Difference between revisions of "Talk:List of Unmanned Sites"
(IAU standard) |
(Undo revision 114407 by 31.184.238.249 (talk) remove vandalism) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
[[User:Cfrjlr|Charles F. Radley]] 06:56, 15 January 2007 (PST) | [[User:Cfrjlr|Charles F. Radley]] 06:56, 15 January 2007 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :The person who could best counterargue with you is Bryce Walden, who was one of the authors of a paper on what's wrong with the Mean Earth coordinate system, what it will take to replace it, and what is possibly the best system with which to replace it. I'd scrounge up the bookmark, but right now my files are spread across two machines, three partitions, and not a few things are not accounted for and may have been accidentally left behind when my previous notebook drive was wiped. -- [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]] 07:44, 15 January 2007 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :found my bookmarks, finally: http://www.oregonl5.org/l5sr02e.html -- Mare Orientale Prime Meridian article -- [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]] 08:21, 15 January 2007 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | James, I am well aware of the ideas being promoted by Bryce and co in Oregon. I have discussed his approach with a member of the relevant IAU committee, who has advised me that the idea has no traction and will not get anywhere. I recommend we do not spend any further time on it. the IAU standard is the de-facto standard. It might have problems, but it is the best we have, and is not likely to ever be changed. If Lunarpedia ignores the IAU standard it will create confusion and damage our credibility in the wider scientific community. | ||
| + | [[User:Cfrjlr|Charles F. Radley]] 11:51, 15 January 2007 (PST) | ||
Latest revision as of 04:49, 22 August 2016
Are these Mean Earth landing coordinates? Can we make room for Mare Orientale coordinates as well, or is it best to keep in one or the other (and prior consensus has been to use Mare Orientale coordinates)? We should probably have an article or two on coordinate systems... -- Strangelv 05:01, 15 January 2007 (PST)
Coordinates are given per the IAU standard. I do not recommend using different coordinate systems. Charles F. Radley 06:34, 15 January 2007 (PST)
good link
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar_resources/imagery.shtml Charles F. Radley 06:36, 15 January 2007 (PST)
This is the generally accepted standard which should be used:
IAU Mean Earth Polar Axis coordinate system, from the transformed Defense Mapping Agency 603 (DMA/603) lunar cartographic control network as described in Davies et al., J. Geophys. Res., v. 92, pp. 14177-14184, 1987.
Charles F. Radley 06:56, 15 January 2007 (PST)
- The person who could best counterargue with you is Bryce Walden, who was one of the authors of a paper on what's wrong with the Mean Earth coordinate system, what it will take to replace it, and what is possibly the best system with which to replace it. I'd scrounge up the bookmark, but right now my files are spread across two machines, three partitions, and not a few things are not accounted for and may have been accidentally left behind when my previous notebook drive was wiped. -- Strangelv 07:44, 15 January 2007 (PST)
- found my bookmarks, finally: http://www.oregonl5.org/l5sr02e.html -- Mare Orientale Prime Meridian article -- Strangelv 08:21, 15 January 2007 (PST)
James, I am well aware of the ideas being promoted by Bryce and co in Oregon. I have discussed his approach with a member of the relevant IAU committee, who has advised me that the idea has no traction and will not get anywhere. I recommend we do not spend any further time on it. the IAU standard is the de-facto standard. It might have problems, but it is the best we have, and is not likely to ever be changed. If Lunarpedia ignores the IAU standard it will create confusion and damage our credibility in the wider scientific community. Charles F. Radley 11:51, 15 January 2007 (PST)
