1st Manned Moon Landing - 45 Years Ago

1st Manned Moon Landing - 45 Years Ago

Author
Discussion

jmorgan

36,010 posts

283 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Grumfutock said:
Not in the science of space monkeys! You just ask old Mr Tom Cruise. smile
There is tin foil hattery, weapons grade alcan head adornments and then there is Tom Cruise.

Grumfutock

5,274 posts

164 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
jmorgan said:
Grumfutock said:
Not in the science of space monkeys! You just ask old Mr Tom Cruise. smile
There is tin foil hattery, weapons grade alcan head adornments and then there is Tom Cruise.
But he is the Grandpoobar! Sent to enlighten and save us all.

Eric Mc

121,788 posts

264 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
MrCarPark said:
Eric Mc said:
I've never really liked that particular documentary. It was loosely based on Norman Mailer's book "Of a Fire on the Moon" - which I also found a bit odd.

Too airy fairy for my liking.
For All Mankind is better. Just the astronauts speaking, and Eno's soundtrack.
Yep - love that one so much that I bought the video and the CD soundtrack.

MartG

20,626 posts

203 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Another good argument to use against the brain-dead deniers - a short video detailing why the video technology of the time simply wasn't up to the job of faking it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

Blib

43,797 posts

196 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Has this been posted yet on the thread?

http://www.firstmenonthemoon.com/

It is the actual descent and landing as recorded by NASA. You can listen as the crew, Houston and various other installations talk about this crucial stage of the mission as Eagle makes its historic flight to the surface of the moon.

You can follow the "Air-to-ground" loop and the "Flight-Director's-Loop and watch the descent from the lander's window

It also includes telemetry which you can follow.

It made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

I heartily recommend it.

Grumfutock

5,274 posts

164 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Blib said:
Has this been posted yet on the thread?

http://www.firstmenonthemoon.com/

It is the actual descent and landing as faked by NASA. You can listen as the crew, Houston and various other conspirators talk about this crucial stage of the mock up as Eagle makes its historic flight to the floor of the film set.

You can follow the "Air-to-ground" loop and the "Flight-Director's-Loop and watch the descent from the lander's window

It also includes telemetry which you can follow.

It made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

I heartily recommend it.
Fixed that for you. smile

Eric Mc

121,788 posts

264 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
MartG - Excellent.

Blib

43,797 posts

196 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Grumfutock said:
Blib said:
Has this been posted yet on the thread?

http://www.firstmenonthemoon.com/

It is the actual descent and landing as faked by NASA. You can listen as the crew, Houston and various other conspirators talk about this crucial stage of the mock up as Eagle makes its historic flight to the floor of the film set.

You can follow the "Air-to-ground" loop and the "Flight-Director's-Loop and watch the descent from the lander's window

It also includes telemetry which you can follow.

It made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

I heartily recommend it.
Fixed that for you. smile
Thanks. thumbup

Mojocvh

16,837 posts

261 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
45 years ago. In some ways that realisation is profoundly depressing.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Mojocvh said:
45 years ago. In some ways that realisation is profoundly depressing.
+1

Especially when you think what aerospace was like 45 years before that.

jmorgan

36,010 posts

283 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
MartG said:
Another good argument to use against the brain-dead deniers - a short video detailing why the video technology of the time simply wasn't up to the job of faking it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU
He has a simple way of putting it across. He has a few on this topic and they are superb.

aclivity

4,072 posts

187 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
I find it amazing that there are NO pictures of Armstrong - other than 1 inside the LM - available! Armstrong had the camera on his chest, couldn't take a photo of himself.

Eric Mc

121,788 posts

264 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
There is one photo of him on the surface.

He had the camera and he only passed it on to Aldrin for a very short spell - in which Aldrin was supposed to take panoramic shots of the landing site. Armstrong creeps into one of these shots - unintentionally.



Don't forget, this first moon walk only lasted just over 2 hours - so they were in a bit of a rush to do all the jobs they had to do.

And I don't think it would have been very easy to take a "selfie" with a large format Hasslblad and big bulky moonsuit gloves.

paranoid airbag

2,679 posts

158 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
jmorgan said:
paranoid airbag said:
Does anyone know why they went straight to a landing rather than a flyby? Maybe I'm just too sissy to run a rocket program (entirely possible), but I would have thought a manned flyby as precursor would have been worthwhile given the huge amount of extra complications landing and rendezvous required.
Apollo 8, and 10. Which 8 was a stroke of genius, or rather common sense I suppose.
Well I've learned something today... Cheers thumbup

TTwiggy

11,500 posts

203 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
And I don't think it would have been very easy to take a "selfie" with a large format Hasslblad and big bulky moonsuit gloves.
Medium format wink

Eric Mc

121,788 posts

264 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
To be strictly accurate, they didn't perform any manned "flybys".

A "flyby" is where a spacecraft scoots around the target planet or moon and continues on on its own trajectory. The Voyagers, for instance, performed flybys of Jupiter and Saturn but didn't enter orbit.

Apollo 8 and Apollo 10 both entered orbit around the moon. So they weren't flybys as such.

Apollo 8 (December 1968) did not have a Lunar Module on the mission (Grumman were still struggling to get its weight down to an acceptable level) so the crew spent 24 hours orbiting the moon in the Command/Service Module..

On Apollo 10 (May 1969), they did have a lunar module which astronauts Tom Stafford and Gene Cernan took down to 50,000 feet above the lunar surface. It was a "dress rehearsal" for a lunar landing attempt. Because Apollo 10 achieved its mission targets, the go ahead was given for Apollo 11 to attempt a landing.

jmorgan

36,010 posts

283 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
paranoid airbag said:
jmorgan said:
paranoid airbag said:
Does anyone know why they went straight to a landing rather than a flyby? Maybe I'm just too sissy to run a rocket program (entirely possible), but I would have thought a manned flyby as precursor would have been worthwhile given the huge amount of extra complications landing and rendezvous required.
Apollo 8, and 10. Which 8 was a stroke of genius, or rather common sense I suppose.
Well I've learned something today... Cheers thumbup
No problem. Apollo 8 was supposed to test the LM in Earth Orbit but the LM was held up in manufacture (9 did it in the end) and they were concerned that the pesky Russians were about to pull off another stunt so instead of faff around in orbit around the Earth with no LM to play with, they went for a pass around the Moon a Mr Craft thought it up I think?? and give the others in that race a kick in the preverbials. Much info from Russia was second hand and late.

10 eventually tested the LM around the moon and 9 eventually tested the LM in earth orbit but a lucky escape on 10 turned into the near disaster on 13. At least without checking, I am probably amiss but the tanks on 10 were changed out and eventually ended up on 13 and they were the ones that exploded?


Edit. oops. Ericmc in first.

Eric Mc

121,788 posts

264 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Yes - according to the original flight manifest, Apollo 8 was supposed to be the test of the Lunar Module in Earth orbit. It would also be the first flight of a manned Saturn V.

Apollo 9 would be a Command Service Module test with no Lunar Module. The Command Service module would be boosted part way to the moon where it would turn around and then, using the big engine on the Service Module, accelerate the Command/Service Module back to Earth at to 25,000 mph, the speed at which the Command Module heat shield would encounter on return from the moon.

With the delays to the Lunar Module, it was decided to switch Apollo 8 for 9 and, with the fear that the Russians might try to send a single cosmonaut on a loop around the moon before the end of 1968. it was decided that they would send the "new" Apollo 8 all the way to the moon and actually enter lunar orbit. They reckoned that the additional risk of sending the Command/Service Module all the way to the moon was outweighed by the benefit of ensuring the Russians didn't steal a march.

Jimbeaux

Original Poster:

33,791 posts

230 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Mojocvh said:
45 years ago. In some ways that realisation is profoundly depressing.
I am with you on that. yes

Eric Mc

121,788 posts

264 months

Tuesday 22nd July 2014
quotequote all
I don't find it THAT depressing. It was a project of its time and the world politics that existed at that time. Indeed, the politics that had created it in 1961 were obsolete by 1969 and that is the reason why the project came to a premature end in 1972.

What I DO find depressing is the fact that, at the moment, the US is totally incapable of putting an American into space - let alone put an American on the moon.