Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

NASA has announced the time&TV coverage of Lcross impact

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Sleipnir
    Registered Users Posts: 5,514 ✭✭✭Sleipnir


    Malty_T wrote: »
    It's the moon, no atmosphere...

    There would still be a debris plume regardless.


  • Options
    #33
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    A bit of tension in some of the voices there at the last minute.


  • Options
    #34
    Chardee MacDennis
    Registered Users Posts: 9,225 ✭✭✭Chardee MacDennis


    Malty_T wrote: »
    It's the moon, no atmosphere...

    makes no difference, there should still be an impact plume


  • Options
    #35
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    Beeker wrote: »
    They are hoping for live footage from the University of Hawaii, 88-inch telescope on Mauna Kea, you could try their web site!

    yeah have some bad tilted view of screen there, don't know what im looking at

    http://dln.nasa.gov/dln/content/webcast/

    when we we see video of the dust cloud? we should have seen it straight away


  • Options
    #36
    thecommander
    Registered Users Posts: 2,537 ✭✭✭thecommander


    Malty_T wrote: »
    It's the moon, no atmosphere...

    You'll still get debris thrown up. It doesnt need air for that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    How dusty is Arizona? :p

    We'll have to wait for images from the various telescopes ranged on the crash site.


  • Options
    #38
    Scruff
    Registered Users Posts: 4,222 ✭✭✭Scruff


    Malty_T wrote: »
    It's the moon, no atmosphere...

    atmosphere has nothing to do with it. you smash things together and bits fly off, even in space :eek:


  • Options
    #39
    View Profile
    Registered Users Posts: 1,133 ✭✭✭View Profile


    Anticlimax anyone?! :confused:


  • Options
    #40
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    but i thought nasa has their other satillite looking live


  • Options
    #41
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    replay http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVyEOFfv_lo


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    le_girl
    Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭le_girl


    I think that the second camera on this page is the Hawaii telescope: http://www.mmto.org/lcross/

    I didn't see anything happen on it though.


  • Options
    #43
    lord lucan
    Registered Users Posts: 9,575 ✭✭✭lord lucan


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    but i thought nasa has their other satillite looking live

    They do but they reckon it'll be another couple of hours before the data is sent back.


  • Options
    #44
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Scruff wrote: »
    atmosphere has nothing to do with it. you smash things together and bits fly off, even in space :eek:

    Yeah but a dust plume is alot harder to see..


  • Options
    #45
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Were any space scopes looking at this?


  • Options
    #46
    Beeker
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 3,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beeker


    Might be wrong but I don't think it went quite as planned. We should have seen the dust and debris from the first impact. There was also a lot of confusion near the end "November or Mick confirm....Yes Mike". strikes me as not as smooth as it should have been.
    Disapointed but lets wait for the results!


  • Options
    #47
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users Posts: 839 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Were any space scopes looking at this?

    I read yesterday, Hubble was going to be trained on it. Could be hours/days before we get those pics though.


  • Options
    #48
    Scruff
    Registered Users Posts: 4,222 ✭✭✭Scruff


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Yeah but a dust plume is alot harder to see..

    still hasnt anything to do with atmosphere or lack of...
    They had expected that it would be visible with 10" telescopes. This doesnt seem to have been the case. If the cameras on the space craft only a couple of hundred miles and closing couldnt see the plume them there isnt any real hope for small telescoped on earth.
    Maybe some of the other onboard sesnors picked it but, will have to wait and see.


  • Options
    #49
    Beeker
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 3,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beeker


    Chap with the beard kept shaking his head, wonder did he know something was not going quite to plan????Attachments

    index.php?action=dlattach;topic=18535.0;attach=175914;image


  • Options
    #50
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Scruff wrote: »
    still hasnt anything to do with atmosphere or lack of...
    They had expected that it would be visible with 10" telescopes. This doesnt seem to have been the case. If the cameras on the space craft only a couple of hundred miles and closing couldnt see the plume them there isnt any real hope for small telescoped on earth.
    Maybe some of the other onboard sesnors picked it but, will have to wait and see.

    :o
    Apologies, I'd just thought from watching it that the dust wouldn't have been that visible, but if they were expecting it to be visible to 10", then we really should have seen something...shoudn't we??:confused:


  • Options
    #51
    Beeker
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 3,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beeker


    NASA TV sure ended the coverage very soon after the event. Interesting to see what the news conference will say later.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    goose2002
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭goose2002


    Dr Pepper wrote: »
    I read yesterday, Hubble was going to be trained on it. Could be hours/days before we get those pics though.


    As far as I know, Hubble cannot be used to observe the moon. Its image sensors are extremely sensitive, so much so that they would be damaged by the brightness of the moon from sunlight. They have to take the moon and the sun into consideration when directing it.


  • Options
    #53
    lord lucan
    Registered Users Posts: 9,575 ✭✭✭lord lucan


    News conference at 15.00,should be interesting!


  • Options
    #54
    Beeker
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 3,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beeker


    lord lucan wrote: »
    News conference at 15.00,should be interesting!
    Yeah, but lets not forget this is science and you don't always get what you think! Better to have tried and got nothing, then not to have tried at all.
    A number of things could have happened, perhaps the crater was deeper than expected and the plume did not go high enought to be see in sunlight? Moon regolith is very dark afterall and may not have reflected.

    Lets wait for the data!


  • Options
    #55
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    wasn't the indian satillite supposed to have been looking at it but that broke, japanese sat finished too?


  • Options
    #56
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    joining the stream it wasn't very clear what was happening, i never heard it say now the probe has hit...


  • Options
    #57
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users Posts: 839 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    goose2002 wrote: »
    As far as I know, Hubble cannot be used to observe the moon. Its image sensors are extremely sensitive, so much so that they would be damaged by the brightness of the moon from sunlight. They have to take the moon and the sun into consideration when directing it.

    That's interesting. Never knew that before. You'd expect the Sun to be a no-go area for Hubble alright but I thought the moon would be safe enough.

    Anyway, just to prove I'm not going crazy :p, the below quote is taken from this page I read yesterday (not saying it's true necessarily though):
    Observatories expected to participate in the study include the newly refurbished Hubble Space Telescope, Hawaii's Keck and Gemini telescopes, the Magdelena Ridge and Apache Ridge observatories in New Mexico, the MMT Observatory in Arizona and the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) now circling the moon.


  • Options
    #58
    Beeker
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 3,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beeker


    Dr Pepper wrote: »
    That's interesting. Never knew that before. You'd expect the Sun to be a no-go area for Hubble alright but I thought the moon would be safe enough.

    Anyway, just to prove I'm not going crazy :p, the below quote is taken from this page I read yesterday (not saying it's true necessarily though):
    It was true before that Hubble could not view the moon because of the brightness, but new instruments on board now allow it to do so. Image below was taken by Hubble a while ago of the Taurus-Littrow Valley, the landing site of Apollo 17 in december 1972. Image below it is from Apollo 17 {Not Hubble}
    136332main5image2350.jpg


  • Options
    #59
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    1230 GMT (8:30 a.m. EDT)
    Astronomers at Palomar Observatory outside of San Diego report they saw no evidence of an impact plume through the 200-inch Hale Telescope. Outfitted with adaptive optics, the telescope has a resolution of about 180 meters per pixel, according to Scott Kardel, the observatory's public information coordinator.


  • Options
    #60
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users Posts: 839 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    1230 GMT (8:30 a.m. EDT)
    Astronomers at Palomar Observatory outside of San Diego report they saw no evidence of an impact plume through the 200-inch Hale Telescope. Outfitted with adaptive optics, the telescope has a resolution of about 180 meters per pixel, according to Scott Kardel, the observatory's public information coordinator.

    Doh! There must have been thousands of disappointed amateurs in their back yards!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    goose2002
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭goose2002


    Beeker wrote: »
    It was true before that Hubble could not view the moon because of the brightness, but new instruments on board now allow it to do so. Image below was taken by Hubble a while ago of the Taurus-Littrow Valley, the landing site of Apollo 17 in december 1972. Image below it is from Apollo 17 {Not Hubble}
    136332main5image2350.jpg


    Cool, I didn't know the upgrades allowed it to do that. Sounds excellent. Apologies for doubting you Dr Pepper. Looking forward to what may be seen in these photos then.


Advertisement