A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 14th 12, 05:20 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 687
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy
mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate
what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly
out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash
on the moon’s surface."

See:

http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...crashing-end-3
  #2  
Old December 14th 12, 08:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Nun Giver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Friday, December 14, 2012 8:20:35 AM UTC-8, wrote:
"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy

mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate

what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly

out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash

on the moon’s surface."



See:



http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...crashing-end-3


Actually they were taking out a Nazi moon base ;-)
  #3  
Old December 15th 12, 04:18 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 14, 8:20*am, wrote:
"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy
mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate
what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly
out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash
on the moon’s surface."

See:

http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...g-mission-to-c...


Because their scheduled orbital decay has not the option of sufficient
retro-thrust nor fuel for any actual slowing down before impact (as
any true fly-by-rocket lander would have to have), instead they’ll
simply impact at roughly 1.35 km/sec.
http://now.msn.com/nasa-probe-will-crash-into-moon
“Is this NASA meets Jackass? The space agency will deliberately crash
two probes into the moon on Monday, hitting the rim of a lunar crater
at over 3,000mph.”

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...18595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#
  #4  
Old December 15th 12, 09:18 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 15, 10:18*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 14, 8:20*am, wrote:

"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy
mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate
what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly
out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash
on the moon’s surface."


See:


http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...g-mission-to-c...


Because their scheduled orbital decay has not the option of sufficient
retro-thrust nor fuel for any actual slowing down before impact (as
any true fly-by-rocket lander would have to have), instead they’ll
simply impact at roughly 1.35 km/sec.
*http://now.msn.com/nasa-probe-will-crash-into-moon
*“Is this NASA meets Jackass? The space agency will deliberately crash
two probes into the moon on Monday, hitting the rim of a lunar crater
at over 3,000mph.”

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
*“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow....
*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif
*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#


it makes sense to do the crash......

its mission and extended mission are complete

no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes

it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites
  #5  
Old December 15th 12, 10:11 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 15, 12:18*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 10:18*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Dec 14, 8:20*am, wrote:


"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy
mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate
what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly
out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash
on the moon’s surface."


See:


http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...g-mission-to-c....


Because their scheduled orbital decay has not the option of sufficient
retro-thrust nor fuel for any actual slowing down before impact (as
any true fly-by-rocket lander would have to have), instead they’ll
simply impact at roughly 1.35 km/sec.
*http://now.msn.com/nasa-probe-will-crash-into-moon
*“Is this NASA meets Jackass? The space agency will deliberately crash
two probes into the moon on Monday, hitting the rim of a lunar crater
at over 3,000mph.”


*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
*“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow...
*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif
*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#


it makes sense to do the crash......

its mission and extended mission are complete

no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes

it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites


Since they still have no viable prototype fly-by-rocket landers for
any pilots to gain their first-hand expertise at being dropped from a
jet cargo transport at 20,000' (or even from a controlled helicopter
deployed drop) and then purely via retro-thrust managing to
controllably downrange and safely soft-land, is perhaps why they'll
need all the new downrange and crash data they can possibly get.
  #6  
Old December 15th 12, 10:34 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 489
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:

it makes sense to do the crash......


its mission and extended mission are complete


no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes


You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following...



it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites


So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion
possibility? *Really?



Really. It is a legitimate reason
  #7  
Old December 16th 12, 01:56 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Me wrote:
On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:


it makes sense to do the crash......


its mission and extended mission are complete


no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes


You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following...


it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites


So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion
possibility? *Really?


Really. *It is a legitimate reason


Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not.

And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES
hit one of them, where's the down side?

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn


On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the
spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure
the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor
and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1-
in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing
sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory

someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those
landing sites for research purposes.

no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there
isnt fuel to prevent it.....

at least this way they get some science out of it... and prevent
possible damage to historic sites
  #8  
Old December 16th 12, 05:59 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 15, 8:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Me wrote:
On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:


it makes sense to do the crash......


its mission and extended mission are complete


no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes


You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following...


it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites


So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion
possibility? *Really?


Really. *It is a legitimate reason


Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not.


And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES
hit one of them, where's the down side?


On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the
spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure
the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor
and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1-
in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing
sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory


I'm sorry, but that's an insane set of probabilities! *I don't believe
it.



someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those
landing sites for research purposes.


Why? *We know more about them than could ever be discerned by visiting
them.



no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there
isnt fuel to prevent it.....


Well, you finally got something right.



at least this way they get some science out of it...


And that's a decent reason.



...and prevent possible damage to historic sites


And that makes no sense whatsoever.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn


Fred no doubt you would like indenpendence hall in philadephia to be
demolished for condos.......

you have no sense of history
  #9  
Old December 16th 12, 02:23 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 15, 4:56*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:









Me wrote:
On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:


it makes sense to do the crash......


its mission and extended mission are complete


no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes


You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following...


it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites


So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion
possibility? *Really?


Really. *It is a legitimate reason


Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not.


And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES
hit one of them, where's the down side?


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn


On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the
spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure
the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor
and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1-
in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing
sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory

someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those
landing sites for research purposes.

no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there
isnt fuel to prevent it.....

at least this way they get some science out of it... and prevent
possible damage to historic sites


Any true lunar surface obtained science would be rather nice for a
change, being that so little had been accomplished by the entire
Apollo era.

Of course closed-door science that is derived from nondisclosure
technology and only that as having been interpreted from those with
having the most vested interest in sustaining their supposed history
and its substantial cold-war legacy of perks, benefits and subsequent
authority that could otherwise be put at risk, and especially if they
actually had to offer those actual fly-by-rocket landers as scaled to
commercially suit that'll work perfectly first time out of the box,
and as equally piloted without a hitch by those as having never
actually performed any one-on-one piloting of a fly-by-rocket craft
with such a variable CG, as for safely downrange and accomplishing
their soft controlled landings as first time at the controls of such a
poorly documented spacecraft with hardly any computer, as well as
having no momentum reaction gyros and only a very limited supply of
fuel, is still going to be a very impressive trick.

So, the more we can learn about the retro-thrust energy required to
pull out of orbit, downrange and manage to soft land whatever craft
without a hitch, regardless of whatever gets compromised by what those
local mascons might contribute, the better. Because somehow our
Apollo era did manage to accomplishing everything, and then some,
which is an extremely important realization if we’re ever going to
commercially exploit whatever our naked and physically dark moon has
to offer.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...18595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#
  #10  
Old December 16th 12, 02:53 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end

On Dec 16, 3:20*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 8:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Me wrote:
On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:


it makes sense to do the crash......


its mission and extended mission are complete


no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual
crashes


You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following...


it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and
damage apollo or other legacy sites


So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion
possibility? *Really?


Really. *It is a legitimate reason


Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not.


And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES
hit one of them, where's the down side?


On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the
spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure
the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor
and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1-
in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing
sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory


I'm sorry, but that's an insane set of probabilities! *I don't believe
it.


someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those
landing sites for research purposes.


Why? *We know more about them than could ever be discerned by visiting
them.


no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there
isnt fuel to prevent it.....


Well, you finally got something right.


at least this way they get some science out of it...


And that's a decent reason.


...and prevent possible damage to historic sites


And that makes no sense whatsoever.


Fred no doubt you would like indenpendence hall in philadephia to be
demolished for condos.......


Bobbert, you making up silly **** and then proclaiming it's my opinion
doesn't change my opinion. *It merely makes you look like a delusional
halfwit.



you have no sense of history


And you have no sense. *Period.

It goes with your inability to read simple English sentences, I
suppose.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine


fred i find it amazing that you hold a paying job, I pity your co
workers if you act in real life anything like you do here.......

most companies weed out offensive people since its bad for worker
morale....

in addition your a very closed mind kinda person, which must add to
defense spending costs.....

imagine what our world could accomplish if all we had were police, and
fighting between nations and terrorists ended.......

it would put you out of work....
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA Lunar Mission Successfully Enters Moon Orbit (LRO) ron News 0 June 24th 09 01:03 AM
........Nasa/Griffin LYING about Public Support for Moon/Mars Mission! jonathan Space Station 0 September 28th 06 04:20 AM
News: Nasa moon mission could include UK astronaut Rusty History 14 May 2nd 06 10:40 AM
Laser Altimeter Mapping the moon question John Stoffel Technology 3 January 29th 06 03:33 AM
NASA selects Moon mapper for mission of opportunity Jacques van Oene News 0 February 2nd 05 09:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.