You’ve probably seen the grainy, flickering footage from 1969. Neil Armstrong’s ghostly figure descending the ladder, the crunchy sound of the radio, and that desolate gray landscape. For decades, those frames were basically all we had. But things changed. Big time. Thanks to modern lunar orbiters, we now have satellite photos of moon landing sites so sharp you can literally see the astronauts' footpaths.
It’s wild.
People often ask why we can't just point the Hubble Space Telescope at the Moon to see the American flags. Honestly? Distance and physics are a pain. Hubble is designed to see massive, bright galaxies billions of light-years away, not a six-foot wide piece of nylon 238,000 miles from Earth. To get the "good stuff," you have to get close. Really close.
The LRO changed everything about how we see the Apollo sites
The game-changer arrived in 2009. NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) began circling the Moon, dipping as low as 15 miles above the surface. Before LRO, looking for the Apollo hardware was like trying to find a specific grain of sand on a beach from a helicopter. After LRO? It was like looking at a Google Maps view of your own backyard.
The LRO uses a system called LROC—the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera. It’s actually a suite of three cameras. The Narrow Angle Cameras (NAC) are the ones that give us those stunning, high-resolution black-and-white images. We’re talking about a resolution of roughly 50 centimeters per pixel.
Think about that.
At that scale, the descent stage of the Lunar Module (the part they left behind) covers several pixels. It looks like a bright, metallic square casting a long, distinct shadow. But the most "human" part isn't the machines. It’s the trails. Because there is no wind on the Moon—no rain, no atmosphere to speak of—the soil (regolith) stays exactly where it’s kicked. When the astronauts walked around, they disturbed the darker soil underneath the sun-bleached surface. In the satellite photos of moon landing sites, these look like dark, spindly threads connecting the lander to the science experiments and the lunar rover.
🔗 Read more: Apple MagSafe Charger 2m: Is the Extra Length Actually Worth the Price?
Why the Apollo 11 site looks different from the later missions
If you look at the LRO shots of Tranquility Base (Apollo 11), it’s actually a bit modest compared to the later missions. Neil and Buzz didn't wander very far. They were on a tight schedule and NASA was, understandably, terrified of something going wrong. They stayed mostly within a hundred meters of the Eagle.
But look at Apollo 17.
By 1972, Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt were basically taking a road trip. The LRO photos of the Taurus-Littrow valley show deep, dark "tire" tracks from the Lunar Roving Vehicle. You can track exactly where they drove to sample rocks near the mountains. The tracks lead right up to the Challenger lander. You can even see the ALSEP (Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package) sitting out there on the plain, still reflecting sunlight after half a century.
It’s a bit eerie. It’s a graveyard of human ambition, perfectly preserved in a vacuum.
Dealing with the "Why are they black and white?" crowd
A common gripe when people see these satellite photos of moon landing sites is the lack of color. "Why is it all gray?" basically.
The Moon is, quite literally, gray. It’s a ball of volcanic rock and dust. But more importantly, the LROC Narrow Angle Cameras are monochromatic to maximize resolution. By focusing on intensity rather than color filtering, the camera can capture much finer details of the shadows and textures. Shadows are actually our best friend here. Because the Moon has no atmosphere to scatter light, shadows are pitch black and razor-sharp. When the sun is at a low angle, the Lunar Module descent stage casts a shadow that is unmistakable. It’s not just a "blob" on the ground; it’s a geometric shape that matches the blueprints of the spacecraft perfectly.
💡 You might also like: Dyson V8 Absolute Explained: Why People Still Buy This "Old" Vacuum in 2026
India and China are now taking their own photos
NASA isn't the only one with "eyes in the sky" anymore. This is where the evidence gets really robust from a scientific perspective. If you don't trust the Americans to photograph their own landing sites, look at the data from the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
In 2021, the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter passed over the Apollo 11 site. Its High-Resolution Camera (OHRC) has a resolution of about 25 centimeters—even better than NASA’s LRO in some specific instances. The ISRO images clearly show the Apollo 11 Lunar Module. They also captured the Apollo 12 site, where you can see the lander sitting near the Surveyor 3 robotic probe that the astronauts visited.
Then you have China's Chang'e missions. While China is busy landing its own rovers on the far side (which is an incredible feat in itself), their orbital data confirms the topography and coordinates of the historic US sites. When multiple countries with different political agendas and different camera hardware all see the same junk sitting on the moon at the same coordinates, the "faked" narrative basically falls apart under the weight of sheer data.
What about the flags?
This is the big question everyone asks. Are the flags still there?
Based on LRO data, the answer is: mostly yes, but they don't look like flags anymore.
Analysis of the shadows cast by the flagpoles at Apollo 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 shows that the flags are still standing. However, for Apollo 11, the flag is gone. Buzz Aldrin reported seeing it get knocked over by the exhaust from the ascent engine when they blasted off to head back to Earth. The LRO photos confirm this—there’s no shadow from a flagpole at Tranquility Base.
📖 Related: Uncle Bob Clean Architecture: Why Your Project Is Probably a Mess (And How to Fix It)
As for the others, they’ve likely been bleached bone-white by decades of unfiltered ultraviolet radiation. Nylon doesn't hold up well in space. They are probably brittle, colorless husks, but they are still there, casting tiny shadows on the lunar dust.
Understanding the limitations of lunar photography
We have to be realistic about what we're looking at. Even with 25cm resolution, a human being would only be about two pixels wide. You aren't going to see Neil Armstrong's "One Small Step" bootprint as a clear shape. You see it as a "pixel disturbance."
Think of it like looking at a beach from a high-rise building. You can't see the individual grains of sand, but you can definitely see the trail where someone dragged a cooler through the dunes. The "dark paths" in satellite photos of moon landing sites are exactly that—trails where the lunar soil was churned up, changing its reflective properties.
Key sites to look up in the LRO archives:
- Apollo 14: Look for the "Antares" lander and the very long trail leading to Cone Crater. The astronauts almost got to the rim but turned back because they were exhausted and disoriented by the terrain.
- Apollo 15: This is where you can see the first Lunar Rover tracks in the Hadley-Apennine region. The contrast between the mountains and the flat landing site is stunning.
- Lunar Rover "Parking Lots": At the end of missions 15, 16, and 17, the astronauts parked the rovers a distance away so the camera on the rover could film the liftoff. You can find these rovers in the photos, sitting all alone.
How to find these images yourself
Don't just take my word for it. NASA’s LROC team at Arizona State University maintains an incredible public database. You can go to the LROC Quickmap website and literally zoom in on these sites yourself. It’s basically the Moon version of Google Earth.
If you want to see the "real" evidence, look for the raw TIFF files. They haven't been touched up for PR purposes. They are grainy, high-contrast, and deeply fascinating. You’ll see the cratering, the ridges of the lunar highlands, and then—suddenly—something that looks entirely too "square" to be a rock.
Actionable next steps for lunar exploration fans
If you're genuinely interested in the tech behind these images or the history of the sites, here is what you should do next:
- Visit the LROC QuickMap: Search for "Apollo 17" in the layers and zoom all the way in. Use the "Sun Angle" tool to see how the shadows change; it’s the best way to prove the height of the objects left behind.
- Check the ISRO (India) archives: Search for the Chandrayaan-2 OHRC image releases. Seeing the landing sites from a non-NASA camera provides a totally different perspective.
- Compare the Lunar Orbiter images (1966) to LRO (present): Look at how we used to see the Moon versus how we see it now. The leap in technology is just as impressive as the missions themselves.
- Study the "Retroreflectors": Some of the "dots" you see in the photos are Laser Ranging Retroreflector arrays. Scientists on Earth still fire lasers at these today to measure the distance to the Moon down to the millimeter. They aren't just photos; they are active scientific tools.
The Moon is no longer a distant, blurry mystery. It’s a place with a history, and we have the receipts in high-resolution. Every time a new satellite goes up—whether it’s from the US, China, India, or a private company like Intuitive Machines—the map gets clearer. Those footprints aren't going anywhere. They’ll be there for millions of years, waiting for the next time someone decides to go up and take a photo from the ground instead of from orbit.