I guess the next thing is whether or not the satellite will work properly. They spent 700 billion dollars (or something like that) on a Mars satellite (the Observer, maybe?) that just quit working for no reason - or so they said. Some peeps said it really worked and NASA said it didn't because they saw an alien spacecraft with it, but I'm not so sure.

FAX

Donger
06-19-2009, 12:21 PM
Successful Spacecraft Separation
Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:34:16 PM MDT

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, or LRO, successfully separated from the Centaur upper stage and Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite, or LCROSS, spacecraft at 6:16:43 p.m. EDT.

The official transfer of control from the Centaur rocket to LCROSS is expected about 9:30 p.m.

LRO will reach the moon on Tuesday at 5:43 a.m.

LCROSS and the Centaur rocket will stay attached for the next four months. They will then separate and be directed to impact the moon on Oct. 9, UTC.

googlegoogle
06-19-2009, 02:46 PM
the moon is so boring

DaneMcCloud
06-19-2009, 03:28 PM
I guess the next thing is whether or not the satellite will work properly. They spent 700 billion dollars (or something like that) on a Mars satellite (the Observer, maybe?) that just quit working for no reason - or so they said. Some peeps said it really worked and NASA said it didn't because they saw an alien spacecraft with it, but I'm not so sure.

FAX

Is this true?

Frazod
06-19-2009, 03:49 PM
Anybody else feel kind of cheated by the lack of any great space travel advances? Seems like got to the moon and just kind of said fuck it. Where's Moonbase Alpha? What about the Pan-Am flights to the giant space stations? Shit, we don't even have flying cars. When I was a kid I thought one day I'd be able to travel in space - not as an astronaut, but as a normal everybody person. I sure don't get that vibe a few decades later.

Other than computers, cellphones and big ass TVs, life really hasn't changed all that much since the 70s.

Demonpenz
06-19-2009, 03:56 PM
Anybody else feel kind of cheated by the lack of any great space travel advances? Seems like got to the moon and just kind of said **** it. Where's Moonbase Alpha? What about the Pan-Am flights to the giant space stations? Shit, we don't even have flying cars. When I was a kid I thought one day I'd be able to travel in space - not as an astronaut, but as a normal everybody person. I sure don't get that vibe a few decades later.

Other than computers, cellphones and big ass TVs, life really hasn't changed all that much since the 70s.

still bitching about gas prices, seeing the rolling stones final tour, still watching the chiefs loose

Frazod
06-19-2009, 03:57 PM
still bitching about gas prices, seeing the rolling stones final tour, still watching the chiefs loose

Exactly.

FAX
06-19-2009, 03:57 PM
Is this true?

Pretty much.

The actual cost of the Mars Observer was around 1 billion dollars US. Not 700 billion. I was wrong about that. However, it did fail just as it was entering Mars orbit. At least that's what NASA said. They called the failure "inexplicable" at the time.

There are other theories, though. One is that the Observer actually worked but NASA told the public it didn't because it was sending back pictures of alien stuff and the government didn't want the Average Joe Peep to know about it.

FAX

DaneMcCloud
06-19-2009, 04:10 PM
Pretty much.

The actual cost of the Mars Observer was around 1 billion dollars US. Not 700 billion. I was wrong about that. However, it did fail just as it was entering Mars orbit. At least that's what NASA said. They called the failure "inexplicable" at the time.

There are other theories, though. One is that the Observer actually worked but NASA told the public it didn't because it was sending back pictures of alien stuff and the government didn't want the Average Joe Peep to know about it.

FAX

Wow, if you're not pulling my leg, I'm thoroughly intrigued. I've done quite a bit of reading (extensive, if you will) and believe that we have been visited by aliens throughout our history. Couple that with several former astronauts claiming they saw alien ships on their missions and we have grounds for a full-scale cover-up.

Thanks for the info. And never forget, everything in our world changed after the Roswell incident.

Everything.

penguinz
06-19-2009, 04:17 PM
Everything.So we can blame aliens for global warming?

mikey23545
06-19-2009, 04:41 PM
So we can blame aliens for global warming?

No, nature.

Donger
06-19-2009, 04:47 PM
Is this true?

No.

mikey23545
06-19-2009, 04:49 PM
Wow, if you're not pulling my leg, I'm thoroughly intrigued. I've done quite a bit of reading (extensive, if you will) and believe that we have been visited by aliens throughout our history. Couple that with several former astronauts claiming they saw alien ships on their missions and we have grounds for a full-scale cover-up.

Thanks for the info. And never forget, everything in our world changed after the Roswell incident.

Everything.

As romantic as the alien hypothesis seems, NASA now believes the disaster was caused by a ruptured fuel line. The fuel spewing from the leak sent the craft into a fatal tumble. Support for this theory comes from the fact that the craft went silent after the command to pressurize the fuel tanks was given as the engine was preparing to fire and slow the craft to enter Mars orbit.

Obviously, since the incident occurred 140 million miles from earth, the cause will always be a matter of conjecture....

DaneMcCloud
06-19-2009, 04:51 PM
As romantic as the alien hypothesis seems, NASA now believes the disaster was caused by a ruptured fuel line. The fuel spewing from the leak sent the craft into a fatal tumble. Support for this theory comes from the fact that the craft went silent after the command to pressurize the fuel tanks was given as the engine was preparing to fire and slow the craft to enter Mars orbit.

Obviously, since the incident occurred 140 million miles from earth, the cause will always be a matter of conjecture....

Are you saying there aren't aliens on Mars?

Dammit!

mikey23545
06-19-2009, 04:53 PM
Are you saying there aren't aliens on Mars?


I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you...

Donger
06-19-2009, 04:54 PM
Are you saying there aren't aliens on Mars?

Dammit!

The geeks up in Boulder just found rather conclusive evidence that a lake of liquid water once existed on Mars. The pictures were provided by MRO, which you would have thought would also have been "lost" considering.

Baby Lee
06-19-2009, 05:04 PM
Pretty much.

The actual cost of the Mars Observer was around 1 billion dollars US. Not 700 billion. I was wrong about that. However, it did fail just as it was entering Mars orbit. At least that's what NASA said. They called the failure "inexplicable" at the time.

There are other theories, though. One is that the Observer actually worked but NASA told the public it didn't because it was sending back pictures of alien stuff and the government didn't want the Average Joe Peep to know about it.

FAX


Is that the one where one of the engineers input values in English units while the rest of the project [and the actual values she was inputting] were in metric?

Donger
06-19-2009, 05:07 PM
Is that the one where one of the engineers input values in English units while the rest of the project [and the actual values she was inputting] were in metric?

No.

FAX
06-19-2009, 05:15 PM
I don't know why the anti-alien crowd is so damn arrogant. NASA lovers. All of them.

Okay. How about this then? The Ruskies sent up a probe thing to Mars called Phobos 2. This was after they sent up Phobos 1. There was, to our knowledge, no Phobos 0. Anyhow, in 1989, Phobos 2 captured a shot of a large, elliptical shape on the surface of mars. It was an enormous shadow of something else hovering above the Martian surface and moving ... like a cloud. Obviously, the shadow of an an alien spacecraft.

Then, a couple of years later, one of the Ruskie cosmopeeps (a lady cosmopeep, as it happened) came forward with photographs taken during the Phobos missions and, guess what? A giant, cigar-shaped object could clearly be seen in the photos hovering around one of Mars' moons.

And don't even get me started on what they photographed near Saturn.

FAX

FAX
06-19-2009, 05:18 PM
Is that the one where one of the engineers input values in English units while the rest of the project [and the actual values she was inputting] were in metric?

No, Mr. Baby Lee. You're thinking of the spacecraft that was supposed to gather solar particles in little gel catchers and return to Earth with them.

The idea was to snag the returning craft's parachute with a helicopter. Instead, the damn thing hit the desert floor at 400 miles per hour.

Fortunately, the project helped with the unemployment rate since NASA had to hire about 5000 little old ladies to sort out the pieces.

FAX

Baby Lee
06-19-2009, 05:20 PM
No, Mr. Baby Lee. You're thinking of the spacecraft that was supposed to gather solar particles in little gel catchers and return to Earth with them.

The idea was to snag the returning craft's parachute with a helicopter. Instead, the damn thing hit the desert floor at 400 miles per hour.

Fortunately, the project helped with the unemployment rate since NASA had to hire about 5000 little old ladies to sort out the pieces.

FAX

Mars orbiter was what I was thinking of. Same planet, same government acronym.

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/

FAX
06-19-2009, 05:23 PM
Hmmm. They must have made the same mistake twice, then.

I don't really doubt it.

FAX

FAX
06-19-2009, 05:31 PM
Here's a portion of the official explanation of the failure of the sun particle gel catcher mission ...

-----

A first possible root cause of the failed deployment of the parachutes was announced in an October 14 press release. Lockheed Martin had built the system with an acceleration sensor's internal mechanisms wrongly oriented, and design reviews had not caught the mistake. The intended design was to make an electrical contact inside the sensor at 3 g (29 m/sē), maintaining it through the maximum expected 30 g (290 m/sē), and breaking the contact again at 3 g to start the parachute release sequence. Instead, no contact was ever made.

-----

If I remember correctly, the parachute whatchamacallit was "wrongly oriented" because some of the scientist guys were using the English system and others were using the metric. I don't think NASA wants to admit that, though. Another cover-up, no doubt.

FAX

Donger
06-19-2009, 05:38 PM
It was an enormous shadow of something else hovering above the Martian surface and moving ... like a cloud.

Or, perhaps it was a cloud.

Baby Lee
06-19-2009, 05:40 PM
Or, perhaps it was a cloud.

Who are you so wise in the ways of science?

Bowser
06-19-2009, 05:44 PM
Or, perhaps it was a cloud.

You're one of them, aren't you?

Donger
06-19-2009, 05:49 PM
Who are you so wise in the ways of science?

Mr. Lenticular.

Donger
06-19-2009, 05:50 PM
You're one of them, aren't you?

Please be more specific.

Baby Lee
06-19-2009, 05:55 PM
Please be more specific.

Them, you, affiliated?

Ari Chi3fs
06-19-2009, 05:56 PM
I had a girlfriend that had one of those....

Well she wouldn't of needed one, if you had Jelq... Sorry about your tiny, Sha na na, Bowser.

FAX
06-19-2009, 06:15 PM
Cloud. Nice try, little gray man fan.

If it were a cloud (which would be strange given the fact that Mars has no atmosphere to speak of, is extremely arid, and, therefore, doesn't actually have giant "clouds") the Ruskies wouldn't have been able to see the shadow because there would have been a cloud in the way, wouldn't there?

Most informed, non-brainwashed peeps recognize that what the Ruskies saw was evidence of a giant, alien spacecraft of some sort. Probably a re-fueling vessel or traveling menagerie.

FAX

Raised On Riots
06-19-2009, 06:32 PM
The Airbrush:

Best friend of NASA since it's inception.

Donger
06-19-2009, 06:35 PM
Cloud. Nice try, little gray man fan.

If it were a cloud (which would be strange given the fact that Mars has no atmosphere to speak of, is extremely arid, and, therefore, doesn't actually have giant "clouds") the Ruskies wouldn't have been able to see the shadow because there would have been a cloud in the way, wouldn't there?

Most informed, non-brainwashed peeps recognize that what the Ruskies saw was evidence of a giant, alien spacecraft of some sort. Probably a re-fueling vessel or traveling menagerie.

FAX

You should probably be silent at this point.

Bowser
06-19-2009, 07:13 PM
You should probably be silent at this point.

Is your mind closed to such posibilities?

Donger
06-19-2009, 07:15 PM
Is your mind closed to such posibilities?

Absolutely not. I'd welcome their Arrival.

FAX
06-19-2009, 07:18 PM
You should probably be silent at this point.

Gonna raygun me?

FAX

FAX
06-19-2009, 07:22 PM
You're one of those Illuminaughties, aren't you?

FAX

FAX
06-19-2009, 07:22 PM
Sold out to the tall whites?

FAX

mikey23545
06-19-2009, 07:26 PM
Donger knows what he is talking about.

Believe me.

Bowser
06-19-2009, 07:28 PM
Illuminaughties. Heh.

FAX
06-19-2009, 07:42 PM
I'm not afraid of Mr. Donger, Mr. mikey23545. He may raygun me to pieces, but I shall stand with those who stand against those Annunaki bastards and their plans to take over our planet. I will not be a slave to a bunch of scaly, green, toothless overlords no matter how many human beings they've recruited to assist them with their nefarious plans.

FAX THE BRAVE

FAX
06-19-2009, 08:04 PM
Down With The Reptilians!!!

Okay ... I did some research on Martian cloud phenomena ... here's what I found out ... there are several different types of clouds that occur on Mars ... I should note, however, that Martian clouds aren't like big, puffy, lenticular, Earth clouds ... due to the lack of atmosphere and water vapor, they are really wispy for the most part ...

Lee waves. These clouds form in the lee of large obstacles such as mountains, ridges, craters and volcanoes. The air in these regions undergoes wavelike oscillations.

The "shadow" form that the Ruskies saw on Mars was not near a mountain or something. It was on the Martian plains. Besides, the shape of the "shadow" was very distinct (you can find videos of it on the interwebs) and had an elliptical shape. Also, it was solitary ... not part of a group of similar shapes.

Wave clouds. These clouds appear as rows of linear clouds. They are common at the edge of the polar caps.

Again, based on the solitary nature, the shape, and the location of the "shadow" seen by the Ruskies, it was not one of these, to be sure.

Cloud streets. These clouds exhibit a double periodicity. They appear as linear rows of cumulus-like, bubble-shaped clouds. These types of clouds usually occur close to the northern-polar cap and in the Tharsis and Syria Planum regions.

These clouds appear in large groupings. Again, they could not cause the isolated, solitary "shadow" as seen by the Ruskies.

Streaky clouds. These clouds have a direction without periodicity.

Not even close to what the Ruskies observed.

Fog or ground hazes. Fog usually occurs in low areas such as valleys, canyons and craters. It forms during the coolest times of the day such as dawn and dusk. Sometimes ground haze is caused by dust in the atmosphere; however, if the atmosphere is clear ground fog can be easily identified.

The "shadow" documented by the Ruskies was not a result of fog or haze. The form was distinct and was clearly caused by something of substance above the ground.

Plumes. These are elongated clouds. They appear to have a source of rising material and in many case are composed of dust particles.

Of all the possibilities, this would come the closest to the type of cloud which could potentially be the cause of the "shadow". Unfortunately for the alien-lovers, this also was not the case as these are caused by dust rising from the surface. The "shadow" was isolated and moving as caused by something above the surface of Mars.

In summary, the shadow form as seen by the Ruskies was not a cloud or the result of a cloud. It was caused by an alien spaceship.

FAX

FAX
06-19-2009, 08:44 PM
When Abducted, Get A Name!!!

Excerpted from Space.com ...

With its thin atmosphere and scant moisture, Mars is often largely cloud-free. But new observations reveal clouds of dry ice thick enough to cast significant shadows on the red planet.

Now, although it is possible that these "dry ice" clouds could cause the shadow seen by the Ruskies, it is unlikely due to the size, shape, and highly distinct form of the shadow.

The shadows cast by these types of clouds tend to have indistinct edges. The Ruskie shadow did not. The edges were very clearly formed.

FAX

Pioli Zombie
06-19-2009, 08:53 PM
Morgan Freeman is checking out if he can fugg anybody he wants up there too.
Posted via Mobile Device

FAX
06-19-2009, 10:23 PM
Needless to say, Morgan Freeman may well be an alien anyhow. Those speckles on his face could easily be some form of breathing apparatus.

But back to the subject at hand ... so ... okay ... where were we? ... right ...

As mentioned, due to the thin atmosphere and relative lack of water vapor, clouds on Mars are quite rare as compared to Earth. Meanwhile, the Ruskies are extremely familiar with clouds since they are from an Earth continent that receives a great deal of precipitation. One can assume that, if anybody can identify a cloud shadow, it would be a Ruskie.

Plus, the cosmopeep lady who smuggled out the secret information and photo from the Phobos 2 mission is not a cloud. She is an actual, real test pilot and cosmopeep lady with photographic evidence of a large, cylinder-shaped object hovering around the Martian moon, "Phobos". (In actuality, "Phobos" is an asteroid that was grabbed by Mars' gravity sometime in the distant past which is a very good thing because an asteroid of that size could do some real damage to Earth, so it's cool that Mars captured it. You go, Mars.) Anyhow, this object is clearly an enormous alien spaceship staffed by hundreds, if not thousands, of tall whites, tiny grays, and medium-sized reptilian bastards who would like nothing more than to suck our DNA dry and call us Nancy.

FAX

FAX
06-19-2009, 10:40 PM
Many ufologists believe that the Ruskies have had a number of significant encounters with space aliens. The following is an excerpt from an article published in Brazil and is based on information released by the Ruskies in 1984 ...

SOVIETS RELEASE INFORMATION ABOUT E.T.- ASTRONAUT CONTACT ON SALYUT
MISSION. By: Luis Gonzaga Sortecci de Paula

UFO crew members appeared in space and interacted extensively with the three Soviet cosmonauts who linked up with Salyut 6 in early 1981. Surprisingly, the U.S.S.R. has elected to release some of the information on the history-making encounter.

During their Salyut 6 mission that began in March and ended in late May, 1981, Soviet cosmonauts Vladimir Kivalyonok and Viktor Savinikh maintained extraordinary contact with three human interplanetary aliens. For an extended period of time, the cosmonauts
watched as these aliens operated an extremely advanced, circular spaceship ringed with portholes.

For approximately four days, with periodic interruptions, the Salyut 6 and the round UFO orbited 400 kilometers above Earth. The crews interfaced to approximately 30 meters of distance between their two craft.

Shaped like a ball, the alien ship measured an estimated 9 to 10 meters in diameter. The circumference of the UFO was ringed with eight symmetrical portholes, or windows. Sixteen additional transparent areas, eight above and eight below the UFO's center area, were lit up in a way that suggested some automated form of lighting.

The encounter was initiated on May 14, when through his porthole, cosmonaut Kovalyonok spotted the round object in front of the Salyut 6 from about 1,000 meters distance. He had made out the ship's portholes with long-distance binoculars.

Positioned by the portholes were three beings of human aspect clearly making various gestures. They were of a solemn and serene countenance with straight noses and thick eyebrows visible above their enormous, slanted blue eyes. They looked out at the cosmonauts with a deep and penetrating gaze, yet displayed no emotional qualities in terms of our understanding of emotions.

Members of Russia's military and scientific communities met with the cosmonauts on June 18, 1981, to view photographs and film footage taken on the mission. Cosmonaut Kovalyonok was bombarded with questions and responded to them all. Later he was silenced under the restrictive label, "top secret," until, for reasons still not clearly explicated, he was officially allowed to go public by determination of the Kremlin.

FAX

Bowser
06-19-2009, 10:41 PM
Some further readings of what Mr. FAX is referring to.....

http://ufologie.net/htm/phob12.htm

Raised On Riots
06-19-2009, 11:07 PM
Some further readings of what Mr. FAX is referring to.....

http://ufologie.net/htm/phob12.htm

I believe John Lear and Robert(Bob)Dean know their shit, and are HIGHLY credible sources.

FAX
06-19-2009, 11:21 PM
I don't know, Mr. Raised On Rats. John Lear seemed credible to me until he unleashed his bizarre moon theory about how the moon is where souls are stored when we die or something like that. As for Dean, he always struck me as a pretty legitimate guy until he decided that he'd actually been on board an alien spacecraft. Frankly, both of those guys have lost me.

There are some very credible guys involved in ufology, though. Some of the peeps who participated in the Disclosure Project, for example, impress me. Especially the former military peeps ... like the guy who used to be in charge of the nuclear missiles in Utah that were all shut down when a UFO appeared at the front gate. Or the guy who was in charge of the nuclear weapons facility in the UK when they were accosted by UFOs over a 3 day period. Both those guys are very believable and have nothing to gain by bullshitting peeps ... and a lot to lose if they are.

FAX

Raised On Riots
06-19-2009, 11:40 PM
I don't know, Mr. Raised On Rats. John Lear seemed credible to me until he unleashed his bizarre moon theory about how the moon is where souls are stored when we die or something like that. As for Dean, he always struck me as a pretty legitimate guy until he decided that he'd actually been on board an alien spacecraft. Frankly, both of those guys have lost me.

There are some very credible guys involved in ufology, though. Some of the peeps who participated in the Disclosure Project, for example, impress me. Especially the former military peeps ... like the guy who used to be in charge of the nuclear missiles in Utah that were all shut down when a UFO appeared at the front gate. Or the guy who was in charge of the nuclear weapons facility in the UK when they were accosted by UFOs over a 3 day period. Both those guys are very believable and have nothing to gain by bullshitting peeps ... and a lot to lose if they are.


FAX

Their initial testimony is solid, but you are correct in that the more these people stay involved in the phenomena, the stranger they seem to get.

greg63
06-19-2009, 11:46 PM
Lift-off scheduled for 5:12pm EDT today. If successful, we'll finally have photographic proof of the Apollo landings (among other things).

Haven't you heard? It was all a "Capricorn 1" thing.

Baconeater
06-19-2009, 11:49 PM
So...are we there yet?

greg63
06-19-2009, 11:51 PM
So...are we there yet?

Stop whining or we'll turn this space craft around! :D

FAX
06-20-2009, 12:12 AM
Greetings, fellow Earthpeeps.

If you're like me and you're tired of getting pushed around by governments, aliens, the Illuminaughties, and the Pope, you'll like this web site about crater chains. It explains how our solar system has experienced an horrific war that devastated Mars and a bunch of other places where peeps once lived peaceful lives until evil aliens started bombing the hell out of us and made us move here, to Earth.

http://www.craterchains.com/

FAX

Baconeater
06-20-2009, 12:28 AM
Hmm...I'm going to need more evidence than a couple grainy photos Mr. FAX.

FAX
06-20-2009, 12:41 AM
I understand, Mr. Bugeater. I really do. Problem is, grainy photos is about all we have since the government and the aliens and the Illuminaughties and the Pope have decided that we don't deserve to know more. It doesn't really matter anyhow. Mr. Average Joe Peep couldn't care less about aliens.

That will change, of course, when those ugly bastards finally show themselves publicly and demand that we give them our women and our water and our flowering shrubberies so they can repopulate their dying world or they'll raygun our balls into a billion infinitesimal particles.

Since all we have are grainy photos, we're about as unprepared for a full-on alien attack as a planet can get. That's why we need to capture an alien as soon as possible. We need to learn their plans and figure out their weaknesses. Otherwise, it's goodbye Momma and so long Mr. Holly Bush.

FAX

Raised On Riots
06-20-2009, 12:52 AM
There is a disturbance in the Force; I sense much buffoonery in this thread.

Donger
06-22-2009, 11:54 AM
#
LRO On Track for Lunar Rendezvous
Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:25:45 PM MDT

Following a successful launch and separation on June 18, the Lunar
Reconnaissance Orbiter is on schedule to reach the moon on June 23 at
5:43 a.m. EDT.

Raised On Riots
06-22-2009, 11:56 AM
And then the intergalactic war can begin...YAY!

Donger
06-22-2009, 12:07 PM
Lunar orbit insertion burn will take place tomorrow at 5:47am EDT.

mlyonsd
06-22-2009, 12:20 PM
Lunar orbit insertion burn will take place tomorrow at 5:47am EDT.

Does it go right to it's final orbit altitude or will it slowly close in?

I want to see pictures of the Apollo sites right fricking now!

Donger
06-22-2009, 12:25 PM
Does it go right to it's final orbit altitude or will it slowly close in?

I want to see pictures of the Apollo sites right fricking now!

LRO will enter an elliptical commissioning orbit and then gradually work its way down to a circular polar orbit of about 30 miles.

FAX
06-22-2009, 12:36 PM
5 days to reach the Moon from Earth?

Do you know how fast this thing is going, Mr. Donger?

FAX

Slainte
06-22-2009, 12:38 PM
Lunar orbit insertion burn will take place tomorrow at 5:47am EDT.

A line most chicks have heard before...

Donger
06-22-2009, 12:53 PM
5 days to reach the Moon from Earth?

Do you know how fast this thing is going, Mr. Donger?

FAX

Relative to what?

FAX
06-22-2009, 12:55 PM
Relative to what?

Mile per hour or kilometers per hour, or something. I thought you might know ... you know, offhand like. No big deal.

FAX

Donger
06-22-2009, 12:59 PM
Mile per hour or kilometers per hour, or something. I thought you might know ... you know, offhand like. No big deal.

FAX

Approximately 8,000 mph

FAX
06-22-2009, 01:06 PM
That's amazing to think about.

From Nashville to Memphis in two minutes. Dang.

FAX

Donger
06-22-2009, 01:10 PM
That's amazing to think about.

From Nashville to Memphis in two minutes. Dang.

FAX

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003600/a003612/lro_orbit_withTime_iPod.m4v

A visualization of the chase and capture.

Lzen
06-22-2009, 01:17 PM
Are you saying there aren't aliens on Mars?

Dammit!

I always thought this was cool. Kind of out there but it made for good entertainment to space nerds like me.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PvISV0wGusU&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PvISV0wGusU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>





And don't even get me started on what they photographed near Saturn.

FAX

What did they photograph near Saturn?

I don't know about all of that, but they seem to have found Bigfoot on Mars.

I understand, Mr. Bugeater. I really do. Problem is, grainy photos is about all we have since the government and the aliens and the Illuminaughties and the Pope have decided that we don't deserve to know more. It doesn't really matter anyhow. Mr. Average Joe Peep couldn't care less about aliens.

That will change, of course, when those ugly bastards finally show themselves publicly and demand that we give them our women and our water and our flowering shrubberies so they can repopulate their dying world or they'll raygun our balls into a billion infinitesimal particles.

Since all we have are grainy photos, we're about as unprepared for a full-on alien attack as a planet can get. That's why we need to capture an alien as soon as possible. We need to learn their plans and figure out their weaknesses. Otherwise, it's goodbye Momma and so long Mr. Holly Bush.

FAX

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/m5lnavfxZWo&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/m5lnavfxZWo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Pioli Zombie
06-22-2009, 01:21 PM
"Can I fugg anyone I want on the moon?!?!?!"
- Morgan Freeman
Posted via Mobile Device

Raised On Riots
06-22-2009, 02:38 PM
Don't let the lighting crew fuck this one up!

Pioli Zombie
06-22-2009, 05:23 PM
I was at the Smithsonian once and this linthead woman looks at the actual Apollo 11 spacecraft and says "Hey, that's just like the one in the movie Apollo 13!!". I kid you not.
Posted via Mobile Device

Donger
06-23-2009, 08:06 AM
LRO is in lunar orbit. Expect streaming video soon.

EyePod
06-23-2009, 10:07 AM
An astronaut talked at my college graduation. He was a Drexel Grad, and he was given an honorary PhD. The dude wouldn't shut the **** up. He was droning on and on about this crap so now I don't have a good impression about it.

Raised On Riots
06-23-2009, 10:33 AM
I wonder if ILM is handling this one, or if NASA can afford it's own department now?