Apollo Flags Still Standing
Discussion
Well, most of them anyway.
The LRO spacecraft has confirmed that most of the flags planted on the moon by the Apollo astronauts are still standing. It was reported by Armstrong and Aldrin during their lift off from the lunar surface that the rocket blast from the Lunar Module ascent engine had knocked their flag over - and this has also been confirmed by LRO.
The picture below shows the Apollo 16 flag and its shadow.
The LRO spacecraft has confirmed that most of the flags planted on the moon by the Apollo astronauts are still standing. It was reported by Armstrong and Aldrin during their lift off from the lunar surface that the rocket blast from the Lunar Module ascent engine had knocked their flag over - and this has also been confirmed by LRO.
The picture below shows the Apollo 16 flag and its shadow.
Moonquake? (They do get these on the moon)
Fluke impact from meteorite? (Less likely but possible)
Degradation of support pole due to ultraviolet light or fracturing of pole due to thermal fluctuations causing it to crumple under its own weight. Thermal fluctuations on the lunar surface are from around -100 degrees C to plus 100 degrees C.
It was assumed by many that the nylon flags may have turned to dust and powder due to ultraviolet rays and the extreme bright light but it seems they have survived reasonably intact. I am pretty sure all the coloured dyes from the flag have been bleached out by now.
Fluke impact from meteorite? (Less likely but possible)
Degradation of support pole due to ultraviolet light or fracturing of pole due to thermal fluctuations causing it to crumple under its own weight. Thermal fluctuations on the lunar surface are from around -100 degrees C to plus 100 degrees C.
It was assumed by many that the nylon flags may have turned to dust and powder due to ultraviolet rays and the extreme bright light but it seems they have survived reasonably intact. I am pretty sure all the coloured dyes from the flag have been bleached out by now.
Pints said:
I certainly wasn't expecting anything from this lot but perhaps sometime in the future.
Although LRO has provided some nice images of the Apollo sites, they are only a by product of its main mission, which is to phoptograph the surface of the moon in the finest detail it has been imaged up to now.The same will be the case for any other future lunar missions. There is little scientific return to be obtained from photographing sites already visited by humans.
Guvernator said:
Eric Mc said:
There is little scientific return to be obtained from photographing sites already visited by humans.
Yes but it would sure shut all those pesky Lunar conspiracy theorists up! 
Apart from galvanising the entire US scientific and engineering industryand learning some fundamental information about the formation of the Solar System and the history of the earth and moon.
Can we start another thread if we want to discuss the merits or otherwise of the Apollo programme? This was only a post about the current state of the flags - which I thought some PHers would find of interest.
Can we start another thread if we want to discuss the merits or otherwise of the Apollo programme? This was only a post about the current state of the flags - which I thought some PHers would find of interest.
The problem is that the "conspiracy" has been discussed to death on PH and many other fora. I just get tired having to wade through all the same old non-science/nonsense again and again.
By all means have the discussion (again) on some other thread. I might even join in
.
But it can pollute genuine chat about Apollo on what was intended to be a sensible thread.
By all means have the discussion (again) on some other thread. I might even join in
.But it can pollute genuine chat about Apollo on what was intended to be a sensible thread.
I can confirm that the Apollo 10 Command Module on display at the Science Museum in London is the real deal. It was very kindly donated by NASA not long after the mission in 1969.
It is indeed a very small space in which to live and work for a fortnight - the length of time of an average lunar mission. However, having come from Mercury and Gemini, most of the astronauts at the time were very impressed with the large amount of volume they had in the Command Module compared to the earlier spacecraft. Apollo is still quite a bit more spacious inside than the Soyuz Command Module - which is still in use. And Soyuz was partly designed with lunar missions in mind.
As for future manned missions, the US is in a bit of a hiatus at the moment. Obama shelved the Ares/Constellation programme which would have seen a return to the moon. All elements of the programme have been cancelled except for the Command Module style spacecraft called Orion. Orion is a kind of super-Apollo - being similar in shape but about 1/3 bigger. The first flightworthy example of the Orion Command Module was recently delivered to the Kennedy Space Centre.
The problem at the moment is that NASA does not have a definitive booster in existence which can launch the thing.
There is a tentative programme for a Saturn V class rocket called the SLS (Space Launch System - I hope they eventually come up with a better name that that).
There is also the possibility that the Orion could be launched on top of a modified Atlas V.
Boeing are even angling for the re-opening of the F1 rocket engine production line. The legendary Saturn V used five F1s on the first stage.
It is indeed a very small space in which to live and work for a fortnight - the length of time of an average lunar mission. However, having come from Mercury and Gemini, most of the astronauts at the time were very impressed with the large amount of volume they had in the Command Module compared to the earlier spacecraft. Apollo is still quite a bit more spacious inside than the Soyuz Command Module - which is still in use. And Soyuz was partly designed with lunar missions in mind.
As for future manned missions, the US is in a bit of a hiatus at the moment. Obama shelved the Ares/Constellation programme which would have seen a return to the moon. All elements of the programme have been cancelled except for the Command Module style spacecraft called Orion. Orion is a kind of super-Apollo - being similar in shape but about 1/3 bigger. The first flightworthy example of the Orion Command Module was recently delivered to the Kennedy Space Centre.
The problem at the moment is that NASA does not have a definitive booster in existence which can launch the thing.
There is a tentative programme for a Saturn V class rocket called the SLS (Space Launch System - I hope they eventually come up with a better name that that).
There is also the possibility that the Orion could be launched on top of a modified Atlas V.
Boeing are even angling for the re-opening of the F1 rocket engine production line. The legendary Saturn V used five F1s on the first stage.
They were pretty aware of the dangers involved is spaceflight. However, they took it in their stride because the bulk of them had come out of US Military Test Flight (Air Force and Navy/Marines, mostly). So they were pretty used to living with the possibility of a catastrophic and dramatic fatal incident.
Regarding "thousands of miles an hour in a vacuum", that is probably the easiest bit as regards strength of the spacecraft. For the Command Module the real test was re-entry - as the re-entry was done directly from the return path from the moon. Therefore, the spacecraft impacted the upper atmosphere at 25,000 mph (a good 7,500 mph faster than an earth orbiting spacecraft does). The heat discolouration and searing evident on the Apollo 10 Command Module is testimony to the heat endured on re-entry.
Having said all that, it was the Command/Service Module that caused the two most serious incidents in teh Apollo programme, the fire that killed the Apollo 1 astronauts in 1967 and the oxygen tank explosion that nearly killed the Apollo 13 crew.
Regarding "thousands of miles an hour in a vacuum", that is probably the easiest bit as regards strength of the spacecraft. For the Command Module the real test was re-entry - as the re-entry was done directly from the return path from the moon. Therefore, the spacecraft impacted the upper atmosphere at 25,000 mph (a good 7,500 mph faster than an earth orbiting spacecraft does). The heat discolouration and searing evident on the Apollo 10 Command Module is testimony to the heat endured on re-entry.
Having said all that, it was the Command/Service Module that caused the two most serious incidents in teh Apollo programme, the fire that killed the Apollo 1 astronauts in 1967 and the oxygen tank explosion that nearly killed the Apollo 13 crew.
speedtwelve said:
If you think the Apollo X CM was a confined space, then think about Frank Borman & Jim Lovell spending 2 weeks aboard Gemini VII in 1965. 2 weeks spent doing Mach 25 while sitting in the same space as the front 2 seats in a Nissan Micra. In pressure suits (mostly).
If you can, have a look at an original Vostok spacecraft. It's a bit confined. Fancy doing Mach 25 in that, followed by a pre-meditated ejection in order to parachute to the ground after re-entry? Yahoo!
As I said earlier, the Soyuz is not that big at all. Neither is the Chinese Shenzhou.If you can, have a look at an original Vostok spacecraft. It's a bit confined. Fancy doing Mach 25 in that, followed by a pre-meditated ejection in order to parachute to the ground after re-entry? Yahoo!
Travelling at "Mach 25" in space is not really that spectacular. Indeed, it's a bit of a misleading way to describe what is going on - since the spacecraft is travelling in a vacuum. Obviously, re-entry is a different kettle of fish - although at the initial impact point with the atmosphere, when speeds are at or near Mach 25, the air is extremely thin.
speedtwelve said:
I've heard NASA astronauts use Mach Nos to refer to on-orbit speeds, near-vacuum notwithstanding. Always thought it sounded more impressive than 17600mph!
Well, in all my reading of NASA material over the decades - whether histories, biographies or technical books, I have never heard anyone refer to velocity in space as a Mach number. The only time it is mentioned is during re-entry when it does, of course, have some real meaning.And I'm impressed by speeds of 17,500 mph (or even 25,000 mph - for Apollo) even if you aren't.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff