3rd party evidence of Apollo 15 landing site?

[HeadLikeARock]

I was comparing the JAXA Selene images of the Apollo 15 landing site with the latest ones taken from the LRO, and was stunned to see what looks to me like Apollo features that are comparable between the 2 images. When I first saw the Selene image I couldn't really make out what might be visible, but when you compare it to the much clearer LRO images (taken from 25km), it looks to me as if you can indeed make out the darkened area around the LM, the astronaut activity around the ALSEP site, and the astronaut footfall from the LM to the ALSEP site.

Jaxa image can be found here:- http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2008/05/img/20080520_kaguya_03l.jpg

Latest LROC Apollo 15 image can be browsed to from here:- http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/index.php?/archives/2012/03/05.html

I've kept the Selene image on the LHS in its native resolution, and scaled down the LROC image on the RHS to approximate the same scale.



Thoughts?

[ChrLz]

well.. I gotta say I'm struggling a bit with the alignment due to the different lighting..  I'd love to have a go at replicating it and try overlaying the images to get a more convincing match, but..  your lroc link seems to only go to the cropped version, not the one you have used for the comparison.

I then took a look at the LROC image search function, and after discovering that searching for the exact image number (eg M175252641L) gave me a 'too many' error result of over 400,000 references  ...  I mentally said a few swearwords about NASA's incomprehensible-to-amateurs website designers and gave up..

If you'd like to help a terminally lazy person with a link to the *actual* lroc image/s you used, feel free..

[HeadLikeARock]

well.. I gotta say I'm struggling a bit with the alignment due to the different lighting..  I'd love to have a go at replicating it and try overlaying the images to get a more convincing match, but..  your lroc link seems to only go to the cropped version, not the one you have used for the comparison.

The lighting does make it a little difficult, as the two images are lit from different directions. I've overlaid the two images in Paint.net and flipped between the two layers and the areas I've highlighted match up well, in addition to the more easily identifiable craters.

I then took a look at the LROC image search function, and after discovering that searching for the exact image number (eg M175252641L) gave me a 'too many' error result of over 400,000 references  ...  I mentally said a few swearwords about NASA's incomprehensible-to-amateurs website designers and gave up..

If you'd like to help a terminally lazy person with a link to the *actual* lroc image/s you used, feel free..

The LROC search facility is clunky to say the least!

Here's the actual image. The LM is slap bang in the middle (horizontally), and about a third of the way up from the bottom.

http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse/view/M175252641

[ChrLz]

Here's the actual image...

That's the one - you are most kind!!  I don't have the time to play just now, but will return as soon as life permits..

[ka9q]

The LROC search facility is clunky to say the least!

Any chance of overlaying a more usable index? The file names do have some sort of meaning, right? Or is it only mission time?

[HeadLikeARock]

From what I can tell (and I may ba totally wrong here), the files are just numbered sequentially. The best way I know of to search for, say, Apollo site images, is to enter the known co-ordinates of Apollo sites (Wiki will do) into the search facility here:- http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc/search