General Chat

Hey Bob, I am long enough in the tooth to remember the old B & W Television showing him grinding the mirrors for his reflector. It was on 'The Sky At Night', sometime in the late 1950's.

Just for fun. Here's a different version of the apollo 11 landing. lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4cjPHjFz5g&feature=related.

Steve
:o)

LOL do you recall that on several occasions he signed off the program with something like........

""well, there you go, not conclusive evidence, but maybe soon we will find out!!""

great guy though.....
many years ago I read a book of his, on how he built a 4 inch reflector telescope, by grinding his own mirrors.......
Bob

This the footage of the apollo17 luner take off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIKRkvCKri8

Steve
:o)

Afternoon SRS and everyone,
Exactly, Patrick Moore is such a genuine trustworthy chap.
As I said, I remember him and his excitement and passion at seeing it than I do the actual landing.
Wasn't really 'girls stuff'. lol

Yes, If not ,Where did all the Cheese come from? **M**:o)>

There ARE currently images available reportedly of the site where they had left some of Their "Junk" .

taken from an explorer type craft orbiting the moon......
Bob

we've been watching the 10 minute documentaries each night, the kids knew nothing about it really and I, like Ed, was 6 at the time and don't remember much. I really never gave it a thought that it wasn't real, but I've recently been a bit of a doubter - it all just looks so unreal - but there are some convincing facts on this thread. we're off to Florida in 2 weeks and will be going to Kennedy (sorry Elaine!) so I might learn a bit more about it!
Maz. XX

One of the best authorities on space is without doubt Patrick Moore. Eccentric he may be, but dumb he ain't !

When cynics began to say the moon missions were faked in a studio he pointed out that astronomers all around the world had tracked the Apollo missions. The angles of the radio waves received from the spacecraft could be determined, by simple trigonometry, proving beyond doubt that the signals were coming from the moon. And NO, the signals were not just bounced off the moon, they would have been detected.

One last fact to disprove the doubters: if it had been faked, don't you think the Russians, who were America's arch-enemy, would have said so?

Just one simple question ...

Why would they fake it SEVEN times? (Eight if you include the aborted Apollo 13 mission). Once yes, twice maybe, but that amount?

They really did it if you ask me - and they calculated it all in miles, feet and inches - long live imperial measurements!

I was six at the time, and I remember the moon landing fairly well. I was space happy when I was growing up (bit of a space cadet now actually!) - I think the lunar landing is the first real global event I recall.

Ed

Stevie, thanks for the explanation,( you seem to have had a more interesting life experience than my mundane maintenance time.) but then the grass is always greener??????

I sort of had half an idea that is what happens, but you have made things a little clearer------no pun intended!!

I also appreciate that cameras were mounted on the superstructure of the craft, but the one I am thinking of seemed way toooo far out for that.......
only other explanation I can think of is the sequence broadcast MAY have been edited......

Bob

I have only seen photos and film clips of it all since - but on the day, we sat and watched it as it happened. Cameras had been set in position before the craft left earth and a lot of it was filmed by crew-members who only got as far as the door - didn't step out onto the moon.

You young'uns have grown up with the acceptance of all of this - but for those of us who were taught at school that it was impossible for man to get to the moon - it was a fantastic revolution. We could hear everything that was said as they said it and right in our own living-rooms - another revolution of the 20th Century - but yet another thing which the young people accept as part of the necessary items in a home like water and electricity. How else would some entertain the little ones without a TV?

I don't remember seeing the craft leaving the moon, but I understood that they left a lot of things up there - surely cameras would be included.

Bob...I think there are few issues when a rocket is engine burning. One is the atmosphere it is burning in....In earths atmosphere there is a lot of water vapour. This in itself will cause a smokey trial of water vapour.
Also the when hydrogen & oxygen burn, the obvious by product is water vapour. When they test the space shuttle engines. The exhaust gases...water vapour actually creates a rain cloud & it rains after the test.

Also & maybe this may answer your question, is how efficient the fuel burns. The hydrogen (which in the past was derived from hydrozine) when burnt purely in O2 will burn with a colourless flame.
I know this as a fact, from my days of MOVPE work. We had to have UV flame detectors, in case in the event of a hydrogen leak that caught fire.

Steve

there IS one thing that recently troubled me, I have always believed that the landings really happened BUT........

when a rocket engine fires, on earth there is obvious action......flame smoke and stuff..
when the engine is in rarefied atnosphere the flame seems to diminish ( watching the footage from the shuttle,boosters and fuel tank etc)

on the moon when the rocket fires, there is NO flame or smoke......just bits of junk flying around.......is that real? I thought that a rocket by its nature carries its own oxygen and propellant so I thought that there should be flame n smoke n stuff.......
any one any views on that?

Bob

I really dont think that patrick moore would have been able to actually see the vehicles? on the moon there wasnt a telescope powerful enough, methinks

also on another clip, there is a remote camera, showing the astronauts exiting the module...after the landing...did I miss something? who put the camera in position.......think it WAS apollo 17

♥*¨¨*Little White Dove*¨¨*♥ Today at 21:39 Request review
Yep cos Patrick Moore watched it through his telescope

That's the most convincing argument. I trust him.

Well I don't know about you SRS...but I definitely didn't....I think!

The classic piece of footage of the lander taking off the moon. I believe it was Apollo 17. Was done by camera remotely controlled by a NASA technician in the control room. Panning the camera upwards using a joystick.

Because of the time delay that it takes for the signal to reach the moon. He had to send the signal about 2.5 secs before take off. To keep the craft in the view of the camera. He had to work out the stake off trajectory of the craft relative to camera. From this, he calculated how quickly he would have to pan the camera upwards.

So at T minus 2.5secs he pulled the joystick for the camera back at the rate he had calculated it to move at.

The at T = 0 secs (on the moon) the lander took off & the camera panned upwards............Then it took another 2.5 seconds for the pictures from the camera to return to earth.

So from his view of that camera monitor. It was 5 seconds from the time he pulled back on that joystick until he saw the pictures of lander taking off & also to see if he'd calculated it right.................It was a one off shot. If he got it wrong there was no take two.

Steve.

Yep cos Patrick Moore watched it through his telescope,I remember that. I was 16 I should remember more about it than I do. Shame on me.

The bit I cannot explain to myself after all these years is how the lunar module was shown leaving the moon. Who filmed that ?

And so many shots that could have only been made with a remote external camera.

Of course they landed on th moon. Conspiracy theorist conspiracies everywhere. All of the issues they brought up about, shadows, reflections in space helmets & lack of stars in the moon sky have all been explained away.

The most compelling evidence that they did land. Was, when each Apollo mission flew, circled the earth & sling shot outwards to the moon & landing. There is constant transmission (both data & vocal) between the spacecraft & earth. This was received & sent by radio telescopes from around the world. ie in the UK at Jodrell bank.
Not only did these receive & send signals to the space craft. These radio telescopes also tracked it, by triangulation. Thousands of scientist & academics were involved in this world wide & thousands more contributed to the program........Could they have all been kept quiet for 40yrs?
So if the moon landings were a conspiracy. It wouldn't have been a USA?NASA conspiracy. But it would had to have been a worldwide conspiracy.

Steve