Jack White Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 (edited) Edited to correct error in graphic. Jack Edited November 29, 2008 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 Errr - huh? In one view you are looking to the south (SSW) of the LM, and in the other you are looking to the west (WNW). Remember the directional system associated with the LM? The ladder is on the 'west' side, and the big flat panel at the back of the LM is on the 'east' side. So the views from the LM are about 90 degrees apart. So what is the problem with the images? BTW, please remember to identify what images you are using by the catalogue number. That way people can independently confirm what you are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 29, 2008 Author Share Posted November 29, 2008 (edited) Edited for error. Jack Edited November 29, 2008 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 Is there a reason that you seem reticent to give the image numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 I don't think Jack will be back to reply, so let me explain why I asked for the image numbers. The images are from different Apollo missions. The top-left image is a composite shot including AS17-147-22515 through AS17-147-22520. It shows the South Massif in the background. AS17-147-22517 The bottom image is a composite pan shot including AS15-87-11835 through to AS15-87-11839. It has Mt Hadley in the background. AS15-87-11838 I don't know why Jack would post this for amusement; it simply reinforces his track record of being sadly lacking in any skill regarding Apollo image analysis. If it was meant to be some type of joke ("amusement"), it was far too subtle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 29, 2008 Author Share Posted November 29, 2008 (edited) Graphic being reworked. Website I obtained the image from identified this photo as showing Mt. Hadley. I am checking to see whether that is correct. Jack Edited November 29, 2008 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 29, 2008 Author Share Posted November 29, 2008 Graphic being reworked. Website I obtained the image from identifiedthis photo as showing Mt. Hadley. I am checking to see whether that is correct. Jack Yes...I doubled checked my graphic and it is correct. The two different views from the landing site are mutually exclusive. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 29, 2008 Author Share Posted November 29, 2008 Graphic being reworked. Website I obtained the image from identifiedthis photo as showing Mt. Hadley. I am checking to see whether that is correct. Jack Yes...I doubled checked my graphic and it is correct. The two different views from the landing site are mutually exclusive. Jack This shows that the two views are mutually exclusive. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 (edited) And still no image numbers... ETA: BTW, like the way you have removed all evidence of your previous gross error. I think in time to come, you'll claim you never made the error. Edited November 29, 2008 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 30, 2008 Share Posted November 30, 2008 Okay, I don't expect an answer. The views are "incompatible" because they are images of different features. One is of Mt Hadley, the other (the B&W copy of a colour image, AS15-87-11832) is of Swann Range. See here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 30, 2008 Share Posted November 30, 2008 (edited) You can actually see the 'missing' portion from what Jack has chosen to show you here: http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15.1472712pan8.jpg Jack, for reasons known only to himself, has chosen to crop the image... which - if he had shown the whole image - would have easily explained the "discrepancy" that Jack "found". As per usual, Jack is wrong and demonstrates his complete lack of ability when applied towards Apollo image analysis. Edited November 30, 2008 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 (edited) Graphic being reworked. Website I obtained the image from identifiedthis photo as showing Mt. Hadley. I am checking to see whether that is correct. Jack Yes...I doubled checked my graphic and it is correct. The two different views from the landing site are mutually exclusive. Jack This shows that the two views are mutually exclusive. Jack And you start a new thread... where your mistakes aren't seen? Tsk, tsk, Jack. Edited December 1, 2008 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now