The Spirit of the Lunar Orbiters lives in LOIRP

Newly retrieved high-resolution frame (Lunar Orbiter II-13-H2) showing a roughly 4 km-wide area in  south Mare Tranquillitatis, originally photographed, processed and radioed back to Earth by the Lunar Orbiter spacecraft November 18, 1966. It is the center (h2) of three sequential high-res frames captured simultaneous to the imaging of medium resolution Lunar Orbiter observation 2-013. It has been remastered and just released by the remarkable Lunar Orbiter Image Restoration Project (LOIRP) working on the campus of NASA's Ames Research Center in California [Moonviews].

Joel Raupe

Lunar Pioneer

In addition to the five spacecraft the United States presently has in lunar orbit, the legacies left behind by the five Lunar Orbiter spacecraft dispatched in 1966 and 1967, ahead of the manned Apollo landings, collectively amount to a sixth mission, still active and present in more than spirit. Because of the vision and resourcefulness of a special group of engineers and scientists the original tapes containing the raw radio signal returned by the Lunar Orbiters is methodically being processed, essentially for the first time, almost fifty years later. The most recent release of frames originally photographed by Lunar Orbiter II late in 1966 provide us with an easy demonstration of where this growing new library of half-century-old observations fits into our 21st century understanding of the Moon.

Any new craters? On December 21, 2009 the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera team swept up much of the territory photographed at high resolution by Lunar Orbiter II in November 1966. The field of view in L2013-H2 is here outlined in yellow. LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) observations M116072806L & R, orbit 2239; angle of incidence 80.6° at 0.96 meters resolution, from 46.3 km [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

Much of the area in the three Lunar Orbiter II high-resolution photographs was surveyed at least once, under a high angle of illumination (80.7°) at slightly better than 1 meter resolution, December 21, 2009. The upper right hand portion of Lunar Orbiter frame 2013 (h2) is also available in the body of Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera high-resolution Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) observations presently released to the Planetary Data System.

Newly retrieved by the Lunar Orbiter Image Restoration Project (LOIRP), the medium resolution Lunar Orbiter frame 2011 (M) shows a roughly 45 km-wide area in south central Mare Tranquillitatis originally photographed by Lunar Orbiter II, November 18, 1966 (1525 UT). Of the three high-resolution frames of the area, engineered to be captured at the same opportunity, the center frame, h2, is thinly outlined in very pale yellow at the direct center, and is detailed above [Moonviews].

A 3200 square kilometer field of view showing the immediate area of southeast Mare Tranquillitatis visible in a set of two medium and three high-resolution Lunar Orbiter photographs newly retrieved and just released by the Lunar Orbiter Image Restoration Project (LOIRP). The white rectangle outlines cover the area of the lunar surface in two LROC NAC observations overlapping the high-resolution Lunar Orbiter II frames. Fields of view in the Lunar Orbiter high-resolution frames were re-surveyed at high-resolution by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, 45 years later. LROC QuickMap at 64 meters resolution, LROC WAC Global 100 meter monochrome mosaic [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

LROC QuickMap 4000 meter resolution context view showing the 3200 square km area of the southeast Sea of Tranquility framed in the image immediately above. This part of the Tranquillitatis basin averages out at a bit higher elevation than elsewhere, and is populated by ancient inundated ghost crater rims with the coherent spatter of secondary craters. As our understanding of lunar morphology deepens it has become less clear whether Mare Tranquillitatis constitutes a true basin. Regardless, however, episodic re-floodings by molten material has left behind some of the Moon's deepest mare strata, even if Tranquility is not as clearly defined, horizontally and vertically, as the Serenitatis, Crisium, Nectaris or Imbrium basins nearby [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

The story behind the recovery and retrieval of Lunar Orbiter photography is pretty amazing. The precision design of the spacecraft and their cameras - designed to shoot simultaneous images on film, to then develop that film and televised the result back to Earth - through to the 21st century story labor of love behind how unique and original tapes were housed in a former McDonalds and the nearly extinct drives and software needed even to begin reading those rediscovered tapes were brought online reads like a detective story. The result has been  to retrieve images at a quality better than any that had been available for decades, and a virtual sixth mission to complement the present-day 21st century flotilla now in orbit (after a very long drought).

The "older" photography can be used for a variety of important purposes, but in the context of the robust LRO photographic survey, now beginning an unprecedented third year in lunar orbit, no price can be placed on the opportunity to search out the rate of new impacts among the slow changes in the lunar landscape over five decades. And despite its clear strengths as a marvel of engineering and on-time, on budget performance, even the LRO will not be capable of surveying the entire lunar surface at high-resolution (though, so far, the LROC team surveyed much more than half). The release of newly retrieved Lunar Orbiter images. like these "fresh" from 1966, fills some of those gaps nicely, and also provides the opportunity to see the same area of the Moon at high resolution under different lighting conditions.

Meanwhile, the LROC Wide Angle Camera has been able to survey the entire visible lunar surface under a variety of lighting conditions at an extraordinary "medium" resolution.

The original and latter history of the Lunar Orbiter legacy amounts to a heroic story, one made possible by forward-thinking scientists like Gene Shoemaker, and thoughtful people who might have tossed the tapes but instead carefully packed them. Their rediscovery and the dedicated people who rebuilt the capacity to read those tapes makes for interesting reading as well. It also provides us with a lesson about the transitory nature of magnetic and digital media.

Today's Blue-Ray may be tomorrow's Eight-Track tape!

Some earlier posts and background on LOIRP (Moonviews.com):
The LOIRP time machine looks back 43 years (June 3, 2010)
New releases from Lunar Orbiter II (1966) - (May 7, 2010)
Boulders of Copernicus (December 11, 2009)
LOIRP: Boulder Trails on the Moon (December 10, 2009)
Lunar Orbiter's originals vs. LOIRP restorations (December 9, 2009)
New restored detail from Lunar Orbiter II (December 8, 2009)
LOIRP configures second FR-900 tape drive (November 12, 2009)
LOIRP remasters the Moon's South Pole (August 14, 2009)
Lockheed Martin donates Clean-Room to LOIRP (August 12, 2009)
LOIRP astounds again, re-release of LO-II0162 (1967)
with each of three high-res sub-frames (August 10, 2009)
Full Earth, as seen by Orbiter V (August 7, 2009)
Lunar Orbiter III-154-H2 (June 16, 2009)
LOIRP recovers Lunar Orbiter IV lunar South Pole image from 1967 (June 16, 2009)
LOIRP recovers detail of Fra Mauro and future landing site of Apollo 14 (June 11, 2009)
New LOIRP high res Lunar Orbiter image of western Oceanus Procellarum (June 10, 2009)
LOIRP recovers image of Ranger 8 impact (June 9, 2009)
LOIRP's "Pictures of the Century" (March 23, 2009)
More astounding new detail from LOIRP (February 26, 2009)
Breakthrough in Lunar Orbiter photograph remastering (February 20, 2009)

Inside the Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project

The "McMoon" facility on the campus of Ames Research Center [Moonviews].

Maggie Koerth-Baker
boingboing

If these photos of NASA's Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project look suspiciously like they might actually have been taken inside an abandoned McDonalds ... well, that's very observant of you. All of those film canisters you see in the first image are actually spools of 70mm magnetic tape containing the analog originals of images taken by the Lunar Orbiter spacecraft in 1966 and 1967. After sitting in storage for decades—most notably in a barn in California—the tapes were brought to the NASA Ames Research Center in 2007. Since then, some of the originals have been digitized and preserved. (There's a good chance you saw a few in 2008, when the first preserved images were released.) Others are still in process. There's not much funding for this type of work, and it can get expensive, as it involves maintaining extremely rare FR-900 tape drives.

Read the entire post at boingboing.net

LROC: Weaving boulder trails on the Moon

Boulders have rolled downslope from the central peaks of Tsiolkovskiy crater, leaving a wide variety of trails in their wake.  Some boulders have come to a stop and several trails curve beyond the field of view further downslope. A 500 meter field of view taken from LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) observation M176791784R, LRO orbit 11189, November 24, 2011; angle of incidence 62.6° at 0.5 meters resolution, form an altitude of 42.12 km. View the larger LROC Featured Image HERE [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

Drew Enns
LROC News System
 
A variety of geologic processes form boulders on the Moon. Some boulders are thrown out as ejecta during the impact process. Other boulders are found at the top of wrinkle ridges; members of the LROC Science Team have identified boulder populations atop lava flows and other lunar volcanic landforms; still other boulder fields are found on the floors of craters after eroding out of outcrops on the walls or central peak. Of course, when we say “erosion” in the context of lunar geology, we don't mean erosion the way one would use it for terrestrial geology. The Moon has no atmosphere, no rain, and no weather, so the main processes that would cause this sort of erosion on the Moon are the constant flux of bolide impacts, and to a lesser extent, seismic activity. So which of these processes produced the boulders in today's Featured Image? Looking at a context image helps.

Interior of 184 km-wide Tsiolkovskiy crater, from the Global LROC Wide Angle Camera (WAC) 100 meter monochrome mosaic, context with the location of the field of view taken from LROC NAC frame M176791784R (designated by the yellow arrow) on the south terraces and slopes of the central peak complex highlighted in the LROC Featured Image released July 11, 2012 [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

The Featured Image shows an area near base of Tsiolkovskiy crater's central peak. Tsiolkovskiy crater, located at 20.38°S, 128.97°E, is filled with mare basalts and has a prominent central peak. The boulders have rolled downhill from outcrops of rock at higher elevations, closer to the summit of the central peak. Central peaks are thought to be made up of the deepest materials exposed during an impact. So, these boulders present an excellent opportunity to enable future astronauts to sample materials from the deep lunar crust.

Under a higher sun (angle of incidence 46°) the area on the south central peak of Tsiolkovskiy comes out of the shadows, also at a slightly higher resolution (89.3 meters), from a monochrome (604nm) mosaic stitched from a series of sequential orbital passes averaging 60 km in altitude, August 17, 2010 [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

But Tsiolkovskiy crater is not just interesting because of its large central peak. Tsiolkovskiy is also partially filled with mare basalt material, a relatively rare occurrence on the farside of the Moon. The combination of accessible deep crustal materials and mare basalts within traverse distance of each other make Tsiolkovskiy crater a high-priority target for future human and robotic lunar exploration.

Explore more of Tsiolkovskiy's central peak and find the source of the boulders in the full LROC NAC frame, HERE.

Some Related Posts:
Frozen in Time (June 9, 2011)
Rolling, Rolling, Rolling (May 1, 2012)
A Recent Journey (February 7, 2012)
Sampling Schrödinger (August 17, 2011)
Archimedes - Mare Flooded Crater! (March 2, 2011)

Boulder trails in Menelaus crater (October 28, 2010)
More of Tsiolkovskiy's boulders and boundaries (August 26, 2010)
Hole in One within Hole in One (May 20, 2010)
Tsiolkovskiy - Constellation Region on Interest (May 1, 2010)
Bouncing, Bounding Boulders (October 16, 2009)
Uplift, Boulders of Tsiolkovskiy (September 1, 2009)

Checking up on the Space Launch System

The most recent publicly released artist's rendering of the Orion/SLS Block-1 architecture, now intended for a hoped-for 2017 debut. Success by streamlined commercial manned space companies filling America's low-Earth orbit manned spaceflight gap with the retirement of the Space Shuttle in 2011, the Space Launce System heavy-lift architecture will revive American manned spaceflight access to Cis-Lunar Space and beyond. Until then, NASA will utilize the work-horse Delta-IV heavy lift booster to begin unmanned flight testing of the Orion spacecraft beginning in 2014  [NASA].

Jason Davis

The Planetary Society Blog
 

When SpaceX's Dragon capsule returned from its historic trip to the International Space Station this May, it proved that -- in theory -- the idea of having private spaceflight companies relieve NASA of its low-Earth orbit taxi duties can succeed. Meanwhile, work continues on the Space Launch System, the next-generation deep space vehicle slated to take humans beyond Earth for the first time since 1972.

Orion arrives at KSC -- Amid much pomp and circumstance, the first space-bound Orion capsule arrived at Kennedy Space Center at the end of June. Orion sat naked during its official unveiling, baring its sea foam-green hull that was constructed using friction stir welding, a process in which metal is 'mixed' at the joint rather than melted (other space vehicles have used this technique, including SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket). NASA officials, astronauts and politicians attended the official unveiling, including U.S. Senator Bill Nelson, who is fond of referring to the SLS by a different moniker: the "Monster Rocket."

Read the complete post HERE.

Related:
Orion Drop Test (April 18. 2012)

EM1: 2017 SLS/Orion lunar mission outlined (March 1, 2012)

Orion EFT1 Animation (No Narration)
Spudis: Double the Space Budget? (March 1, 2012)

NASA settles on SLS architecture (September 14, 2011)

LROC: "Sunny Side Up"

The center of Linne F is filled with a small mound surrounded by a moat of impact melt rock. Image width is ~1450 m, LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) observation M190509409, LRO orbit 13120, May 1, 2012; native resolution 1.5 meters. View the larger (1100 px)) LROC Featured Image release, HERE [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University]

Drew Enns
LROC News System
 
Linne F is a 5 km diameter crater located at 32.33°N, 13.95°E, and it displays a spectacular melt pond (now frozen) on its floor. Immediately after the impact event, melt pooled and eventually hardened to form the now lower reflectance flat deposit surrounding a central mound. The once molten material shares characteristics that are seen in many other impact craters: small mounds, blocky craters, and fractures. But what is the origin of the central mound? Compare the central mound in Linne F to the interiors of other similarly sized craters. Perhaps it is a proto-central peak or maybe the mound formed due to unusual target properties?

Linne F, surrounded by Mare Serenitatis basalts. LROC QuickMap (64 meters resolution) with profile statistics; field of view is 37.12 km [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

Do any other 5 km diameter lunar craters have central peaks? On the Moon, central peaks start to form in craters between 10-20 km in diameter, much larger than Linne F. If the mound isn't a nascent central peak, perhaps the local target properties of this portion of Mare Serenitatis played a role. Target properties are important for small (<500 m diameter) craters as a loose regolith over solid bedrock can result in benches, mounds, and flat floors. It is unclear if target properties are also important for larger craters, but Mare Serenitatis has a thick layer of basalt overlying older basin material. Both hypotheses are possible, but hard to prove from remotely sensed data alone. Linne F is just one example of the uniqueness of each crater on the Moon. It is easy to generalize that all craters below 10 km in diameter are bowl shaped - but that generalization glosses over the variety of geologic forms seen in lunar craters. It is this richness of detail from crater-to-crater that scientists are studying to unravel the story of the surface, and subsurface, of our nearest neighbor!

Explore more impact melt in the full LROC NAC mosaic, HERE.

Related Posts:
Cracked Mound
Shattering Consequences
Farside impact!

LROC: Sunset Over Giordano Bruno

Slump terrace in the northern half of Giordano Bruno crater seen at sunset, from an altitude of 54 km. Terrace is 4800 meters wide, LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) M165190579LR, LRO orbit 9478, July 13, 2011; spacecraft slew 60° at 1.37 meters resolution. View the full-size LROC image release, HERE [NASA/GSFC/ Arizona State University].

Mark Robinson
Principal Investigator
Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera
Arizona State University

The exact age of formation for Giordano Bruno crater is not known. Legend has it forming sometime in the 12th century, and more recent crater counts have this beautiful crater forming up to 10 million years ago.

Crater counts must be more accurate than legend, right?

Perhaps, but one of the new results from analysis of LROC images is that self-secondaries (sometimes called auto-secondaries) may be more pervasive than previously thought.

Subsampled version of NAC oblique view of Giordano Bruno crater (21 km diameter). View the full-size LROC image release, HERE [NASA/GSFC/ Arizona State University].

A self-secondary crater forms as late stage ejecta lands on top of early ejecta, all from the same impact event. In this case the impact that formed Giordano Bruno crater. So despite the best efforts of the lunar science community, all we know is that this fascinating crater formed no later than 10 million years ago and no earlier than 18 June 1178. How can we get to an unambiguous answer; what is the exact age of formation of Giordano Bruno? The answer is simple, radiometric age dating of rocks that melted during the impact! When a rock is melted and then recrystallizes its radiometric clock is reset, thus all we need to do is collect a sample of the abundant impact melt rocks either from the floor or flanks of Giordano Bruno.

Impact melt deposit on south flank of Giordano Bruno crater, arrow indicates center of landing site (35.47°N, 102.86°E) shown at full resolution below. View the full-size LROC image release, HERE [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

In terms of planetary missions, collecting such a sample is relatively straightforward (although no planetary spacecraft missions are simple): land, scoop, return. First scientists and engineers find the safest landing spot on an impact melt deposit. My favorite is just outside the crater, on the crater's southern rim (visit last week's Featured Image mosaic of Giordano Bruno crater). This large area provides numerous 100 meter size landing spots on now frozen deposit of impact melt. Next, you have to build the sample return spacecraft and land it safely on the Moon. This is no small feat, but keep in mind that the Soviet Union did this successfully three times almost four decades ago. While on the surface, key supporting measurements would be acquired; images, spectral measurements, magnetic properties, and perhaps information about surface radiation exposure to help design safer spacecraft and spacesuits for future astronauts. Finally, after no more than a lunar day on the surface, a sample is scooped up and then returned to Earth. What would we learn? Of course, we'd learn about the age of formation of Giordano Bruno crater, but also much more.

Example landing spot (250 meter diameter circle) on now frozen impact melt. View the full-size LROC image release, HERE [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

This new knowledge will help crater counting experts understand the importance of self-secondary craters on very young craters. A new calibration for these youngest craters could be obtained, thus making age estimates for all other young craters on the Moon more reliable. Additionally this part of the Moon is far from the Imbrium basin and the KREEPy region from where all the Apollo and Luna samples were returned. So this precious sample would be our first look at unsampled highlands terrain, the oldest portion of the Moon's crust. All-in-all, this site is a prime candidate for an automated precursor sample return - lets go!

Be sure and check out the amazing details in the full resolution complete oblique mosaic of Giordano Bruno crater.

Previous LROC Giordano Bruno Featured Images
The Big Picture
Outside of Giordano Bruno
Fragmented Impact Melt
Delicate Patterns in Giordano Bruno Ejecta
Impact Melt Flows on Giordano Bruno
Young Giordano Bruno

A possible landing site on the south flank of the relatively fresh, much studied crater Giordano Bruno (22.13km, 35.92°N, 102.74°E) LROC Wide Angle Camera (WAC) mosaic from four sequential orbits, February 23, 2010, angle of incidence 49.62° at 76.2 meters resolution, from 54 km. [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

UAH students join international lunar simulation

Kyle Burger
WAAVtv.com
Huntsville, Alabama
 
Students from the University of Alabama-Huntsville recently fared-well in a high-tech lunar exploration competition.

“The events (of the simulation) actually happened slowly, because we are in space and things happen slowly in space,” UAH Director for Modeling, Simulation and Analysis, Mikel Petty, Ph.D. said. “It takes a long time to go from the earth to the moon.”

But the minds of UAH modeling and simulation students work furiously on a simulating a lunar exploration operation, complete with a rover and communications satellite.

“(We developed) some of the algorithm, we actually had an orbital propagator to determine to constellation orbit of the satellites,” Daniel O’Neil, technical manager at Marshall Space Flight Center, said.

A very advanced eight member UAH team competed in a worldwide competition known as "the smackdown" in Orlando, Fla.

Teams from universities around the world develop sophisticated computer simulations that work together, in real-time to simulate a lunar exploration scenario.

“We were the only southeastern team and university in Alabama to participate in the event,” student Crystal Fordyce said. “The other teams were from Penn State and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.”

Other teams included: Pennsylvania State University, Technion (Israel), University of Genoa (Italy), and Marconi University (Italy).

UAH came home with two awards, including the Pitch Award, which recognizes collaboration with other teams, and the Board of Directors award. But what may help these students in the future is that the program was sponsored by AEgis Technologies and NASA.

“Working with NASA is a big deal,” student Swetha Govindaiah said. “It's a big thing for me. It gives me a lot of experience and new thoughts about modeling and simulation. I would like to work for a modeling simulation industry.”

Craters near Lunokhod-1 officially named

Luna 17, the lander that carried Lunokhod 1 to the surface; debarking ramps for the rover visible extending down to the surface to the right. Many rover tracks are visible around the lander and throughout LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) frame M175502049RE, LRO orbit 10998, November 9, 2011. View the original contextual image with enlarged inset, HERE [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

Olga Zakutnyaya
The Voice of Russia
 
A number of moon craters in the vicinity of Lunokhod–1 lunar rover have been given their own names. They were named in honor of the crew members of the first self-propelled vehicle on the surface of the celestial body.

The experiment carried out more than 40 years ago is to be repeated in the course of “Luna-Resource” expedition which should be launched no earlier than 2015.

The International Astronomical Union has approved 12 new names for small craters on the Moon, and now they have names of the members of the first lunar expedition and scientists who were involved in the project. Despite the fact that these people were not able to walk on the Moon’s surface themselves, they were the ones who led Lunokhod–1 – the first planet rover on the surface of an alien celestial body. All craters are located in the area of the “Sea of Rain” (Mare Imbrium) where the landing vehicle of Luna-17 interplanetary automatic station soft-landed in November 1970. It delivered Lunokhod lunar rover onto the Moon’s surface. All craters are comparatively small, their diameter ranging from 100 to 400 meters.

Thus, the names of Albert, Borya, Gena (in honor of the navigator Gabdulkhai Latypov), Igor, Kolya, Kostya, Leonid, Nikolya, Slava, Valera, Vasya, and Vitya appeared on the Moon.

The Luna-17 spacecraft was built by the design and construction bureau of the machine-engineering plant named after S.A. Lavochkin (now NPO Lavochkin). Lunokhod-1 was equipped with a set of scientific devices to explore the lunar soil. In the course of 10 months that it was working on the Moon, the rover traveled over 10.5 kilometers and sent back to Earth information about the mineral composition and characteristics of the lunar surface.

Lunokhod 1 rover in its final parking place (38.315°N, 324.992°E) on the surface of Mare Imbrium. LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) observation M175502049RE, orbit 10998, November 9, 2011, resolution 33 cm per pixel. View original Featured Image released March 14, 2012 (with enlarged inset) HERE. [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University].

Lunokhod-1 was controlled remotely via the center for space communications by two crews – five people each who worked in shifts. Each crew consisted of a commander, a driver, a navigator, a flight engineer, and a high gain antenna operator. Thus there were 10 people all together, plus a reserve driver and reserve high gain antenna operator.

Even though by the time Lunokhod-1 was launched American astronauts had already landed on the Moon, the soviet rover was no less a remarkable scientific and technical achievement. Unfortunately, at that time, the meaning of this achievement was overshadowed by the defeat in the race to put a man on the moon. Lunokhod-1, with all its novelty and complexity, was more of a consolation prize. At least that was the general attitude – and analysts might object, of course. Sadly, it was what determined the further development of the lunar program. After the improved version Lunokhod-2 in 1973, there was Lunokhod-3 which never made it to the Moon. As a result, the Lunar Program of the USSR was suspended. Forty years on there has been little progress.

Today it can be said that it was a mistake. Weak consolation might be the fact that space programs in other countries primarily in the United States have also been suspended. However, the comparison might not be accurate – paradoxically as it may sound as though the soviet moon explorations at the end of the “manned moon race” were in a better state (if not financially from the strategic point of view). A continuation of manned expeditions demanded huge resources and clear goals, which probably did not exist at that time. Autonomous expeditions were easier from the point of view of their preparation but brought back much more scientific results. Besides, by that time, complicated initial stages with lots of failures were overcome and so reliability was higher.

Far western 1970 Landing Zone of the Soviet Union's Luna 17, and the final parking spot of the first remote-operated lunar rover, Lunokhod-1. The French-built laser reflector array deployed from the Lunokhod eluded detection for four decades until its precise location was reacquired by the LROC Narrow Angle Camera in 2009. It's relocation added vital precision to measurements of the Earth-Moon distance that may answer important questions in astrophysics. LROC Wide Angle Camera 100 meter Global Mosaic overlaid upon LOLA topography and assembled using the NASA LMMP ILIADS application [NASA/GSFC/LMMP/Arizona State University].

Something similar is happening to NASA’s Mars exploration program. A long and ongoing exploration of the planet with more and more sophisticated and complex tasks resulted in the fact that the US became a true leader in the Mars programs. That was, in fact, the main argument by scholars who objected to cuts in NASA’s planetary space budget in 2013. In their opinion to lose such an important scientific and technical foundation would be a poor strategic move.

The current plans of Russia in the area of space exploration include returning to the Moon with landing vehicles and a mini-rover – a self-propelled machine which is being developed by an Indian organization for the purposes of the Luna-Resource program. It is planned to repeat lunar soil collection considering previous experiences. If in the course of the first expeditions the soil was collected only in the places of landing – now the goal is to combine the operation of the mini-rover and returning spacecraft. The mini-rover is to determine the most interesting spots and collect soil from them and then the spacecraft should return the samples to the Earth.

New Names Approved for Twelve Small Lunar Craters - The Working Group for Planetary System Nomenclature has approved 12 new names for small craters on the Moon: Albert, Borya, Gena, Igor, Kolya, Kostya, Leonid, Nikolya, Slava, Valera, Vasya, and Vitya. For details, see the map of LAC 24 and the Lunokhod-1 traverse map in the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature [USGS].

Yet as of now these are only plans. Information from the Moon is coming daily. NASA LRO and GRAIL spacecraft continue to work in the Moon’s orbit (two spacecraft which measure lunar gravity fields). Several days ago, the NASA LRO mission published recent images of the lava fields formed as a result of asteroid impacts. The images were taken by LROC – Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera. This camera is also connected to the Lunokhods – in 2010, the first high resolution images were printed and it was possible to see Lunokhod-1 and the landing spacecraft and the wheel tracks. Interesting that in the same year a group of American scientists announced that they had managed to intercept a pulse from a laser retroreflector on Lunokhod-1.

It is probable that these circumstances have raised the interest in the Lunokhod program again. Naturally, recognition of the achievements of the soviet scientists is satisfying on the one hand, but on the other the interest is mostly coming from western institutions and space lovers. Without the LROC images, the “favourite lunar tractor” would be remembered only by those who are truly loyal to space science. That is why one of the tasks of the future lunar program is not only to learn again how to land and control spacecraft on the Moon, but also how to inform people about it in plain language, and on a regular basis.

Related: Lunokhod-1 revisited (March 15, 2012)

Lunar tide warps CERN's Large Hadron Collider

Watch out for that moon! Cross section of CERN's Large Hadron Collider, which contorts once a month.

Mark Halper
smartplanet
 
According to the website Talking Points Memo, the gravitational pull of a recent full moon tugged on one side of CERN’s Large Hadron Collider in Geneva more than on the other, “ever so slightly deforming the tunnel through which the proton beams pass.”

But never fear. This seems to have happened before, and CERN’s astute operators were on the case.

    “In order to keep the proton beams on track, the operator at the LHC’s control center had to subtly alter the direction of the proton beams to accomodate the Moon’s pull, ‘every hour or two,’ ” writes TPM’s Carl Franzen.

This all came to light because scientist Pauline Gagnon  from the University of Indiana had noticed an anomaly in her data while conducting an experiment at the LHC.  So she called the control room, and as she recalls in a blog post,

    “Oh, those dips?”, casually answered the operator on shift. “That’s because the moon is nearly full and I periodically have to adjust the proton beam orbits.”

    “The LHC is such a sensitive apparatus, it can detect the minute deformations created by the small differences in the gravitational force across its diameter. The effect is of course largest when the moon is full.”

CERN is using its $9 billion contraption to mimic conditions just after the Big Bang, and to try to find the elusive Higgs Boson many believe serves as the capstone to the Standard Model of Physics.

Read the article, HERE.

Toxicity of lunar dust

Gene Cernan, soon after the completion of the third and last EVA of Apollo 17, also the final EVA of the Apollo program. His moon suit carries a heavy accumulation of lunar dust, as does his skin. Three years earlier mission planners had been worried about astronauts, along with their spacecraft, sinking into the accumulation of dust on the surface. After Apollo, and decades later, mitigating the clinging affect of dust on equipment and human life remains a problem evading easy solution [Schmitt/AS17-145-22224].

Dag Linnarsson, et al.
Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm/ESA

Abstract - The formation, composition and physical properties of lunar dust are incompletely characterized with regard to human health. While the physical and chemical determinants of dust toxicity for materials such as asbestos, quartz, volcanic ashes and urban particulate matter have been the focus of substantial research efforts, lunar dust properties, and therefore lunar dust toxicity may differ substantially. In this contribution, past and ongoing work on dust toxicity is reviewed, and major knowledge gaps that prevent an accurate assessment of lunar dust toxicity are identified. Finally, a range of studies using ground-based, low-gravity, and in situ measurements is recommended to address the identified knowledge gaps. Because none of the curated lunar samples exist in a pristine state that preserves the surface reactive chemical aspects thought to be present on the lunar surface, studies using this material carry with them considerable uncertainty in terms of fidelity. As a consequence, in situ data on lunar dust properties will be required to provide ground truth for ground-based studies quantifying the toxicity of dust exposure and the associated health risks during future manned lunar missions.

Introduction - The current renewed interest in human exploration of the Moon is driven not only by an urge to expand the human presence to other celestial bodies, but also by genuine scientific interest. Many aspects of the origin and evolution of the Earth and the other bodies in our solar system remain unclear. The Moon is thought to hold important information about the time when our own planet was formed, and humans remain capable of much more intelligent and adaptive exploration of the Moon than even the most sophisticated robotic and remote-controlled devices (e.g., Crawford et al., 2012). Identification and retrieval of representative or exotic mineral specimens, and drilling deep into the lunar subsurface are examples of tasks for which astronauts are superior to machines. The most compelling argument for human exploration is the unique ability of humans to identify and quickly assess the unexpected, enabling real time adjustment of a pre-planned exploration strategy.

Although humans have landed on and returned from the Moon during the Apollo era, it is still a formidable challenge to secure the health and safety of astronauts during Moon missions. Challenges for future missions include long-term low- or microgravity, radiation exposure, and the maintenance of a number of life support systems during a much longer period than was the case during the Apollo flights (e.g., Cain, 2010, 2011).

One of the biggest challenges may be related to the presence of dust on the lunar surface. The ubiquity of fine dust particles on the surface of the Moon plays an important and often dual role in many aspects of human lunar exploration. On the one hand, identifying the mineralogical and chemical composition of the dust fraction of lunar soils can provide in situ geological context for both robotic and human landing sites. In addition, lunar dust may be an ideal starting material for a range of future in situ resource utilization activities on the Moon (e.g., Taylor et al., 2005), and dust is an important component of the lunar exosphere (Horanyi and Stern, 2011).

On the other hand, dust can adversely affect the performance of scientific and life-support instruments on the lunar surface. Fine dust was spread over all parts of the Apollo astronauts space suits, ending up in the habitat (Figure 1a), resulting in astronaut exposure times of several days. The Apollo astronauts reported undesirable effects affecting the skin, eyes and airways that could be related to exposure to the dust that had adhered to their space suits during their extravehicular activities, and was subsequently brought into their spacecraft (Figure 1b).

Figure 2. Steps of cell and tissue interaction with nano and micron-sized particles in the lung. When attained the alveolar space the particle may react with endogenous molecules (step 1). The particle may then be cleared out of the lung either through the mucociliary escalator (step 2) or through alveolar macrophage (AM) clearance (step 3). If reactive, AM activation will follow with release of several factors and recruitment of other immune cells (AM and polymorphonucleate cells, PMN), eventual cell death and establishment of permanent cycles of ingestion (step 4). This process produces chronic inflammation (step 5). Combined with the direct action of the particle (step 6) this will cause damage to the target cells (epithelial, endothelial). If the particle is nano-sized, it may easily escape from the lung to the pleura and to systemic circulation (step 7).

Figure 3. The role of particle and cell derived free radicals and reactive oxygen species (ROS) in cell damage, oxidative stress and diseases.

Dust exposure and inhalation could have a range of toxic effects on human lunar explorers, especially if longer exposure times become the norm during future manned exploration missions. There is therefore a need to assess the risks to health. The physical and chemical determinants of dust toxicity for terrestrial materials such as asbestos, quartz, volcanic ashes and urban particulate matter have been studied in great detail, and lunar dust simulant (synthesized from terrestrial volcanic material) has been found to exhibit toxic effects (Lam et al., 2002; Latch et al., 2008; Loftus et al., 2010). Unique features of actual lunar dust (described in more detail in section 3), resulting from its formation by (micro)meteoroid impacts and its extended radiation exposure in the absence of oxygen and humidity, could lead to toxic effects significantly exceeding those of simulants made from Earth materials. At present, the formation, composition and physical properties of lunar dust remain incompletely characterized with regard to human health.

In a micro-/hypo-gravity environment the risk of inhalation of dust is increased due to reduced gravity-induced sedimentation. Inhaled particles tend to deposit more peripherally and thus may be retained in the lungs for longer periods in reduced gravity as will be the case in a future lunar habitat (Darquenne and Prisk, 2008; Peterson et al., 2008). Inhalation of particles of varying size may affect the respiratory and cardiovascular systems in deleterious ways leading to airway inflammation and increased respiratory and cardiovascular morbidity (Frampton et al., 2006; Sundblad et al., 2002).

In this contribution, we review our knowledge of the physical chemistry determinants of dust toxicity, of the composition and size of lunar dust, and all aspects related to its toxicity. We identify a number of knowledge gaps that need to be filled to constrain the required extent of mitigation activities protecting astronauts from the potentially toxic effects of lunar dust during and after a stay on the Moon. We also recommend a range of future studies using ground-based, low-gravity, and in situ measurements on the lunar surface to better constrain lunar dust toxicity.

arXiv:1206.6328 (v.1)
62 pg. (PDF)

Failure to Launch, Failure to Lead

President George H. W. Bush (1989-1993), flanked by First Lade Barbara Bush and Dr. Neil Armstrong on his right with Vice President (and head of the National Space Council Dan Quayle) with Apollo 11 command module pilot Michael Collins on his left, celebrates the 20th anniversary of the first manned landing on the Moon, July 20, 1989. The president announced the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI), the first major presidential initiative beyond Earth orbit, and successor to the Space Shuttle, since 1961.

Paul D. Spudis
The Once and Future Moon
Smithsonian Air & Space

In the aftermath of a major Space Shuttle accident, an incumbent President decides that our civil space program needs a bold new strategic direction.  In a major public speech, he outlines a path to return to the Moon and go to Mars.  The space agency responds with full-color sales brochures, committee meetings, community workshops, and a thousand charts outlining the steps they will take to carry out the new direction.  A couple of years pass, a new President takes office, and then – promptly cancels the initiative of the previous administration.

Sound familiar?  This has happened in our space history – twice.

President Bush, with Vice President Quayle, join the crew of Apollo 11
by the unused Lunar Module, now an exhibit at the National Air and
Space Museum, July 20, 1989.

In 1989, after much agency soul-searching following the loss of seven crew members aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger, President George H. W. Bush took to the steps of the National Air and Space Museum and announced what was soon dubbed the “Space Exploration Initiative," (SEI) a long-range program to send people beyond low Earth orbit, first to the Moon and then to Mars.  NASA responded to this challenge by outlining an architecture imaginatively named the “90-Day Study.”  It called for the development of new launch vehicles, new modules, transfer spacecraft and numerous robotic elements, including lunar and martian orbiters and landers (most of them extensions of existing hardware and designs).  Financial analysts somehow arrived at an aggregate cost of $600 billion (which also included assembly of ISS) and everyone gasped.

After numerous politicians and bureaucrats scoffed disapproval, a special ad hoc group was convened to re-examine the objectives and devise a less expensive approach for implementing SEI.  Their report was delivered and immediately put on the shelf.  In the ensuing three years, a new NASA Administrator was named, Congress refused to increase the NASA budget, and President Clinton cancelled SEI.

In 2003, the Space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated during re-entry, killing its crew of seven.  The agency investigated and concluded that foam shed during launch destroyed the integrity of the vehicle’s thermal protection system, causing the loss of the Shuttle.  In January of the following year, President George W. Bush announced a new strategic direction for space – the “Vision for Space Exploration," (VSE) a long-range program to send people beyond low Earth orbit – first to the Moon and then to Mars.  NASA responded to this challenge by outlining an architecture to implement the new direction that called for the development of new launch vehicles, new modules, transfer spacecraft, and numerous robotic elements (including orbiters and landers for both the Moon and Mars – most of them extensions of existing hardware and designs).

President George W. Bush (2001-2009), following the release of the official investigation into the causes of the Columbia accident, announces the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) at NASA Headquarters in Washington in 2004.

Once again a committee was convened to examine the agency’s implementation of the new direction.  Another report was written and put on a shelf.  During numerous meetings and workshops spread over several years, an architecture emerged – accompanied by many charts (all electronic this time – technology marches on!). President Obama terminated the VSE in April, 2010 during a speech at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (“We choose NOT to go to the Moon!” – the historical resonances astound!).

What, if anything, is to be learned from these two sequences of events?  According to Mark Albrecht, Executive Secretary of the National Space Council in the Bush-41 White House, it means that the space agency is fundamentally broken – comprised of various constituencies that protect turf and resist implementing any new direction that may challenge or threaten their existence.  However, there is another possible reading of the situation.  The space agency was in a very different predicament during SEI than it was during the VSE.  In 1990, NASA had a clear but unfulfilled mission – Space Station Freedom, for which not a single element had yet been launched.  NASA’s anxiety at the time was uncertainty in being able to execute both Station and SEI simultaneously.  The oft-quoted 30-year, $600 billion cost of SEI, repeated by the media to denigrate the effort, included construction and operation of Station, which was to serve as both an orbital platform for missions beyond LEO and as a source of hardware (e.g., habitation modules) that could be adapted to trans-LEO missions.  Even so, most of the costing assumptions in the 90-Day Study were inflated beyond reason, presumably following in the footsteps of former NASA Administrator James Webb, who after reportedly being told that Apollo would cost about $20 billion, asked for more than $35 billion as a cushion.

In contrast, the VSE came along just as NASA was in the middle of ISS construction, with the program’s end clearly in sight.  There was no future plan for human spaceflight beyond Shuttle/ISS and the agency sorely needed some high-level direction.  The idea of Shuttle replacement came from the Columbia Accident Investigations Board report, which contended that the Shuttle system was inherently dangerous and that we ought to develop a new space transportation system as soon as possible.  In contrast to uninformed reporting and Internet mythology, President Bush did not “retire” the Shuttle – he ordered that it first be brought back to flight status (so that ISS construction could be completed) and then transitioned and replaced with new human spacecraft capable of journeys beyond LEO (which became the now-cancelled Project Constellation).  In contrast to SEI, the VSE came to NASA with price limits already in place – after a small incremental increase in the early years, it was to cost no more than we were then spending on human spaceflight (about $8 billion per year) with funding available from the gradual decline in spending on the Shuttle/Station program.  Finally, unlike SEI, which never had much Congressional support, NASA was given two Authorization bills (in 2005 and 2008) that strongly endorsed the VSE (many VSE goals, though ignored, remain in the current 2010 Authorization).

President Barack Obama (2009- ) joins Buzz Aldrin, Michael
Collins and Dr. Neil Armstrong at the White House to mark the
40th Anniversary of Apollo 11, July 20, 2009 [White House].

Although neither SEI nor the VSE succeeded in their principal objectives of sending people beyond low Earth orbit, they did manage to greatly advance our understanding of just what is at stake.  In the case of the former, a variety of people from the defense and civil space sectors worked together on SEI, creating networks that advanced an outbound agenda.  One accomplishment was the Clementine mission, a joint effort by the Department of Defense’s Strategic Defense Initiative Organization and NASA.  Flying in 1994, Clementine successfully mapped the entire Moon in eleven spectral bands, mapping its mineral composition in detail.  Clementine made the first global topographic map of that body and most significantly, found evidence for the presence of water ice in the dark areas near the south pole of the Moon.  The success of Clementine led to the Lunar Prospector mission, a robotic orbiter flown under NASA’s Discovery program, that both confirmed the excess hydrogen at the poles of the Moon and globally mapped the Moon’s chemical composition.

The intriguing results from Clementine and Lunar Prospector resulted in an international fleet of six spacecraft being sent to the Moon in the past decade, adding to our knowledge of the processes, history and potential utility of that body.  From this exploration, we now know that the Moon contains millions of tons of harvestable water.  We possess detailed maps of lunar physical and compositional properties.  In short, we now know that the Moon is habitable and is both an appropriate near-term destination for people and a unique enabling asset for future spaceflight within and beyond the Earth-Moon system.

Now, just as we find the Moon to be an attractive destination, we shrink away from the challenge, watching as others blaze trails we once traveled.  We willingly accept the pablum to not fret over new space powers who do not cancel their programs.  We are told they have not yet done all that we have and that we still carry the mantle of the world’s leading space power.  This is not logical. Similar thoughts once prevailed in Portugal, during an earlier age of exploration.  One doesn’t assume or retain the mantle of leadership by fiat or declaration – it must be earned and exercised.  Perhaps the real issue is not whether NASA is up to the task but rather, whether we as Americans are blind to the truth, unable to recognize that by having our nation withdraw from this arena, that we are retreating from our position, thereby ceding our prosperity, leadership and greatness to other nations who do have the will and the vision to press forward.

Originally published at his Smithsonian Air & Space blog The Once and Future Moon, Dr. Spudis is a senior staff scientist at the Lunar and Planetary Institute. The opinions expressed are those of the author and are better informed than average.

Farside offers radio-quiet to probe cosmic Dark Age

Dark Ages Radio Explorer (DARE), utilizing the radio-quiet of the lunar farside to explore the earliest period on the cosmic time line, 200 million years between the primordial Big Bang and the emergence of the earliest luminous sources and the structure of the present universe. "The lunar Farside is potentially the only site in the inner solar system for high precision radio cosmology.” [NLSI].

Anil Ananthaswamy
New Scientist
 
FORTY years after NASA ditched the idea of landing Apollo 17 on the far side of the moon, the forbidden fruit is being sought once again. Not by astronauts this time, but by astronomers seeking a quiet spot from which to observe the universe's "dark ages".

This was an epoch in the development of the cosmos, which lasted for a few hundred million years after the big bang, before stars and galaxies began to form. The only way to observe the dark ages is to look for faint radio signals from neutral hydrogen - single protons orbited by single electrons - which filled the early universe.

Telescopes on Earth, such as the Murchison Widefield Array in Western Australia, are searching for such signals, at frequencies above 100 megahertz. This can probe the universe back to 400 million years after the big bang.

To explore even earlier times, telescopes need to receive radio waves at frequencies below 100 megahertz. Interference from radio sources on Earth such as FM radio and the planet's ionosphere can mess up these signals. "You get to the point where the ionosphere is just a hopeless barrier," says Dayton Jones of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California. "You have got to go to space, and the most promising location by far is the far side of the moon."

To peer back to the universe's earliest years will need sensitive telescopes in a place where Earth's ionosphere and radio chatter cannot interfere

This is why astronomers were discussing it at an American Astronomical Society meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, this month. Telescopes behind the moon would not have to contend with Earth's ionosphere, and they would also be shielded from our planet's radio chatter. "It is a very pristine environment for low-frequency observation," says Jones.

The first shot at radio astronomy from the moon's far side will probably be a mission called the Dark Ages Radio Explorer, being designed by Jack Burns at the University of Colorado at Boulder, and colleagues.

If selected as a mission by NASA in its review next year, DARE will orbit the moon at an altitude of 200 kilometers. It will collect neutral-hydrogen signals between 40 and 120 megahertz. That corresponds to 80 million to 420 million years after the big bang. Its antenna is designed to pick up signals from the entire sky. The craft will be a little toughie, with parts made from an Astroquartz/Kevlar fibre, which is very thermally stable - particularly handy when moving in and out of sunlight as it orbits the moon.

The DARE team has begun testing the probe's antenna at remote locations on Earth, starting with the National Radio Quiet Zone surrounding the Green Bank telescope in West Virginia. "It may be a radio quiet zone, but it's not quite," says DARE team member Abhirup Datta. "You can still see the FM bands coming in, and of course the ionosphere is a problem."

Not everyone reckons a space-based solution is needed to study the universe's dark ages. "Existing ground-based experiments will yield good progress on this problem at a tiny fraction of the cost of a space mission," says Steven Tingay of Curtin University in Bentley, Western Australia, who headed the construction of the Murchison array.

Burns disagrees. Preliminary tests reveal that the Earth's ionosphere is absorbing signals from space and re-emitting them as noise in frequencies below 80 megahertz. "If we can verify and characterize that, that slams the lid on any attempts to do this kind of experiment from the ground," says Burns.

Once DARE has done its job, his team want to deploy bigger telescopes on the lunar far side to image the first stars and galaxies. These antennas would be made of conducting material imprinted on extremely lightweight films of polyamide, micrometers thick.

In one design, three 100-metre-long arms of such films are attached to a central box of electronics. The arms would be rolled up tight for launch and, once on the moon, a rover sent along with the unit will move it to its required spot and help unfurl the arms. The rover would likely have to be controlled by astronauts orbiting a Lagrange point over the lunar far side.

To test this scenario, Burns's team will work with astronauts based on the International Space Station next year. The astronauts will remotely operate a Mars rover called K-10. It is being outfitted to unwind films of polyamide on a simulated Martian landscape at NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California.

HDTV still of Tsiolkovskiy, captured by Japan's lunar orbiter SELENE-1 ("Kaguya," 2007-2009). The Naval Research Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and  others are refining work on a possible radio telescope array to be deployed in the conspicuous farside crater floor to utilize the radio quiet of the the Moon's farside to probe the cosmic Dark Age [JAXA/NHK/SELENE].

"The ultimate experiment we'd like to do for cosmology on the far side would involve thousands of these antennas," says Burns.

But what if the basic idea proves unfeasible, in terms of cost or in overcoming obstacles in the terrain? At JPL, Jones and his team are working on another solution: rolled-up antennas that inflate like party blowers seconds before they touch the lunar surface. "They are essentially immune to whatever irregularities there are at the surface," says Jones.

Astronomers have their sights set on at least one site for such telescopes: the flat bed of the 180-kilometre-wide Tsiolkovskiy crater, exactly where the Apollo 17 astronauts first wanted to land.

Related Posts:

The Moon as a platform for Astrophysics (April 24, 2012)
MIT to lead development of new radio telescope
array on lunar farside (February 19, 2008)
Naval Research Laboratory to design Farside DALI (March 11, 2008)
What better view? (March 26, 2008)
New model of lunar motion from Apollo LLRR (December 27, 2008)
MacDonald LLR defunded by NSF (June 21, 2009)
The continued importance of lunar laser ranging (August 3, 2009)
Laser Ranging and the LRO (August 12, 2009)
Dust accumulation on Apollo laser reflectors may
indicate a surprisingly fast and more dynamic
lunar exosphere (February 16, 2010)
Long term degradation of optics on the Moon (March 4, 2010)
A Fundamental Point on the Moon (April 13, 2010)
Acquisition Lunokhod-1 (April 27, 2010)

For Google, getting to space is not out of this world

Tiffany V.C. Montague, manages space initiatives for Google and its interests in the Google Lunar X Prize  [Aram Boghosian / The Boston Globe].

Tiffany V.C. Montague manages Google Inc.’s space initiatives and its Lunar X Prize, the company’s competition that will award $30 million in prizes to teams that successfully land and operate a robot on the moon. Before joining Google, Montague, 36, was an Air Force officer and worked as a flight test engineer at the Air Force Research Laboratory in Albuquerque. She spoke recently with Globe reporter Michael Farrell while in town to talk with Boston University students about space.

Why is Google so interested in space?


Google likes to take big bets. We are a company of technologists and space enthusiasts. It’s not surprising to me that we would be involved in space as much as we’re involved in any other game-changing technology, like self-driving cars.

What’s so exciting about space?

Are you kidding me? When I was a kid growing up in England my view of the future was that we would all have jet packs and hover cars and we would be vacationing on the moon. It’s 2012. I don’t have a jet pack, I don’t have a hover car, I can’t vacation on the moon, and I feel gypped about that.

I’ve never been there, but the moon doesn’t look like a very nice place to visit.

It is a fantastic place for a human outpost. The moon is a very attractive place because it’s outside the earth’s gravity well and there are resources that we can use. It’s part of this whole idea of frontierism that we should be pushing outward from what we know, and then find a way to push out even farther.

Read the full article, HERE.

Apollo engineer's four decades on New Frontier

Dan Dipaolo
Daily American
 
Davidsville, Pennsylvania native Lee Wible Jr., 67, spent more than four decades in the country’s space program often training astronauts or in mission control during Apollo missions to the moon.

When astronauts stepped safely outside their spacecraft to conduct scientific tests, collect rock samples or to just generally push the limits of human exploration, it was thanks in part to engineering work Wible had done on their portable life support systems (PLSS.)

“Some of those EVAs (extra-vehicular activities) were in excess of seven hours,” he said. “That was pushing right to the bitter end. That was the whole thing — exploration,” he said.

During some of the later moon missions in the early 1970s (Apollo 14-17), Wible was often one of the engineers in the back room of mission control in Houston, Texas, talking with the astronauts while they walked the moon or rode the Lunar Rover to various geological formations.

"I had a damn good life," - Lee Wible, Jr.

A team of six men — often armed only with stacks of paper, pens and slide rules — would be sitting in the mission control room nearly 239,000 miles away from an astronaut eyeing up an interesting rock formation or meteorite crater.

They were responsible for monitoring every movement an astronaut made outside the spacecraft.

Other groups of flight controllers were responsible for almost every conceivable stage of the mission — from lift-off of the massive Saturn V rocket to landing on the moon in the lunar module.

“They’d have to ask permission to go over and we’d go to work figuring if they could get there and back,” he said.

The controllers would radio back to the astronaut that he either had enough consumables (air, water and power) to get to the formation and back to the lunar module or not.

His position’s radio call sign was often EVA-2 or EVA-COM (for consumables.)

“There was no margin for error,” he said. “It was like biting your fingernails for 24 hours.”

Read the full article, HERE.