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

[Beyond]

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?

[chrisfruit]

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!

[hotspur]

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

[Ester]

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!

[hotspur]

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

[Chris Peterson]

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.

[geckzilla]

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.

[BMAONE23]

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.

[hotspur]

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

[Coomaraswamy]

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!

[Sam]

A little later...

Click to view full size image

[BMAONE23]

A little later...

Click to view full size image

Proof positive>>>we did land on the moon

[Beyond]

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