Apollo 11

[Shannow]

Problem is that there's too much polarity in either side.

Some (obviously) faked footage does not mean we didn't go there.
The fact that we went there does not make the faked footage real.

But then to tape over the moon landing works to save costs, and forget how to get there ?

That fuels the conspiracies also.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by Shannow
Problem is that there's too much polarity in either side.

Some (obviously) faked footage does not mean we didn't go there.
The fact that we went there does not make the faked footage real.

But then to tape over the moon landing works to save costs, and forget how to get there ?

That fuels the conspiracies also.


We didn't forget how to get there. It was pretty expensive to go there, just not spending the money to go there anymore.

I do like Space 1999 though, shot in 1975, pretty speculative to have a moon base in 24 years. Still nowhere near that today.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by Wolf359
I get pretty disgusted watching the History channel, now it's all about aliens and I can't even figure out who's watching those shows.

OT, but I had read somewhere, for what it's worth, that it costs an insanely small amount to produce Ancient Aliens. They do a copy location shoots, but all you have to do, and I'm not even being a wise guy here, is put a camera in front of Giorgio, and let him ramble for hours on end, and you have enough content for a season's worth of episodes. Do the same with von Danniken and Childers or whatever his name is, and you've got yourself a show. Giorgio probably has more screen time on his show than Seinfeld did on his, but Seinfeld probably makes more in one episode than Giorgio did for the whole series, so that's why we're seeing this tripe.

Shannow: I always get upset at how much footage was lost, not just from the Moon landings, but historically in early TV and radio. The eye watering cost of magnetic media in those days, unfortunately, answers the conspiracy theorists.

 

[Number_35]

Originally Posted by Shannow
I remember being 18 months old, and my Mum standing me in front of the TV, and telling me that what was happening was very important.

I don't recall the video moment, and can superimpose it from later memories, but clear as day remember the event and the set-up.with My Mum.

I floored her years later (like 42 years later) by drawing the floorplan of the house that we moved out of when I was 3-1/2, describing the bed spread on my bed, and who was in what rooms the dog that went missing at the same time...oh, and the Chicken Pox Party
Shannow, that sounds just like me. My condolences!

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by kschachn
I suggest that anyone who has doubts should seek out Buzz Aldrin and ask him. He's approachable and often appears at various public events where you can talk to him one-on-one.

Go on, I dare you.


Wifey reminded me that I had met Buzz Aldren and had spoken with him at some length maybe twenty years ago.
I do recall this, but I don't recall where.
It would either have been the USAF Museum in Fairborn or in Florida at the Cape, where a complete Saturn V lies on stands on its side.
A quiet and approachable guy as I recall.
I also recall a guy in FL trying to tell his son that the Shuttle was a far more advanced ship, and I had to correct him saying that while the Shuttle could achieve Earth orbit, it couldn't carry anything like the load the Saturn did. It couldn't carry enough fuel to leave Earth orbit and accelerate into trans-lunar orbit and then brake into lunar orbit, disgorge and recover its disposable LEM and then accelerate from lunar orbit into trans-earth orbit and the brake into earth orbit from whence it had to brake again to descend.
That we haven't had a heavy lift booster available since the now defunct Shuttle was made the primary lifter and Apollo and the attendant Saturn V was cancelled is really rather sad.
To get people to the ISS these days, we rely upon a Gemini era Russian booster.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by Wolf359
I get pretty disgusted watching the History channel, now it's all about aliens and I can't even figure out who's watching those shows.

OT, but I had read somewhere, for what it's worth, that it costs an insanely small amount to produce Ancient Aliens. They do a copy location shoots, but all you have to do, and I'm not even being a wise guy here, is put a camera in front of Giorgio, and let him ramble for hours on end, and you have enough content for a season's worth of episodes. Do the same with von Danniken and Childers or whatever his name is, and you've got yourself a show. Giorgio probably has more screen time on his show than Seinfeld did on his, but Seinfeld probably makes more in one episode than Giorgio did for the whole series, so that's why we're seeing this tripe.


Yeah that makes sense. Maybe people watch it for his crazy hair? Never seen anyone out in public with that kind of look. If I was a bit older, I'd probably be yelling at the TV, but I just switch the channel after a minute or two.

 

[M56959]

Folks please keep the subject about the moon landing and not conspiracy theories or shows that pander to them

Also anymore off topic political commentary being removed will get another interesting topic locked.

 

[4WD]

Think this is one I saw on a long haul flight … not bad

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dish

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Originally Posted by Cujet
I'm reading the book "Operation Paperclip" right now. Amazing story of German scientists and their work in the USA. In particular, the rocket scientists.


I've read that one as well! The amount of technology we absorbed from our "enemies" and called our own boggles the mind.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by Wolf359
Originally Posted by Shannow
Problem is that there's too much polarity in either side.

Some (obviously) faked footage does not mean we didn't go there.
The fact that we went there does not make the faked footage real.

But then to tape over the moon landing works to save costs, and forget how to get there ?

That fuels the conspiracies also.


We didn't forget how to get there. It was pretty expensive to go there, just not spending the money to go there anymore.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/...lity-to-travel-to-the-moon/#3e8baf361f48

 

[bdcardinal]

PBS just had a show "8 Days: To the Moon and Back" and it was incredible. My mom, who I said earlier worked on the Saturn V with Boeing in their parts department, was crying the whole time. I bought her the Saturn V Lego set a while ago, I need to put it together.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by Wolf359
Originally Posted by Shannow
Problem is that there's too much polarity in either side.

Some (obviously) faked footage does not mean we didn't go there.
The fact that we went there does not make the faked footage real.

But then to tape over the moon landing works to save costs, and forget how to get there ?

That fuels the conspiracies also.


We didn't forget how to get there. It was pretty expensive to go there, just not spending the money to go there anymore.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/...lity-to-travel-to-the-moon/#3e8baf361f48


Not having the facilities to build it doesn't mean it can't be done again. It wasn't clear at the time if the US would actually get there. There was thinking at the time that the Russians would get there first, but they never made it. The same issues mentioned in the article probably applies to many things that are no longer made. Can we make a Delorean again?

In terms of cost, Apollo was about 28 billion over the years which in inflation adjusted dollars, that's about 288 billion today. Nasa is working on the SLS (space launch system) which could be used to go to the moon and mars. They've already spent 14 billion on it and it'll be another 1.5 to 2.5 billion per launch. About 9 planned/proposed launches so far but the first launch keeps slipping now back to June 2020.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by Wolf359
Yeah that makes sense. Maybe people watch it for his crazy hair? Never seen anyone out in public with that kind of look. If I was a bit older, I'd probably be yelling at the TV, but I just switch the channel after a minute or two.

I would be, too.

The PBS special on the Apollo program had some interesting takes, including an interview with Sergei Krushchev, in the context of Nixon as VP visiting his father, Nikita, back in the day. There was much mention about how differing payload estimates from the States versus the USSR had their rocket become absolutely gargantuan. It would be nice for Mola to help us out on this.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by bdcardinal
PBS just had a show "8 Days: To the Moon and Back" and it was incredible.


Looks like PBS is playing that show a couple times a day for the next few days. Plan on catching one of the shows.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Just watched the 1-1/2 hr PBS show "8 Day: To the Moon and Back". Pretty well done IMO. They used a lot of the actual voice recordings and film footage and photos, but added actors and CGI simulations to play out action with the voice recordings. Pretty amazing mission, and so many things had to be perfect or disaster could have happened. I didn't recall them being out of the LM on the surface of the moon for only 2 hours doing their thing.

One thing I would have liked to see is more detail on how the LM achieved an orbit at the same speed and altitude as the CM, and how they timed it so they could find each other orbiting around to moon so they could dock with each other.

 

[javacontour]

If I understand correctly, the AM (the half of the LEM that returned to the CSM) fired it's rocket and they could steer with the attitude adjustment jets for roll, pitch and yaw.

Houston knew where the CSM was in relation to the AM and told them when to launch.

The AM and the CSM both had radars and the computers on each could use the radar information to steer each craft. In fact, one of the reasons they were getting computer alarms on the descent was Buzz and Neal decided to have that radar on during the landing so if they had to find the CSM due to a problem, it was already engaged. The (now) ancient computer didn't have enough processing power to perform the landing and handle information being provided by the radar, so it kept giving 1202 and similar alarms indicating it was dropping tasks due to being overloaded.

Fortunately, the programmers were smart enough to give the landing program priority over the extra stuff.

The radar being on was and ad-lib by the crew as it wasn't planned for the mission if I understand correctly.

Short answer, math, computers, timing and radar.

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Just watched the 1-1/2 hr PBS show "8 Day: To the Moon and Back". Pretty well done IMO. They used a lot of the actual voice recordings and film footage and photos, but added actors and CGI simulations to play out action with the voice recordings. Pretty amazing mission, and so many things had to be perfect or disaster could have happened. I didn't recall them being out of the LM on the surface of the moon for only 2 hours doing their thing.

One thing I would have liked to see is more detail on how the LM achieved an orbit at the same speed and altitude as the CM, and how they timed it so they could find each other orbiting around to moon so they could dock with each other.

 

[Pew]

Originally Posted by javacontour

Short answer, math, computers, timing and radar.


I can't even imagine the size of the whiteboard needed for all that math.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted by javacontour
The radar being on was and ad-lib by the crew as it wasn't planned for the mission if I understand correctly.


No, it was in the mission plan, for the reason you mentioned: they wanted to be able to quickly find the CSM if they had to abort. The problem hadn't been seen in testing because the simulator didn't properly simulate the additional load from the radar.

It's also worth noting that Aldrin had developed the procedures to rendevouz without the computer, just by using traditional tools like a sextant. Not sure whether he had one on board, though

.

 

[javacontour]

Makes sense.

They didn't give (what was it 9 or 10) enough fuel in the LEM to actually land when they flew it to the moon and did all but land. So they wouldn't have been running the landing program and had the radar on to test this scenario.

Originally Posted by emg
Originally Posted by javacontour
The radar being on was and ad-lib by the crew as it wasn't planned for the mission if I understand correctly.


No, it was in the mission plan, for the reason you mentioned: they wanted to be able to quickly find the CSM if they had to abort. The problem hadn't been seen in testing because the simulator didn't properly simulate the additional load from the radar.

It's also worth noting that Aldrin had developed the procedures to rendevouz without the computer, just by using traditional tools like a sextant. Not sure whether he had one on board, though

.

 

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by javacontour

Short answer, math, computers, timing and radar.


I can't even imagine the size of the whiteboard needed for all that math.


Amazing what they accomplished with very low tech systems.