It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Moon Cameras?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Let me throw this out.....Who is to say there are not cameras on the moon streaming video feeds back to earth? How about we start a conspiracy on that one?




posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: KnightFire

Ok I like this. I will start.

From Earth to Moon they zoom
From Moon to Earth they zoom!
The cameras are bolted down on the moon.
With a spy eye they watch us here on earth like a hawk finding food
Every time a human launches a space ship we follow and track it with orbs
In the orbs we have special cameras.

We have to make sure you humans do not land on the darkside of the moon (not pink Floyd)
We know somehow you made it thru the radiation belt. A barrier to block your silly ships.
We told you to stay away in the late 1960's.
Thank you for not coming back.
It is fiction!!!

edit on 4 15 2016 by Quantum12 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4 15 2016 by Quantum12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: KnightFire
Let me throw this out.....Who is to say there are not cameras on the moon streaming video feeds back to earth? How about we start a conspiracy on that one?


No, that's not stupid enough.
Let's stick with the moronic one that we never went there.



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
I have wondered about that myself. Also this shot of the capsule leaving the moon, it zooms a bit, then follows the ascent...How? And how did that attain the footage?

It is all explained in this article: Universe Today


As the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum explains in a 2011 blog post, the camera was available on Apollos 15, 16 and 17. The television camera communicated from Earth using a high-gain antenna on the rover, but there was a slight time delay for the radio waves to travel (a couple of seconds) between the Earth and the Moon. So the engineers suggested moving the rover a certain distance from the lunar module and setting the camera to automatically tilt to show the lunar liftoff when commanded from Earth. That was the plan, at least. On Apollo 15, the tilt mechanism malfunctioned and the camera never moved upwards, allowing the lunar module to slip out of sight. And while the attempt on Apollo 16 gave a longer view of the lunar module rising up, the astronauts actually parked the rover too close to it, which threw off the calculations and timing of the tilt upwards so it left view just a few moments into the flight. Ed Fendall was the person doing the controlling. In an oral history for NASA done in 2000, he recalled how complex the procedure was. Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out, and what your settings would go to. That picture you see was taken without looking at it [the liftoff] at all. There was no watching it and doing anything with that picture. As the crew counted down, that’s a [Apollo] 17 picture you see, as [Eugene] Cernan counted down and he knew he had to park in the right place because I was going to kill him, he didn’t — and Gene and I are good friends, he’ll tell you that — I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn’t see it until it was over with and played back. Those were just pre-set commands that were just punched out via time. That’s the way it was followed.


And how did they get the footage? I guess would have to be transmitted. And why not continue using the camera if it can transmit from the earths surface. I still think it is very odd.



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
I have wondered about that myself. Also this shot of the capsule leaving the moon, it zooms a bit, then follows the ascent...How? And how did that attain the footage?

It is all explained in this article: Universe Today


As the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum explains in a 2011 blog post, the camera was available on Apollos 15, 16 and 17. The television camera communicated from Earth using a high-gain antenna on the rover, but there was a slight time delay for the radio waves to travel (a couple of seconds) between the Earth and the Moon. So the engineers suggested moving the rover a certain distance from the lunar module and setting the camera to automatically tilt to show the lunar liftoff when commanded from Earth. That was the plan, at least. On Apollo 15, the tilt mechanism malfunctioned and the camera never moved upwards, allowing the lunar module to slip out of sight. And while the attempt on Apollo 16 gave a longer view of the lunar module rising up, the astronauts actually parked the rover too close to it, which threw off the calculations and timing of the tilt upwards so it left view just a few moments into the flight. Ed Fendall was the person doing the controlling. In an oral history for NASA done in 2000, he recalled how complex the procedure was. Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out, and what your settings would go to. That picture you see was taken without looking at it [the liftoff] at all. There was no watching it and doing anything with that picture. As the crew counted down, that’s a [Apollo] 17 picture you see, as [Eugene] Cernan counted down and he knew he had to park in the right place because I was going to kill him, he didn’t — and Gene and I are good friends, he’ll tell you that — I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn’t see it until it was over with and played back. Those were just pre-set commands that were just punched out via time. That’s the way it was followed.


And how did they get the footage? I guess would have to be transmitted. And why not continue using the camera if it can transmit from the earths surface. I still think it is very odd.

They explain that it was only available for the flights that had a rover, which had a high gain antenna that could transmit and receive signals to and from the moon/Earth.
Not much to see after the ascent module lifts off.... just a still life picture.
edit on b000000302016-04-15T12:44:06-05:0012America/ChicagoFri, 15 Apr 2016 12:44:06 -05001200000016 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Quantum12

Awesome!!

I wonder how many aliens are looking at Earth through their telescopes? lol



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: KnightFire

LOL

A lot!!



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I used my google-fu and this is what I found....

"It is not any camera, it is a Hasselblad… not any Hasselblad it is “Hasselblad Data Camera” especially designed to fit strict NASA specifications for Moon landing conditions.

Used by Neil Armstrong in the Apollo 11 mission, this camera was made to be as simple as possible. The operating controls were redesigned so that it could easily be handled by astronauts, despite the clumsy suits they had to wear. The shutter was modified, lubricants had to be chosen with unprecedented care because of the risk that conventional lubricants could boil off in vacuum and condense all over the optical surfaces of the lens. The mirror and secondary shutter were removed and the focusing screen for the reflex viewfinder was replaced with an opaque plate. In fact so much was removed that it would be no exaggeration to say they created the world’s most expensive box camera.

Around the same time, Kodak was asked by NASA to develop thinner new films with special emulsions and Carl Zeiss designed a completely new lens with a maximum aperture of f/5.6 and a focal length of 60 mm. The camera, the lens and the film were especially designed to work in vacuum and at more then 120°C

On board the Apollo 11 camera film magazines were loaded with 70 mm film on open spools. This permitted some 200 exposures per roll but the magazines had to be loaded in a darkroom.

When Eagle (the Landing Module) left the moon after its 22 hour visit, the Hasselblad camera was abandoned along with other no longer useful equipments, just to balance the 25kg of rock samples loaded from the surface of the planet. Between 1969 and 1972, a total of 12 Hasselblad Data Camera were left on the moon. Of course they are still there now, if anyone would like to bring them back, have to go somewhere in the Sea of Tranquility on the Moon
. The NASA described the camera as follows in its equipment list: “The Hasselblad Data Camera (HDC) is a rugged version of the commercial electric Hasselblad camera, 500EL, and is used for medium resolution, photogrammetric photography during the Apollo and Skylab missions. This camera incorporates a glass reseau plate positioned immediately in front of the film plane. The reseau plate places a pattern of precision crosses on each photograph to facilitate photogrammetric utilization of the photography”


It was sourced from this website:
blog.alexgalmeanu.com...

edit on 15-4-2016 by Giraffe because: I sometimes have the grammar of a Chimp



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
I have wondered about that myself. Also this shot of the capsule leaving the moon, it zooms a bit, then follows the ascent...How? And how did that attain the footage?


It was done remotely, there was only the once to get the timing right.

Ed Fendall was the person doing the controlling. In an oral history for NASA done in 2000, he recalled how complex the procedure was.

"Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out, and what your settings would go to. That picture you see was taken without looking at it [the liftoff] at all. There was no watching it and doing anything with that picture. As the crew counted down, that’s a [Apollo] 17 picture you see, as [Eugene] Cernan counted down and he knew he had to park in the right place because I was going to kill him, he didn’t — and Gene and I are good friends, he’ll tell you that — I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn’t see it until it was over with and played back. Those were just pre-set commands that were just punched out via time. That’s the way it was followed."

Just shows you, Ed Fendall daren't look at the live picture, and looked at the clock!
edit on 15-4-2016 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Giraffe

Interesting reply
I wonder why they never used these remarkable cameras to take a picture of the earth from orbit.
All this took place in the sixties. Technology was far less advanced than now but everything when smothely and worked.
It it similar to most NASA explanations. It is an explanation but do you actually believe it.



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: brendanduke

I agree with you that our technology is far advanced.

I just wonder why we cannot take super clear close ups of the moon.



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Since the moon landing was a hoax and was directed by the legendary Kubrick. There was surely a professional photographer on set to take these great images. Why do you ask these questions when it's obvious. You know how hard it is to take a well focus, exposed and composed photograph and these astronaut just did it without ease! How wonderful of a lie.



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

how did they get the film back... from the camera after they left lol



posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: reddragon2015
a reply to: smurfy

how did they get the film back... from the camera after they left lol

No film coming back from a video camera.
The video came to Earth via radio waves.



posted on Apr, 16 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: KnightFire

according to this article: webcam on the moon there should be a webcam on the moon right now streaming live images back to Earth.



posted on Apr, 16 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Ahhh... I digg you. It is a covert "they didn't land on the moon" thread...isn't it? You just do not want to be labelled a loony.. Doesn't matter brother, nothing to be ashamed about. And to answer your questions...

NASA didn't bother to deal with the questions you have because they were confident that the entire world would buy their corruption and fraud...and just didn't bother to solve those excellent questions.




posted on Apr, 16 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: zatara
Your reply is right on, I agree the OP was telling a story how NASA never made it to the moon.
The radiation belt is holding our silly little ships back.

His most excellent point was, how did they change the film. Right. They could not!!



posted on Apr, 16 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quantum12
a reply to: zatara
Your reply is right on, I agree the OP was telling a story how NASA never made it to the moon.
The radiation belt is holding our silly little ships back.

His most excellent point was, how did they change the film. Right. They could not!!

They could change the film in the Hasselblad cameras.
Check here, there are links, and a photo of film being changed by an astronaut.
Space Exploration Stack Exchange



posted on Apr, 16 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Wow cool, thank you. I wonder if they could develop rhe film too. LOL



posted on Apr, 17 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Quantum12

No, the OP (me) was telling no such story. The OP was simply asking a question about photography and cameras.

Let's not make this something it isn't...Mmmmm'kay?



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join