Interactive Apollo 15, 16 and 17 Maps Now Available!

Trying to better understand the geological history of the Moon was one of the top priorities for the Apollo science team. Sending astronauts to the Moon meant that rock formations could be compared with those on Earth, photographs and observations of the lunar surface could be taken, and most importantly, samples could be collected and brought back to Earth for analysis. To maximize the data and samples that the astronauts could collect in the limited time they had, areas with high geological variability were of the highest scientific value.

Unfortunately, the areas of most interest to scientists were often some distance from anywhere engineers thought they could safely land (in short, without terrain hazards). During the first few Apollo missions, the crew had to walk to wherever they wanted to observe. While taking any step on the moon was, as Armstrong put it, “One giant leap for mankind” Many people don’t know how rare Compared to later Apollo missions, the first astronauts didn’t actually take many steps. Aldrin and Armstrong never ventured more than a tenth of a mile (about 650 feet) from the Eagle. However, for Apollo 15, 16, and 17, the USGS’s beloved Grover (Geological Lunar Rover) Astronauts were mobilized as never before. This meant that the astronauts could go further and visit more geologically complex sites than on previous missions. With the number of accessible, safe and geologically interesting landing zones greatly increased, the mission team decided to send the last three missions to Rima Hadley, Descartes and Taurus-Littrow, respectively.

The Apollo 11 traverse (upper left) came within about 1/10 of a mile of the lunar module. The Apollo 17 traverse (base image), on the other hand, flew 22.2 miles at Grover. This map illustrates the difference in scale between the two missions. Photo credit: NASA/GFSC/ASU, USGS Astrogeology

Check out a timeline of all of NASA’s Apollo missions here!

When astronauts get their hands dirty On-site trainingUSGS mappers began to produce a series of official USGS lunar landing site maps so that astronauts on the Moon would have a sort of scientific roadmap to guide them to the areas where the most valuable and far-reaching observations could be made. The lunar landing site geologic maps prepared for these missions contained not just one, but two “nested” maps for each landing site. The smallest scale (largest area) map showed the broad area surrounding and including the landing site. The largest scale (smallest area) map was a zoomed-in view of the direct landing site, with more detail than the regional maps.

This image demonstrates the nesting quality of the USGS IMAP 800. An inset of a 1:50K (smaller area, larger scale) landing site map is outlined on a 1:250K (larger area, smaller scale) map of the Taurus Littrow region. Image credit: USGS Astrogeology

But why wasn’t one map enough? Couldn’t the USGS cartographers have put all the information on one map?

Let’s think about why they provide multiple maps using an Earth-based example. Imagine you’re driving to an amusement park on vacation, and you can only get there using a paper map. All you know is that the park is located in “Fun City” and that “Fun City” is located in “Adventure County,” but other than that, you have no idea how to get there.

To find the location of the amusement park, you’ll need to first look at a statewide map. Depending on the size of the state, a statewide map may not show the amusement park, and it certainly won’t show the city in enough detail for you to get to the amusement park. Instead, you may need to use a state map to narrow down the interstate highways that lead to Adventure County. To find the location of the amusement park, you may need a slightly larger regional map of Adventure County, and then you can determine which local highways you need to take to get to the amusement park.

Once you arrive in Fun City, the amusement park will appear on your regional map, but the roller coaster symbol takes up so much graphic space that you can’t see any of the intersections around the amusement park. To find the location of the amusement park, you’ll need a larger scale Fun City map, or you’ll have to drive around the area for hours to find it.

After finally parking at the amusement park, you look back at the welcome pack they gave you – and inside is a map of the park! Even inside the amusement park, you wish you had a map to take you to your favorite rides, your hotel, the way to the restaurant, or even just the way back to your car!

Through this example, we can see why nested maps are necessary and how different map scales can show different information. You can never use the state map to find a restaurant in the amusement park, and you can never use the detailed map of Fun City to get directions to another state. If we need Four The map was only for our simulated amusement park vacation, and it’s incredible to think that astronauts on the moon could get around with just two people. It’s easy to forget that there is no GPS on the moon!

The nesting of lunar maps at different scales was very deliberate, and not just to allow the astronauts to flip through multiple maps like we did on our fictional road trip. Detailed large-scale (small-area) maps were necessary to properly know where to land and complete short excursions. For the longer trips involved in the Apollo 15, 16, and 17 missions, the astronauts needed more context to explore beyond their immediate landing site. Regional small-scale (large-area) maps filled that need. In fact, Apollo 17 still holds the record for the longest distance traveled by a spacecraft during any type of extravehicular activity. They flew 4.7 mile Stay away from LM Challenger!

We plan for the upcoming Artemis The landing site and mapping issues facing the Apollo science team are as prominent as they were 50 years ago. Artemis III will land in an area of ​​great geological interest and variation, where water ice deposits may exist. Due to their proximity to the lunar south pole, potential Artemis landing sites present a number of challenges, including high-angle shadows and extremely variable temperature and lighting conditions. Thirteen candidate landing sites are being evaluated, and the challenges, considerations, and field changes made to plans and maps during the Apollo era serve as an excellent reference during the Artemis planning process, especially the nested maps of the last few lunar missions.

this USGS Planetary Geology Mapping Program Continues to digitize Apollo-era maps, currently only available in paper form, and make them available as interactive web-based maps. Now you can explore the new interactive map Apollo 15, Apollo 16and Apollo 17 The landing sites were recently digitized by W. Brent Garry’s team at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center with NASA funding. The digitization work is ongoing, so stay tuned for more updates. Interactive map search tool Learn more about the Moon’s interactive map!