Starship Asterisk*

by **Beyond** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:30 am

Yeah, but look how small the moon is. Its not worth the trouble

And if that Astronut isn't careful, he just may stub his toe on a crater. But the good news is that WE won't hear the scream

by **BMAONE23** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:38 pm

Sam wrote:A little later...
Click to view full size image

Proof positive>>>we did land on the moon

by **Sam** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:40 pm

A little later...

: Click to view full size image

by **Coomaraswamy** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:13 pm

An alternate explanation is that the diameter of the moon is actually a lot smaller than we thought. Also that it is much closer. Given that the plane appears to be propeller-driven, the troposphere is the likely orbit. Lucky that the plane didn't crash into it!

by **hotspur** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:41 am

Thanks Chris Peterson,geckzilla and BMONE23,you are correct,I was just was slightly offended by Chrisfruits' word-coincidence.
I have spent years watching that flight go near a first quarter moon,And spent many hours preparing for that image.

Chris Peterson,I notice you have an observatory,so may be you do a bit of maths too.On the Ice in Space link,a chap named Dennis Simmons
has done some maths and made a graph and spread sheet of all the data,a few chaps have done the maths and worked out height of plane etc,etc.

According to the calculations,the 250th speed I used,as I captured the plane,the plane travel .69 metres, So yes I made a mistake in my previous post.

The spread sheets and data there is quite impressive,Dennis has even done a graphic diagram,well worth a look by everyone.One figure is quite amazing,
apparently-had my observatory been 40 metres either side of where it was,the plane would not be in centre,The chaps who have done the maths said they are open for correction.But so far it appears to be correct.They used some different methods of calculation-but the answers always seem about the same.

Yes,I do have another image I will submit to APOD one day,its a green comet at night,with airplane going right 'through' it,its wing lights 'frame' the comet.

Yes,most people left a very good comment,Sam's was amazing!

Thanks,Chris

by **BMAONE23** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 5:46 am

Hotspur(chris),
Don't allow fruityChris to deter you from taking wonderful images or submitting future images to APOD. Like others have said, there are very few detractors (in fact only a couple of posters have expressed negatively toward your APOD) The vast majority of APODers have defended your work and tried tirelessly to educate those few FlatEarther Conspircy theorists. Unfortunately, no matter how hard you bang a flat earther head against the wall, there is never anything inside to rattle into place.

Keep taking great pictures and don't be fearful of the neagtively vocal minority. Not much substance in their arguements.

by **geckzilla** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 5:18 am

Man, I missed a lot being stuck in jury duty (for 20 days!)

This photo is truly amazing and I'm afraid many simply do not have the knowledge required to comprehend how difficult it must have been to capture, Chris (oh, there are two Chrises now)
Echoing the other Chris, definitely don't let a few ignorant naysayers get to you. No accomplishment is ever universally accepted on the internet.

by **Chris Peterson** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 5:09 am

hotspur wrote:BTW.in the image I took the plane appears slightly blurry,that is because it has traveled 65 metres in the time the photo was been taken.

Don't you mean 0.65 meters?

I do not think I will be in a hurry to submit another image to APOD again.

Why? There were only a handful of doubters, and I can assure you that nobody that matters was taking them seriously. Many tricky-to-capture or otherwise unusual images on APOD have attracted this sort over the years. Don't sweat it.

by **hotspur** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 5:02 am

Final piece if information for the 'flat earther's' like Chrisfruit.

The plane in 'moon/plane' APOD 29-9-10 is a QANTAS LINK AIRWAYS Bombardier Dash 8 Q 400.

Registration VH-QOV flight number 2406 flight from Brisbane to Emerald (Queensland) left Brisbane at 5.12 pm

The image I took was taken at 5.24.37 pm.The distance from my observatory to BNE airport is approx 120 kms.

The plane travels at approx 600 KM/H.so by doing a 'time to time' calculation.all assumed data I have given is shown to be correct.

BTW.in the image I took the plane appears slightly blurry,that is because it has traveled 65 metres in the time the photo was been taken.

Like Owlice said "got a firm grasp on those straws",Chrisfruit?

Also the date I took image was 16-9-10,that is one day after first quarter.Hope this finally puts the 'conspiracy' theory to bed.

Finally;I'd just like to add,for a image that is one frame,that has had so little PP,I find it ironic to accused as a cheat.Considering some

of the images here,which have had a great deal of PP,they get the all clear.

I do not think I will be in a hurry to submit another image to APOD again.

Chris

by **Ester** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 5:50 pm

It's an amazing image!
and certainly not the first APOD to have it's authenticity questioned.
While I agree that NASA (and others) would be nearly impossible to fool, there is a lot of talent and craftiness out there that might enjoy the challenge.
Any speculation concerning it's origin somehow helps (in my mind) to affirm the APOD's magnificence!

by **hotspur** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 5:00 am

Chrisfruit,you obviously have NOT read the thread or gone to the links,I keep putting up.

Fr your information the Canon 450D was attached to a Vixen 103ED Refractor F 7.7 which was on a Vixen GP mount driven

by a Vixen Skysensor 2000PC(all made in Japan similar quality to Takahashia),you really need to read some of the latest posts of the IIS link.

Mate,it appears to me you have a case of S.O.L-(Australian saying),go google that after you have had a READ of the IIS link.

There is plenty of information there for the 'flat earthers' like yourself.The Fight number from Qantas has been added,the rego on the wing VH-QOV has been confrimed by C.A.S.A.I would like to draw your attention to the diagrams and spred sheets of calculations from the assumed data from the site. By Mr Dennis Simmons-These are really worth a look by everyone.

If there is any doubt,it only takes a few minutes to read the latest post in IIS the link is on one of previous posts in this thread.Also There is a RAW file along with the JPEG.

Do you really think a amateur astronomer can fool NASA.CASA and NTSB Chrisfruit?

I hope this extra informations clears up any doubts.
Cheers Chris

I

by **chrisfruit** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 11:51 pm

So a "Astro-Physics 155EDF f/7 refractor and an SBIG ST10XME CCD camera equipped with an Astrodon 6nm H-Alpha filter"
can take the same quality image as a "Canon 450D at 1/250s, set on ISO200" (tomas's)?

But I guess people can just stick to how its a real fine coincidence then!

by **Beyond** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 11:26 pm

Exactly!, chris. That is why you can't just compare a quarter moon picture to another quarter moon picture taken at some other time and say that the first quarter moon picture is wrong because the lighting is a little different. Right?

by **Chris Peterson** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:25 pm

beyond wrote:I asked about the time because if they were taken at different times of the night they would both be different.
If you take a picture of a quarter moon at moonrise, at midpoint and at moonset, you would have 3 different pictures of the moon's surface being lit.
A quarter moon is a quarter moon. However, it depends on what time of THAT night that the pictures are taken, as to how different each of them looks. So if you are trying to compare the picture of another quarter moon that was not taken at the same time of the same night that the airplane crossing was taken, it will be different - with or without the plane, because the moon itself will not be in the same quarter moon position and thus be a little more or a little less illuminated.

It doesn't matter what time an image is made, in terms of where it is in the sky. The moment of first quarter is just that- a moment. So if you take three images over a night, they will be different simply because the lunar phase is changing- not because the position of the Moon in the sky is changing. Other things that will affect how the image appears include where you are on the Earth, the current libration both in latitude and longitude, and where the Moon is in its orbit (which isn't perfectly circular). All these things make it nearly impossible to capture two identical images of the Moon at different times.

You might easily take an image one month during the day, low in the sky, and the next month at night, high in the sky, and find the images very similar. It is the position of the Moon relative to yourself and the Sun that matters, not where it is in the sky or what time it is.

by **Beyond** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:16 pm

BMAONE23 wrote:Only if they were taken at different times of the year with a 5:45pm sunset in Australia that places the image as being taken near southern hemisphere winter (before or after) But I'm not certain when the other was taken though is was taken in Ontario Canada.

I asked about the time because if they were taken at different times of the night they would both be different.
If you take a picture of a quarter moon at moonrise, at midpoint and at moonset, you would have 3 different pictures of the moon's surface being lit.
A quarter moon is a quarter moon. However, it depends on what time of THAT night that the pictures are taken, as to how different each of them looks. So if you are trying to compare the picture of another quarter moon that was not taken at the same time of the same night that the airplane crossing was taken, it will be different - with or without the plane, because the moon itself will not be in the same quarter moon position and thus be a little more or a little less illuminated.

by **BMAONE23** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 4:49 pm

Only if they were taken at different times of the year with a 5:45pm sunset in Australia that places the image as being taken near southern hemisphere winter (before or after) But I'm not certain when the other was taken though is was taken in Ontario Canada.

by **Beyond** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:43 pm

Were both those moon pictures taken at the same time of night?

by **BMAONE23** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:57 am

Yes,
A first quarter moon is a first quarter moon.
Look closely at this image

: Click to view full size image

and you will notice that the terminator line in the MARE IBRIUM meets at the crater Archimedes, and farther to the left and below the terminator lies 2 sunlit peaks whose bases lie in the shadow of night in the MARE IBRIUM
But in the APOD image

: Click to view full size image

the terminator lies slightly farther up in the image and meets more near the middle of the crater Archimedes whish isn't as brightly lit along the bottom crater rim.
And, in fact, the two sunlit peaks are not visible because the terminator hasn't progressed far enough to illuminate them.

by **owlice** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:48 am

chrisfruit, got those straws firmly grasped, hmm?

by **chrisfruit** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:31 am

Sorry folks:
http://www.skynews.ca/pages/pow_archive ... or----2221

Code: Select all

# 334 | First Quarter Moon

In the spring the angle of the ecliptic is inclined quite steeply towards the western horizon. For lunar observers and photographers, this results in a well-placed Moon in the evening sky, high above the horizon and away from our murky atmosphere which affects seeing and photos.

On March 14, Stuart Heggie of Flesherton, Ontario used his Astro-Physics 155EDF f/7 refractor and an SBIG ST10XME CCD camera equipped with an Astrodon 6nm H-Alpha filter to create this images of the Moon.

Ten images, each .12 seconds were taken and combined afterwards using Maxim DL and Photoshop.

Result: http://www.skynews.ca/pow/pow334.jpg

Unless the image was also taken from Ontario 10 times and combined, I don't know why the craters, shadings and fadings can be the entirely the same. Anyone got a clever explanation why they are the same?

by **13 Rabbit** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:52 am

I sent an email to ABC requesting the image from the football game. I suggested they ask Dandy Don and Frank Gifford about the incident. I'm sure they will jump right on this.

by **13 Rabbit** » Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:32 am

I was just about to post the same item about Monday Night Football. I saw it. I only have the image in my head.

by **Batmite** » Mon Oct 04, 2010 3:56 pm

Ii the early nineties during Monday night football, in a game being played in San Francisco, a camera was pointed at a rising full moon. When the station showed it live, for those 3-4 seconds a plane crossed in the path. Very cool indeed. Somewhere there in probably a still of it.

by **DavidLeodis** » Sun Oct 03, 2010 6:09 pm

hotspur wrote:here is link to original file (3377) http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/show ... hp?t=65931

The original JPEG file is 3377 its there for all the naysayers.

I also have a RAW file untouched on the SD card.

I can not find the 'attachment' area under 'save,submit,preview" buttons

Hope the naysayers look at the ice in space thread and original images.

Yes the plane flys over everyday at approx 5.30 pm,yes the sunset around 5.45 pm that day,Yes the camera clock was correct.

Do all APODs get such a pizzling? I would have thought people at NASA inspecting them would be good enough pass

The word "pizzling" is a new one to me. I like it.

I also like the excellent photo.

There's something particularly nice when viewing the Moon when it is between its ¾ to ¼ phases (sorry for the use of those simple layman's terms but I'm not sure of the correct phase terms without looking them up).

by **emc** » Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:48 pm

bystander wrote:
emc wrote:Sorry, not my call.
You are still the infamous Mr. Ed, don't go shapeshifting on us.

I like my nickname… it’s funny. I don’t know who came up with it but I told you it was ok.

I’m content when I’m in my “stable”. But that Moon…!

Starship Asterisk*

APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)

Re: APOD: An Airplane in Front of the Moon (2010 Sep 29)