DOCSLIB.ORG

Dsc Pub Edited

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dsc Pub Edited 1965 50) just 24 kilometers from its intended target Ranger 8 point in the equatorial region of the Sea of Nation: U.S. (21) Tranquillity—an area that Apollo mission Objective(s): lunar impact planners were particularly interested in Spacecraft: Ranger-C studying. Spacecraft Mass: 366.87 kg Mission Design and Management: NASA JPL 51) Launch Vehicle: Atlas-Agena B (no. 13 / Atlas “Atlas-Centaur 5” D no. 196 / Agena B no. 6006) Nation: U.S. (22) Launch Date and Time: 17 February 1965 / Objective(s): highly elliptical orbit 17:05:00 UT Spacecraft: SD-1 Launch Site: ETR / launch complex 12 Spacecraft Mass: 951 kg Scientific Instruments: Imaging system (six TV Mission Design and Management: NASA JPL cameras) Launch Vehicle: Atlas-Centaur (AC-5 / Atlas C Results: As successful as its predecessor, no. 156D / Centaur C) Ranger 8 returned 7,137 high-resolution pho- Launch Date and Time: 2 March 1965 / tographs of the lunar surface prior to its 13:25 UT scheduled impact at 09:57:37 UT on 20 Launch Site: ETR / launch complex 36A February. Unlike Ranger 7, however, Ranger 8 Scientific Instruments: none turned on its cameras about 8 minutes earlier Results: This mission was designed to rehearse a to return pictures with resolution comparable complete Centaur upper-stage burn in support to Earth-based telescopes (for calibration and of the Surveyor lunar lander program. On a comparison purposes). Controllers attempted nominal mission, the Centaur would boost its to align the cameras along the main velocity payload on a direct-ascent trajectory to the vector (to reduce imagine smear) but aban- Moon. On this test flight, SD-1, a nonfunctional doned this maneuver to allow greater area dynamic model, would be boosted on a simu- coverage. There had also been a mysterious lated lunar transfer trajectory to a hypothetical loss of telemetry during a midcourse correc- Moon with an orbit of 167 x 926,625 kilometers. tion on 18 February that gave rise for con- During the actual launch, less than 1 second cern, although the mission was completed after liftoff, a faulty valve caused both Atlas successfully. Ranger 8 impacted at 2°43' main engines to shut down. As a result, the north latitude and 24°38' east longitude, booster fell back onto the pad and exploded. 1965 47 52) Unlike its predecessors, the cameras this time Kosmos 60 / [Luna] were aimed directly in the direction of travel Nation: USSR (30) and provided some spectacular shots as the Objective(s): lunar soft-landing spacecraft approached the lunar surface. Spacecraft: Ye-6 (no. 9) These pictures were converted for live viewing Spacecraft Mass: c. 1,470 kg on commercial TV. Best resolution was up to Mission Design and Management: OKB-1 25 centimeters just prior to impact. The space- Launch Vehicle: 8K78 (no. R103-25) craft crashed into the Moon at 14:08:20 UT on Launch Date and Time: 10 April 1965 / N/A 24 March at 12.83° south latitude and 357.63° Launch Site: NIIP-5 east longitude, about 6.5 kilometers from its Scientific Instruments: scheduled target. 1) imaging system 2) radiation detector 54) Results: Yet another Soviet attempt to soft-land no name / [Luna] a Ye-6 probe on the lunar surface ended in Nation: USSR (31) failure when the Blok L upper stage failed to Objective(s): lunar soft-landing fire for the translunar injection burn. Instead, Spacecraft: Ye-6 (no. 8) the spacecraft remained stranded in Earth Spacecraft Mass: c. 1,470 kg orbit. A later investigation indicated that Mission Design and Management: OKB-1 there had been a short circuit in an inverter Launch Vehicle: 8K78 (no. R103-26) within the I-100 guidance system of the space- Launch Date and Time: 10 April 1965 / N/A craft (which also controlled the Blok L stage) Launch Site: NIIP-5 / launch site 1 preventing engine ignition. The spacecraft’s Scientific Instruments: orbit decayed five days later. 1) imaging system 2) radiation detector 53) Results: This was the seventh consecutive Ranger 9 failure to accomplish a lunar soft-landing by Nation: U.S. (23) the Soviets. On this mission, engineers Objective(s): lunar impact redesigned the problematic I-100 guidance Spacecraft: Ranger-D system that had caused most of the previous Spacecraft Mass: 366.87 kg failures. Previously, the I-100 unit had Mission Design and Management: NASA JPL controlled both the Blok L upper stage and Launch Vehicle: Atlas-Agena B (no. 14 / Atlas the spacecraft itself. On this mission (and D no. 204 / Agena B no. 6007) subsequent Lunas), the fourth stage and Launch Date and Time: 21 March 1965 / the Ye-6 spacecraft had separate systems. 21:37:02 UT Unfortunately, this probe never reached Earth Launch Site: ETR / launch complex 12 orbit. During the launch, depressurization of a Scientific Instruments: nitrogen pipe for the liquid oxygen tank on the 1) imaging system (six TV cameras) third stage had prevented third-stage engine Results: Ranger 9 was the final Ranger mission ignition. The spacecraft broke up over the of the Block III series and closed out the pro- Pacific without reaching orbit. gram as a whole. Since both Ranger 7 and Ranger 8 had provided sufficient photographs 55) of the mare regions (potential landing sites for Luna 5 the early Apollo missions), Ranger 9 was tar- Nation: USSR (32) geted to the more geologically interesting Objective(s): lunar soft-landing Alphonsus crater in the lunar highlands, at Spacecraft: Ye-6 (no. 10) that time a possible site for recent volcanic Spacecraft Mass: 1,476 kg activity. Following a midcourse correction on Mission Design and Management: OKB-1 23 March, the spacecraft headed directly to its Launch Vehicle: 8K78M (no. U103-30) impact point. Only 20 minutes prior to impact, Launch Date and Time: 9 May 1965 / Ranger 9 began taking the first of 5,814 pic- 07:49:37 UT tures from an altitude of 2,100 kilometers. Launch Site: NIIP-5 / launch site 1 48 Deep Space Chronicle Scientific Instruments: 57) 1) imaging system Zond 3 2) radiation detector Nation: USSR (34) Results: In May 1965, Luna 5 became the first Objective(s): lunar flyby Soviet probe to head for the Moon in two Spacecraft: 3MV-4 (no. 3) years. Following the midcourse correction on Spacecraft Mass: 950 kg 10 May, the spacecraft began spinning around Mission Design and Management: OKB-1 its main axis due to a problem in a flotation Launch Vehicle: 8K78 gyroscope in the I-100 guidance system unit. A Launch Date and Time: 18 July 1965 / N/A subsequent attempt to fire the main engine Launch Site: NIIP-5 / launch site 1 failed because of ground control error, and the Scientific Instruments: engine never fired. After loss of control as a 1) imaging system result of the gyroscope problem, Luna 5 2) ultraviolet spectrograph crashed. Landing coordinates were 31° south 3) ultraviolet and infrared latitude and 8° west longitude. It was the spectrophotometer second Soviet spacecraft to land on the Moon 4) meteoroid detectors (following Luna 2 in 1959). 5) radiation sensors (cosmic rays, solar wind) 56) 6) magnetometer Luna 6 7) ion thrusters Nation: USSR (33) 8) radio telescope Objective(s): lunar soft-landing Results: This “third-generation” deep space Spacecraft: Ye-6 (no. 7) probe had originally been slated for a Mars Spacecraft Mass: 1,442 kg flyby in late 1964 but could not be prepared Mission Design and Management: OKB-1 on time. Instead, Soviet designers diverted Launch Vehicle: 8K78M (no. U103-31) the mission for a simple lunar flyby in 1965 Launch Date and Time: 8 June 1965 / 07:40 UT to test its basic systems and photograph the Launch Site: NIIP-5 / launch site 1 far side of the Moon. After a successful Scientific Instruments: translunar injection burn, Zond 3 approached 1) imaging system the Moon after only a 33-hour flight. Its 2) radiation detector imaging mission began on 20 July at a range Results: On this ninth Soviet attempt at a of 11,570 kilometers from the near side of the lunar soft-landing, the mission proceeded as Moon. The camera system used a similar planned until the major midcourse correction system to that of Luna 3, with onboard expo- late on 9 June. Although the main retro-rocket sure, development, fixing, and drying prior to engine (the S5.5A) ignited on time, it failed to scanning for transmission to Earth. In total, cut off and continued to fire until propellant the spacecraft took twenty-five visual and supply was exhausted. An investigation later three ultraviolet images during its flyby. The indicated that the problem had been due to closest approach was to 9,220 kilometers. human error; a command had been mistak- These pictures were successfully transmitted enly sent to the timer that ordered the main back to Earth on 29 July, nine days after Zond engine to shut down. Although the spacecraft 3’s lunar encounter, when it was 2.2 million was sent on a completely wrong trajectory, kilometers from Earth. Further communica- ground controllers put the spacecraft through tions sessions occurred on 23 October a series of steps to practice an actual landing, (involving photo transmissions) when Zond 3 all of which were satisfactorily accomplished. was 31.5 million kilometers from Earth. The Luna 6 passed by the Moon late on 11 June at last contact was sometime in early March a range of 161,000 kilometers and eventually 1966, when the spacecraft was 153.5 million entered heliocentric orbit. Contact was main- kilometers away. During the mission, it had tained to a distance of 600,000 kilometers photographed the unseen 30 percent of the from Earth.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Master Table of All Deep Space, Lunar, and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 Official Name Spacecraft / 1958 “Pioneer” Mass[Luna] No
    Deep Space Chronicle: Master Table of All Deep Space, Lunar, and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 Official Spacecraft / Mass Launch Date / Launch Place / Launch Vehicle / Nation / Design & Objective Outcome* Name No. Time Pad No. Organization Operation 1958 “Pioneer” Able 1 38 kg 08-17-58 / 12:18 ETR / 17A Thor-Able I / 127 U.S. AFBMD lunar orbit U [Luna] Ye-1 / 1 c. 360 kg 09-23-58 / 09:03:23 NIIP-5 / 1 Luna / B1-3 USSR OKB-1 lunar impact U Pioneer Able 2 38.3 kg 10-11-58 / 08:42:13 ETR / 17A Thor-Able I / 130 U.S. NASA / AFBMD lunar orbit U [Luna] Ye-1 / 2 c. 360 kg 10-11-58 / 23:41:58 NIIP-5 / 1 Luna / B1-4 USSR OKB-1 lunar impact U Pioneer 2 Able 3 39.6 kg 11-08-58 / 07:30 ETR / 17A Thor-Able I / 129 U.S. NASA / AFBMD lunar orbit U [Luna] Ye-1 / 3 c. 360 kg 12-04-58 / 18:18:44 NIIP-5 / 1 Luna / B1-5 USSR OKB-1 lunar impact U Pioneer 3 - 5.87 kg 12-06-58 / 05:44:52 ETR / 5 Juno II / AM-11 U.S. NASA / ABMA lunar flyby U 1959 Luna 1 Ye-1 / 4 361.3 kg 01-02-59 / 16:41:21 NIIP-5 / 1 Luna / B1-6 USSR OKB-1 lunar impact P Master Table of All Deep Space, Lunar, andPlanetary Probes1958–2000 ofAllDeepSpace,Lunar, Master Table Pioneer 4 - 6.1 kg 03-03-59 / 05:10:45 ETR / 5 Juno II / AM-14 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Low-Energy Lunar Trajectory Design
    LOW-ENERGY LUNAR TRAJECTORY DESIGN Jeffrey S. Parker and Rodney L. Anderson Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, California July 2013 ii DEEP SPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND NAVIGATION SERIES Issued by the Deep Space Communications and Navigation Systems Center of Excellence Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Joseph H. Yuen, Editor-in-Chief Published Titles in this Series Radiometric Tracking Techniques for Deep-Space Navigation Catherine L. Thornton and James S. Border Formulation for Observed and Computed Values of Deep Space Network Data Types for Navigation Theodore D. Moyer Bandwidth-Efficient Digital Modulation with Application to Deep-Space Communication Marvin K. Simon Large Antennas of the Deep Space Network William A. Imbriale Antenna Arraying Techniques in the Deep Space Network David H. Rogstad, Alexander Mileant, and Timothy T. Pham Radio Occultations Using Earth Satellites: A Wave Theory Treatment William G. Melbourne Deep Space Optical Communications Hamid Hemmati, Editor Spaceborne Antennas for Planetary Exploration William A. Imbriale, Editor Autonomous Software-Defined Radio Receivers for Deep Space Applications Jon Hamkins and Marvin K. Simon, Editors Low-Noise Systems in the Deep Space Network Macgregor S. Reid, Editor Coupled-Oscillator Based Active-Array Antennas Ronald J. Pogorzelski and Apostolos Georgiadis Low-Energy Lunar Trajectory Design Jeffrey S. Parker and Rodney L. Anderson LOW-ENERGY LUNAR TRAJECTORY DESIGN Jeffrey S. Parker and Rodney L. Anderson Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, California July 2013 iv Low-Energy Lunar Trajectory Design July 2013 Jeffrey Parker: I dedicate the majority of this book to my wife Jen, my best friend and greatest support throughout the development of this book and always.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1: Venus Missions
    Appendix 1: Venus Missions Sputnik 7 (USSR) Launch 02/04/1961 First attempted Venus atmosphere craft; upper stage failed to leave Earth orbit Venera 1 (USSR) Launch 02/12/1961 First attempted flyby; contact lost en route Mariner 1 (US) Launch 07/22/1961 Attempted flyby; launch failure Sputnik 19 (USSR) Launch 08/25/1962 Attempted flyby, stranded in Earth orbit Mariner 2 (US) Launch 08/27/1962 First successful Venus flyby Sputnik 20 (USSR) Launch 09/01/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Sputnik 21 (USSR) Launch 09/12/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Cosmos 21 (USSR) Launch 11/11/1963 Possible Venera engineering test flight or attempted flyby Venera 1964A (USSR) Launch 02/19/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Venera 1964B (USSR) Launch 03/01/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Cosmos 27 (USSR) Launch 03/27/1964 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Zond 1 (USSR) Launch 04/02/1964 Venus flyby, contact lost May 14; flyby July 14 Venera 2 (USSR) Launch 11/12/1965 Venus flyby, contact lost en route Venera 3 (USSR) Launch 11/16/1965 Venus lander, contact lost en route, first Venus impact March 1, 1966 Cosmos 96 (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Possible attempted landing, craft fragmented in Earth orbit Venera 1965A (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Flyby attempt (launch failure) Venera 4 (USSR) Launch 06/12/1967 Successful atmospheric probe, arrived at Venus 10/18/1967 Mariner 5 (US) Launch 06/14/1967 Successful flyby 10/19/1967 Cosmos 167 (USSR) Launch 06/17/1967 Attempted atmospheric probe, stranded in Earth orbit Venera 5 (USSR) Launch 01/05/1969 Returned atmospheric data for 53 min on 05/16/1969 M.
    [Show full text]
  • Spacecraft Deliberately Crashed on the Lunar Surface
    A Summary of Human History on the Moon Only One of These Footprints is Protected The narrative of human history on the Moon represents the dawn of our evolution into a spacefaring species. The landing sites - hard, soft and crewed - are the ultimate example of universal human heritage; a true memorial to human ingenuity and accomplishment. They mark humankind’s greatest technological achievements, and they are the first archaeological sites with human activity that are not on Earth. We believe our cultural heritage in outer space, including our first Moonprints, deserves to be protected the same way we protect our first bipedal footsteps in Laetoli, Tanzania. Credit: John Reader/Science Photo Library Luna 2 is the first human-made object to impact our Moon. 2 September 1959: First Human Object Impacts the Moon On 12 September 1959, a rocket launched from Earth carrying a 390 kg spacecraft headed to the Moon. Luna 2 flew through space for more than 30 hours before releasing a bright orange cloud of sodium gas which both allowed scientists to track the spacecraft and provided data on the behavior of gas in space. On 14 September 1959, Luna 2 crash-landed on the Moon, as did part of the rocket that carried the spacecraft there. These were the first items humans placed on an extraterrestrial surface. Ever. Luna 2 carried a sphere, like the one pictured here, covered with medallions stamped with the emblem of the Soviet Union and the year. When Luna 2 impacted the Moon, the sphere was ejected and the medallions were scattered across the lunar Credit: Patrick Pelletier surface where they remain, undisturbed, to this day.
    [Show full text]
  • Apollo Over the Moon: a View from Orbit (Nasa Sp-362)
    chl APOLLO OVER THE MOON: A VIEW FROM ORBIT (NASA SP-362) Chapter 1 - Introduction Harold Masursky, Farouk El-Baz, Frederick J. Doyle, and Leon J. Kosofsky [For a high resolution picture- click here] Objectives [1] Photography of the lunar surface was considered an important goal of the Apollo program by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The important objectives of Apollo photography were (1) to gather data pertaining to the topography and specific landmarks along the approach paths to the early Apollo landing sites; (2) to obtain high-resolution photographs of the landing sites and surrounding areas to plan lunar surface exploration, and to provide a basis for extrapolating the concentrated observations at the landing sites to nearby areas; and (3) to obtain photographs suitable for regional studies of the lunar geologic environment and the processes that act upon it. Through study of the photographs and all other arrays of information gathered by the Apollo and earlier lunar programs, we may develop an understanding of the evolution of the lunar crust. In this introductory chapter we describe how the Apollo photographic systems were selected and used; how the photographic mission plans were formulated and conducted; how part of the great mass of data is being analyzed and published; and, finally, we describe some of the scientific results. Historically most lunar atlases have used photointerpretive techniques to discuss the possible origins of the Moon's crust and its surface features. The ideas presented in this volume also rely on photointerpretation. However, many ideas are substantiated or expanded by information obtained from the huge arrays of supporting data gathered by Earth-based and orbital sensors, from experiments deployed on the lunar surface, and from studies made of the returned samples.
    [Show full text]
  • (Est Pub Date) Sid: Preliminary Analysis of Luna 9
    Directorate of Science and Technology [b)[1J TOP SECReT [b)[3J CONTENTS Preliminary Analysis of Luna 9 . • . TOP SBGRET ''OP 8BCRET PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF LUNA 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The success of Luna 9 in soft-landing on the moon and transmitting data back to the earth represents a significant accomplishment in the Soviet lunar ex­ ploration program. The numerous un­ successful efforts that preceded Luna 9 indicate the high priority placed on a lunar landing by the USSR. Information derived from Luna 9 is valuable to both the United States and In addition, the Soviets said that Luna 9 the Soviet Union. Luna 9 proved that made radiation measurements and found a vehicle can be successfully softlanded that the radiation level on the moon is on the moon. This in turn, may lead to well within the acceptable limits for some optimism regarding future manned human beings. The Luna 9 payload lunar landings. appears to be of relatively simple design using subsystems of minimum com­ plexity consistent with achieving its mis­ sions. Mar 66 - 1 - TOP 8ECRET DISCUSSION Previous Launch AttemPts teries were contained inside the sphere. The station was said to be about two feet Luna 9 was the twelfth attempted lunar above the lunar surface, but it is not clear mission* in a program dating back to whether this figure refers to the diameter January 1963. Of the previous 11 at­ of the sphere or to the height ofthe photo­ tempts, four failed while in their park­ facsimile viewing device above the sur­ ing orbit, two failed during ejection from face.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitable Zone ? UE Zu Habitable Planeten Präsentation 1
    Venus Habitable Zone ? UE zu Habitable Planeten Präsentation 1. Juni 2006 Eisenkölbl, Grohs, Hren, Lendl Venus 1. Raumsonden zur Venus Überblick • Raumfahrt zur Venus – Allgemeines – Beweggründe – Technische Hintergründe • Venus – Missionen – Zeittafel und Überblick – erfolgreiche Missionen – Zukünftige Missionen Raumfahrt zur Venus Allgemeines • Venus ist der meistbesuchte Planet in unserem Sonnensystem. (~ 25 erfolgreiche Missionen von 44) • Heutige Daten der Venus sind ein Ergebnis der zahlreichen Raummissionen Raumfahrt zur Venus Beweggründe • Dichte Wolkendecke – keine Beobachtungsmöglichkeit von der Erde aus im sichtbaren Licht • Vorstellung von Leben auf Venus • Suche nach habitabler Zone • Ressourcensuche Raumfahrt zur Venus technische Hintergründe • Venus ist der Planet mit der geringsten Entfernung von der Erde – Minimum 38.2 x 106 km – Maximum 261.0 x 106 km • Sonden leisten Pionierarbeit – Erprobung von Raumsonden • Technik • Material • Bauart Raumfahrt zur Venus – Zeittafel 1 (1961-1967) 1961 Sputnik 7 - 4 February 1961 - Attempted Venus Impact Venera 1 - 12 February 1961 - Venus Flyby (Contact Lost) 1962 Mariner 1 - 22 July 1962 - Attempted Venus Flyby (Launch Failure) Sputnik 19 - 25 August 1962 - Attempted Venus Flyby Mariner 2 - 27 August 1962 - Venus Flyby Sputnik 20 - 1 September 1962 - Attempted Venus Flyby Sputnik 21 - 12 September 1962 - Attempted Venus Flyby 1963 Cosmos 21 - 11 November 1963 - Attempted Venera Test Flight? 1964 Venera 1964A - 19 February 1964 - Attempted Venus Flyby (Launch Failure) Venera 1964B
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: a Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 | Asifa
    dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 1 Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: A Chronology ofDeep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 |Asif A.Siddiqi National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA SP-2002-4524 A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 Asif A. Siddiqi NASA SP-2002-4524 Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 2 Cover photo: A montage of planetary images taken by Mariner 10, the Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter, Voyager 1, and Voyager 2, all managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Included (from top to bottom) are images of Mercury, Venus, Earth (and Moon), Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. The inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth and its Moon, and Mars) and the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) are roughly to scale to each other. NASA SP-2002-4524 Deep Space Chronicle A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 ASIF A. SIDDIQI Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 June 2002 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of External Relations NASA History Office Washington, DC 20546-0001 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Siddiqi, Asif A., 1966­ Deep space chronicle: a chronology of deep space and planetary probes, 1958-2000 / by Asif A. Siddiqi. p.cm. – (Monographs in aerospace history; no. 24) (NASA SP; 2002-4524) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Space flight—History—20th century. I. Title. II. Series. III. NASA SP; 4524 TL 790.S53 2002 629.4’1’0904—dc21 2001044012 Table of Contents Foreword by Roger D.
    [Show full text]
  • ILWS Report 137 Moon
    Returning to the Moon Heritage issues raised by the Google Lunar X Prize Dirk HR Spennemann Guy Murphy Returning to the Moon Heritage issues raised by the Google Lunar X Prize Dirk HR Spennemann Guy Murphy Albury February 2020 © 2011, revised 2020. All rights reserved by the authors. The contents of this publication are copyright in all countries subscribing to the Berne Convention. No parts of this report may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, in existence or to be invented, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without the written permission of the authors, except where permitted by law. Preferred citation of this Report Spennemann, Dirk HR & Murphy, Guy (2020). Returning to the Moon. Heritage issues raised by the Google Lunar X Prize. Institute for Land, Water and Society Report nº 137. Albury, NSW: Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University. iv, 35 pp ISBN 978-1-86-467370-8 Disclaimer The views expressed in this report are solely the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views of Charles Sturt University. Contact Associate Professor Dirk HR Spennemann, MA, PhD, MICOMOS, APF Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 789, Albury NSW 2640, Australia. email: [email protected] Spennemann & Murphy (2020) Returning to the Moon: Heritage Issues Raised by the Google Lunar X Prize Page ii CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 2 2. HUMAN ARTEFACTS ON THE MOON 3 What Have These Missions Left BehinD? 4 Impactor Missions 10 Lander Missions 11 Rover Missions 11 Sample Return Missions 11 Human Missions 11 The Lunar Environment & ImpLications for Artefact Preservation 13 Decay caused by ascent module 15 Decay by solar radiation 15 Human Interference 16 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Moon As a Laboratory for Biological Contamination Research
    The Moon As a Laboratory for Biological Contamina8on Research Jason P. Dworkin1, Daniel P. Glavin1, Mark Lupisella1, David R. Williams1, Gerhard Kminek2, and John D. Rummel3 1NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 2European Space AgenCy, Noordwijk, The Netherlands 3SETI InsQtute, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA Introduction Catalog of Lunar Artifacts Some Apollo Sites Spacecraft Landing Type Landing Date Latitude, Longitude Ref. The Moon provides a high fidelity test-bed to prepare for the Luna 2 Impact 14 September 1959 29.1 N, 0 E a Ranger 4 Impact 26 April 1962 15.5 S, 130.7 W b The microbial analysis of exploration of Mars, Europa, Enceladus, etc. Ranger 6 Impact 2 February 1964 9.39 N, 21.48 E c the Surveyor 3 camera Ranger 7 Impact 31 July 1964 10.63 S, 20.68 W c returned by Apollo 12 is Much of our knowledge of planetary protection and contamination Ranger 8 Impact 20 February 1965 2.64 N, 24.79 E c flawed. We can do better. Ranger 9 Impact 24 March 1965 12.83 S, 2.39 W c science are based on models, brief and small experiments, or Luna 5 Impact 12 May 1965 31 S, 8 W b measurements in low Earth orbit. Luna 7 Impact 7 October 1965 9 N, 49 W b Luna 8 Impact 6 December 1965 9.1 N, 63.3 W b Experiments on the Moon could be piggybacked on human Luna 9 Soft Landing 3 February 1966 7.13 N, 64.37 W b Surveyor 1 Soft Landing 2 June 1966 2.47 S, 43.34 W c exploration or use the debris from past missions to test and Luna 10 Impact Unknown (1966) Unknown d expand our current understanding to reduce the cost and/or risk Luna 11 Impact Unknown (1966) Unknown d Surveyor 2 Impact 23 September 1966 5.5 N, 12.0 W b of future missions to restricted destinations in the solar system.
    [Show full text]
  • Cartography for Lunar Exploration: 2006 Status and Planned Missions
    CARTOGRAPHY FOR LUNAR EXPLORATION: 2006 STATUS AND PLANNED MISSIONS R.L. Kirk, B.A. Archinal, L.R. Gaddis, and M.R. Rosiek U.S. Geological Survey, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, USA - [email protected] Commission IV, WG IV/7 KEY WORDS: Photogrammetry, Cartography, Geodesy, Extra-terrestrial, Exploration, Space, Moon, History, Future ABSTRACT: The initial spacecraft exploration of the Moon in the 1960s–70s yielded extensive data, primarily in the form of film and television images, that were used to produce a large number of hardcopy maps by conventional techniques. A second era of exploration, beginning in the early 1990s, has produced digital data including global multispectral imagery and altimetry, from which a new generation of digital map products tied to a rapidly evolving global control network has been made. Efforts are also underway to scan the earlier hardcopy maps for online distribution and to digitize the film images themselves so that modern processing techniques can be used to make high-resolution digital terrain models (DTMs) and image mosaics consistent with the current global control. The pace of lunar exploration is about to accelerate dramatically, with as many of seven new missions planned for the current decade. These missions, of which the most important for cartography are SMART-1 (Europe), SELENE (Japan), Chang'E-1 (China), Chandrayaan-1 (India), and Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (USA), will return a volume of data exceeding that of all previous lunar and planetary missions combined. Framing and scanner camera images, including multispectral and stereo data, hyperspectral images, synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images, and laser altimetry will all be collected, including, in most cases, multiple datasets of each type.
    [Show full text]
  • India to Pull Ahead of China with Mangalyaan's Success
    India is set to join the elite list of members after the US, Russia and Europe to have successfully launched termed successful only after the spacecraft manages to insert itself into the Mars orbit on September 21, INDIA TO PULL a spacecraft to Mars. The attempts made by Japan and China (using a Russian rocket) have failed so far. 2014. China had successfully sent two spacecraft, Chang’e 1 and Chang’e 2, into the lunar orbit and is India is banking on its most-successful PSLV rocket, which had put its first spacecraft, Chandrayaan-1, preparing to send a landing and rover mission, Chang’e 3, to the moon in December 2013. Here is a look AHEAD OF into the lunar orbit in 2008. The same rocket flew Mangalyaan on Tuesday. However, the mission will be at all the missions to Mars: LAUNCH DATE Mar 2 LAUNCH DATE Aug. 4 LAUNCH DATE June 10 COUNTRYEurope COUNTRY US CHINA WITH COUNTRYUS LAUNCH DATE May 30 MISSION GOAL Mars SPACECRAFT SPACECRAFT Rosetta SPACECRAFT Phoenix COUNTRY US orbit LAUNCH DATE Mars Exploration Rover A (Spirit) MISSION GOAL Comet MISSION GOAL Mars MANGALYAAN'S SPACECRAFT COMMENTS Aug 5 MISSION GOAL Rover landing COMMENTS Success landing COMMENTS Mariner-9 (Mariner I) Success COUNTRY Success COMMENTS Success LAUNCH DATE LAUNCH DATE Jul 18 LAUNCH DATE USSR LAUNCH DATE LAUNCH DATE LAUNCH DATE SUCCESS LAUNCH DATE Aug. 12 LAUNCH DATE Feb 25 SPACECRAFT Aug 20 Sep 9 Nov 7 LAUNCH DATE LAUNCH DATE July 7 COUNTRY USSR Dec 4 LAUNCH DATE June 2 COUNTRY US Nov.
    [Show full text]