(updated: July 19, 2002)

Where we clearly need to be, October 2002

This page offers much to do with the up coming potential of the October 2002 date (plus subsequent other opportunities), as that offering our best and nearest access to the planet Venus and, specifically as to laser/xenon communications. Do to the fact that their dark side is obviously facing Earth's illuminated side and, that any form of illuminations initiated by Venus could be viewed (with proper solar isolation and/or digital removal) back here on Earth and/or especially more so from Earth's existing L1 solar monitoring satellite position. This is clearly why October 2002 represents a most valid window of opportunity, at (God forbid) nearly zerro cost at that.

All of these images include and/or are solely that of the planet Venus (except for the fifth image example which is obviously that of a fairly old aperture~radar (SIR/SAR) reference image of Earth, as somewhat of the same imaging technology and representative capability as that of the Magellan mission, but not as obtained at the more usable 43 perspective, such as were the Magellan images of Venus). Today there are literally then of thousands of good perspective views of Earth, both NASA and "Quick Bird" offer an overwhelming degree of such examples, thus ample certified references as to what is to be considered as natural verses artificial when captured via SAR imaging.

The above global topography image is offered as a reduction/extract from the full Venus11.gif, a fairly good (somewhat resolution limited) if not excellent hemispheric view of Venus as centered at 0 Degrees East Longitude, acquired via the spacecraft: Magellan.  This image was that produced by: NASA/USGS, as with most such images the Copyright is "Public Domain". A mouse click on the image will take you to their full 2mb GIF file. There are certainly additional image resources, however, many are simply too massive for the majority of us not so privileged as to operating from our own T-1 line, such as the following two links: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/photo_gallery and especially this one: http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/

As far as my discovery effort goes, you simply do not have to take my word upon any of this; every originating source, including my examples presented here, are those publicly available for your study/review, as directly available from NASA and/or NASA's orchestrated (qualified and thereby moderated) sites. It's too bad that most pro-NASA types apparently see nothing whatsoever and therefore need not waste their valuable time, especially when there is so much ongoing Apollo and now "GUTH Venus" damage control that needs their attention.

Even though none of these images should be the least bit NSA/DoD security issues (especially that target area of "GUTH Venus"), however, perhaps it will become a good thing not to press upon this potential nondisclosure issue because, NASA's reputation and perceived qualifications could be on the line (such as those based primarily upon the Apollo missions, of which so many are questioning).

In order to comprehend the ulterior motives as to why there has been all the Venus discovery rejections, here again, apparently these Apollo considerations are likely to keep coming up, such as whenever pro-NASA types feel the need to bash away at my discovery, I'll gladly return the favor in most any of my cross examinations, after all, when it comes down to establishing "extraordinary proof", what's fair is fair, as I truly feel our next manned mission(s) should clearly become those onward to Venus (at the very least Venus L2), and for that effort we most certainly do not want anything going wrong simply because we foolishly based the required technology upon those apparently undocumented and yet somehow perfection "lunar landers" and that also upon our radiation proof astronauts and film, as altogether somehow offering truly exceptional round-trip space flight capability without regard to solar flares, which by that of NASA (including all of their associated media coverage) somehow managed to not record but a single one of their successful 1/6th gravity scaled manned test flights and, while on the lunar surface failed to ever record one qualified reference star. No sir, I guess we certainly can't have that happening, as this next mission requirement is simply worth a whole lot more, as well as having far better scientific and humanitarian values to boot (unfortunately, unlike like those Apollo missions, there is nothing NSA/DoD cloak and dagger worthy of modifying images nor moderating the mission documentation).


Most certainly and, why the hell not. Come October 2002, Venus is only 108 times further away then our moon and do remember, just 30 years ago we've supposedly been there and done that moon thing a half dozen times (isn't that right! NASA?) and, didn't that lunar lander in fact work like a freaking charm and basically without a single hitch. So what's all the big deal? I certainly believe we can do this Venus thing (at least a series of robotic instrumentation deployments from a manned expedition to Venus L2) and, if you think not, please feel free to advise my ignorance as to why not. I am thinking, the more input on this subject the better, while NASA's thinking "go away".

Once again, we obviously seem to have been a bit late, as our crack wizards have nearly blow away another super chance at doing Venus, at least for this latest 0.271AU near miss opportunity, however, we still retain the opportunity to attempt visual (laser/xenon) communications to/from the dark side of Venus, that which will be representing itself as 3.25% the diameter of the sun as viewed from Earth's L1, but then, I'm only guessing that NASA has been a little too busy with damage control to bother with anything as pointless and low budget as "first contact" and, besides all that, there is nothing all that much fun if there isn't a little cloak and dagger impact from our beloved NSA/DoD ruse masters.

With a little applied up-scaling, a few heat and radiation shield alterations to one of our old but existing and available shuttle busses, or better that of my concept spaceship, plus lots and lots of snacks and perhaps a ton of prozac, mission Magellan-XX could have been on its' way nearly a year ago, hopefully along with a collection of 3 or 4 of those flawlessly functioning lunar landers which could be suitably modified for their atmospheric re-entry and robotic deployment task, that of at least delivering our two-way instrumentation to the surface, as this fly-by-wire lander technology should just do the trick quite nicely, especially without having crew and thereby lots more fuel and technology, but then we have a cool upper CO2 atmosphere for aerobreaking and then the use of relatively compact parachutes plus the fact that the lander need not be configured for re-assending, as it could just sit there as a fairly large, well insulated and air conditioned, instrumentation package (of course I'm still trusting that for down-range landings they ever worked at all, as there seems to be a somewhat serious void of independent documentation, other then those films showing us highly unstable and totally disastrous [1/6 gravity scaled] test flights, which for some reason are not all that confidence building). I've also been thinking about our deploying just a few robotic Osprey landers, as those aircraft are already fully fly-by-wire and, along with placing a little H2O2 onboard as a darn good fuel oxidiser, then at least we could get some use out of those multi-billion dollar aircraft, as otherwise, I do have some worthy airship considerations based upon what else I've discovered existing at "GUTH Venus", where all we may need to do is call for one of their shuttles once our mission obtains orbit or perhaps just Venus L2, then handing over the communications package and whatever other exchanges.

In order to help best accomplish this mission;  I believe Russia offers (bar none) the most capable launch solutions as well as sheer payload capacity and most likely the best delivery speed for our buck and, I would have to bet they could use the money right about now. At their present average net take-home pay (actual $0.50/hr for their scientist and engineers), perhaps we could get something like 100:1 and, then secure multiple mission launches at something like 10:1 results for our moneys. That's certainly a whole lot of bang for our buck.

Actually taking any surface tour (even within a depressurized airship) is rather pointless because, as Americans we're too damn arrogant and plain old stupid, we're certainly not going to make tinkers an effort at being accustomed to the greater atmospheric pressure and besides, we don't even believe in airships (let alone those utilizing H2) and, we've proven time and again that we have little if any regard for the rights and customs of others (unless they have oil, then we bind over backwards so as to expell any external/internal threats, even if that means loosing a few tall buildings).

For just a basic mission example;  I located several sources which situated our L2 (semi-stable) orbit area for that of Earth at approximately 1.5 million kilometers and, the added solar protection afforded at that location is approximately 85%. Venus on the other hand is a bit lessor in diameter and of much lessor mass (roughly 80% that of Earth) and, that issue combined with perhaps the 50% greater orbit speed provides the L2 location necessary for sustaining a protected orbit somewhat closer (1.014 < 1.015 million kilometers or that of approximately 1.002 million kilometers as situated above the surface of Venus), in which instance the protective shade or solar eclipse area as that provided by the planet Venus (according to my latest calculations) would offer at least 90% shade (L2 being situated within the planet's solar eclipse/shelter zone and, that being somewhat of a damn good radio relay link location, as well as for otherwise our optionally viewing some of those massive solar storms without getting radiated to death).

I firmly do believe we should have and most likely could have managed a permanently stationed platform (preferably manned) at Venus L2. Having established all this a decade ago would obviously have been nice, but then sustaining our cold-war efforts may have been sidetracked and/or essential ruse funding diminished because there's nothing NSA/DoD worthy of Venus, and we obviously can't have that. Unfortunately, for our morals involving true and honest research, the Venus L2 mission offers nothing whatsoever for NSA/DoD agendas, as from any Venus L2 platform, as they can't spy upon anyone back on Earth, nor threaten any other Nation from the standpoint of too much distance, so therefore, zero support for anything purely scientific and humanitarian worthy as far as NSA/DoD are concerned. I keep mentioning NSA/DoD as though they control NASA, well guess what folks, I think they do and have been, during and ever since Apollo, as the only missions that seem to ever get off the ground are those either directly supporting NSA/DoD agendas and/or helping in some manner as to prove out technology and/or upon various delivery capabilities which NSA/DoD foresees a far better use for, like their worthy deployments via orbiting of various weapons and, don't forget that of our acquiring of those potentially lethal (250 billion dollar) Mars microbes, of which I'll just bet NSA/DoD can't wait to get their dirty little hands on those.

From my somewhat limited perspective, this L2 orbit position may not even be all that complex to manage, as there is no moon to continually compensate for and, besides requiring somewhat careful initial positioning and then merely slight navigational adjustments from time to time, L2 station keeping energy expenditures could be fairly minimal (especially for purely robotics), perhaps affording that of selectively maneuvering so as to obtain just sufficient solar exposure so as to keep everything from sub-freezing to death or simply otherwise for emergency so as to recharge solar batteries, though main onboard power should be as provided by a pair of nuclear power pods, as this could likely become a 24+ month mission with power demands for a crew and passenger group of 18, including 25+kw worth of full time SAR imaging and, I would have to think on average, the overall mission could conceivably exceed 250kwh, therefore a pair of 500kw capable nuclear power generators should do quite nicely (I think Russia or perhaps France [if they didn't already hate our guts] can provide these reactor pods, damn near right off their shelf).

Regarding imaging resolution; Venus L2 is still somewhat distant from the prime target of "GUTH Venus", lets say for our 1000 metric tonne observational platform situated at L2, (until I'm informed otherwise) roughly 1.002e6 km (622,613 miles), just far enough so that conventional optical observations could be limited (a Hubble class imaging scope utilizing our finest NSA-spy grade 2048 CCD sensor, at that range might yield a raw 15 meter resolution, then pushed further down to 1.5 meters via digital resampling enlargements) however, due to the relatively thick clouded atmosphere(s) (though potentially of somewhat lessor density at night with thinner semi-transparent zones of 20:1 ratio), and obviously because we are to be viewing only that of the dark side, therefore visible spectrums will simply not provide all that much of what we are looking for and, that leaves us with perhaps better options of CCD/IR or UV. Because the atmosphere and those clouds of Venus are supposedly somewhat transparent to ultraviolet, some form of CCD/UV imaging may become usable and, there is always that good old reliable NSA-spy SAR imaging (better yet "Quick Bird") however, from the distance of L2, this imaging still is handicapped at something around one thousand times that distance of the average Magellan mission. However, by applying far newer SAR technology with that of substantially larger onboard equipment apparatus as well as at least 100 times as much power (25+kw with a much larger SAR transmitting antenna, longer receiving tower and a lessor aperture of 0.1 degrees and thereby scanning areas at well under 1800 km), combining that with merely a 1024x1024 or perhaps a 1024 X 2048 aperture sensor could yield a raw 1.75 meter (as dead-on) out to approximately 4.75 meter resolution near the horizon, which should due quite nicely, then digital resampling that 8 to 16 bit data data by another 10X factor and we're down to 0.175 meters (I now realize, in spite of NASA's disinformation, that we today have this technology and capability and then some, and if NASA should be stating otherwise, they're either proving out their utter stupidity or simply lying again).

As far as visual communications, I am also hoping that along with multiple Earth based KW lasers or just xenon emitters and/or potentially a giga-watt orbiting based (star wars) laser cannon, that visual communications as well as combined with other interactive and SAR imaging as piped from newly deployed satellites, such as a Magellan-II (which these days should be capable of yielding something closer to 1.0 meter and 16-bit raw resolution) plus, eventually having several Venus based interactive two-way audio/video communication placements, all of this should offer truly incredible results. This is exactly where the L2 station would ultimately and best provide for our long term mission support as well as signal relay/boosting to/from Earth (data streams of 1 meter resolution images should be somewhat enormous packets). As far as I'm concerned, we should already have those massive solid fueled rockets from Russia pushing our ISS towards the Venus L2 station keeping (according to our infamous NASA/Apollo records; space travel radiation is not even an issue worth discussing, but just in case that comes up, I do have some worthy ideas, one of which is merely using an available space rock, like any of those which are 100+meters worth and frequently passing between Earth and our moon every couple of weeks or so).

The L2 location (according to NASA types) would also yield a highly suitable launch position for the manned excursion directly down to "GUTH Venus" although, exactly how that crew would ever return is still in the works (at this point, any volunteers at this point get to ride for free). Perhaps, in conjunction with a hydrogen balloon assent assist, where those up-scaled lunar lander technologies could be re-employed or perhaps not, as on the other hand, I'm also re-thinking aerodynamics and that of our taking advantage of that thick atmosphere, perhaps via hybrid rocket along with turbo-props fueled by hydrogen-peroxide and/or whatever else (I'm also considering this just might be a darn good place to throw our prestigious OSPREY into action and, for only another hundred billion or so, perhaps at least one of these suckers could be modified to fly us off Venus, which is a whole lot more then they seem to be doing for us right here on Earth).

These following images are fundamental examples, which I believe continues to clearly establish the "GUTH Venus" identity, identifying as that area situated within the Magellan SAR original, as simply that which is offering a good representation of the overall territory (w/area ID). Please try not over analyzing this image, especially if you are employed or funded in any manner by NASA, because you could hurt yourself and, the last thing we need is for yet another work related injury claim (eye or brain strain) as, I will not be responsible for your injuries should they become related to any consequence of my imaging results (so stop squinting)..

This next image/map is obviously that which NASA had processed so as to help establish rough ground elevations (I've seen better as topography goes and remember, this is not representative of the true planet colors), where darker blues represent negative elevations (below mean average), and the green is at or slightly above average (sort of your above sealevel but obviously without any real seas) and, the brownish reds are depicting areas approaching and/or above 6km and, anything towards a deep red spectrum would be indicating elevations approaching or above 10km. As I have not uncovered direct access to the original Magellan radar imaging data base and, because this image is so murky (resolution deficient), I certainly can not as of yet verify or disprove what this map represents. If anyone out there has such access to those raw radar files, and wishes to become credited for improving upon the determination of the specific elevations (especially that of "GUTH Venus"), then by all means please do so. I feel the new opportunities which I have exposed, for that of involving all sorts of expertise as pertaining to further exploring the planet Venus are nearly endless and, I believe of great value in spite of what NASA thinks.

Being on a "need to know basis" is the pits and, simply another fine example of the apparent inefficiencies revolving about and within NASA. There are hundreds, hell thousands, of such cataloged images and, specifically those of Venus (as well as other planets, including Earth) and, perhaps thousands of others never cataloged or at least not currently maintained within the archived files being made available to the public, however, and none the less, these images are already bought and paid for (several times over) by you and me. My index page-2 offers further links to my ongoing research as well as many others issues of NASA's stash, unfortunately, that is not the fullest amount of potentially valuable data and, then likewise intentionally short of any image the least bit embarrassing which obviously have become most conveniently not so available (if at all). The Magellan SAR/GIF image which I am working from, as a worthy discovery goes, I believe was simply that of another bloated agency oversight and, obviously a damn good example as to perhaps what other evidence could be lurking elsewhere, such as by having direct access to those original Magellan aperture/radar data files as well as that all essential conversion software.

Need I remind you taxpayers of our initial investment(s) into researching and exploring the planet Venus, as compared to almost every other past endeavor (except those Apollo missions), this overall investment into Venus was and is still our most costly effort to date and, to think that something this obvious and incredibly valuable as the discovery at "GUTH Venus" had been so pathetically overlooked for the past 12 years and, even blatantly further being ignored after the fact should start telling you something, perhaps that we have been allotting far too much unchecked recess/play time at Club NASA and, those Mars missions are soon becoming no exception to this rule.

Now I know that those NSA/DoD agendas have been a whole lot of fun, all that cloak and digger stuff may certainly be right up there with the adrenaline rush of screwing your best friend's or boss's wife, and simply otherwise having to play with all those incredibly powerful spy imaging technologies and space missile (cost plus "star wars") theories along with all that extreme deep space (thousand + light years beyond our human access and/or of any likely comprehension values) and, then obviously throwing in a little further cosmic conjecturing just for good measure, is vastly more thrilling and obviously vastly more costly (hundreds of billions more costly) then that of merely exploring the past or present day existence of LIFE as existing on the planet Venus. Come on you space jockey guys, we are simply running out of moneys and time, especially when that planet Venus is darn near going to run us over come this October 2002, a mere 0.271AU is basically a near miss, where we should damn near be able to globally shout at those at "GUTH Venus".

It's too bad our beloved NASA has been so thoroughly caught up in their own self-inflicted demise (mostly Apollo damage control), to such an extent that they can't possibly disclose the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" and otherwise, simply get along with what I believe is our most urgent task at hand, that of establishing contact with those on the planet Venus and, then hopefully bringing home the answers and cures to our most pressing issues, such as perhaps resolving stupidity and greed and thus possibly surviving on this planet Earth and, preferably doing so without first poisoning, infecting or blowing ourselves up. I know, that's asking a lot!

Besides all of the above reasons, there is certainly much more to this discovery that I alone can't afford to support. Our struggling commercial enterprises, more then ever, thanks to our infamous NSA/DoD visions of political and slanted or skewed foreign affairs diplomacy, via a little provocation and intimidation and subsequent retaliation force, I believe will be in need of this opportunity to sell everything from PoP-Tarts to you name it (just plain old "water" could become a real hot item), and, how about new releases of those old, old TV programs (I LOVE LUCY), once translated into Islamic lizard format, these could be worth a fortune and, I'll just bet you can think of all sorts of alternative commercial opportunities, but remember, we first have to get there, be the first to deploy several two-way interactive audio/video technologies and, preferably doing so before they decide it's time they conquer our (water and food abundant) world. From looking at all those dreadful Venus data sheets, pondering all those meager territories without much if anything to offer (except heat and perhaps a little too much of that plus thick smog and/or acidic atmosphere), I seriously don't see what those souls on Venus could possibly have to loose, come October 2002 (perhaps sooner) or at any other opportune planetary cycle.

UPCOMING DATES: (where planet Venus is close enough to damn near touch, or better yet, to invade Earth)

2002/11/01 (0.271 AU)
2004/06/07 (0.289 AU)
2006/01/13 (0.267 AU)

(This will return you to my index page)

Copyright © 2000/2002 - Brad E. Guth
GUTH Venus: All Rights Reserved
Webmaster: Brad Guth - BradGuth@yahoo.com / IEIS 1-253-8576061