Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Evolution of Apollo 11 landing site map designs

10.12 from the Lunar Sourcebook by G.H. Heiken, D.T. Vaniman, and B.M. French, editors, copyright 1991 by Cambridge University Press, and is reproduced with permission. It is dervied from the 1978 air-brush map of the Defence Mapping Agency and the US Geological Survey. 

5 November 2011 LROC image taken from 25-km altitude

Landing site map visualization: SIMPLE AND EFFECTIVE. Diagram based on the Apollo 11, 12, and 14 Traverses map prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey and published by the Defense Mapping Agency for NASA.

This is science (?) Spatially correct, But overcomplicated. Apollo 11 Landing Site Map compiled by G. Schaber, R. Batson, and T. Hait, August 1969 that was presented to President Richard Nixon; USGS photograph P854c, F27042. USGS Open-File Report 2005-1190, Figure 064. - ID. Project Apollo (1960-1973) 064 - pap00064 - U.S. Geological Survey

Same as above, with more annotation. Traverse Map, Figure 3-16 from the Apollo 11 Preliminary Science Report

Welcome to 21st-century infographics! Thomas Schwagmeier has re-drafted a high-resolution version.

Now this is art. At the suggestion of Joe O’Dea, Thomas Schwagmeier has created an overlay of his Apollo 11 traverse diagram on a football (soccer) pitch. Spatially correct, not less complicated and still visually effective (but not very scientific). Size context is given, Lunar context is lost, however. So this may be more art than science. Designed for international audience.
Oops... Americans don't know how large a football field is... so there is a need for a localized version for the American audience. The same problem arises when spacecraft images are compared to coutry/state contours. 
Thomas Schwagmeier used a detail from the 5 November 2011 LROC image taken from 25-km altitude to revise his Apollo 11 traverse diagram overlayed on a baseball diamond, based on a suggestion by Eric Jones. Lunar context is now back but all annotation has disappeared.

So, nothing is good for me, but from these figures, a good one could be combined.


No comments:

Post a Comment