1st Manned Moon Landing - 45 Years Ago
Discussion
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.Too airy fairy for my liking.
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
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.
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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff