Where's the camera man?

Here's a stupid question... watch the videos below

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...
(0:38+)

I've seen a lot of videos of old Nasa tapes where there is a 3rd person camera, either following the spaceship, or filming it land/takeoff. I always wondered who's filming these, there isn't a camera man floating in space chasing the spaceship... or the first video who's filming the takeoff of the spaceship (left someone behind?)

I can't see this being remote controlled with such fast reaction time, specially in the 70s technologies!

Anyhow probably stupid question, but can someone tell me how this is done? (other then filming on Earth)

reply to post by freighttrain


Is that first vid legit? If so, you ask a damn good question!

Line 2.

reply to post by freighttrain


I have no idea... However if it was filmed on earth, and you stated that the technology in the 70's is rubbish, how would they be able to think of such an ingeneous attempt at filming a space ship taking off like that!

reply to post by The Songwriter


That's what puzzles me!

reply to post by gemineye


I'm assuming it's a "real footage", there are many more videos that are similar that are from NASA. I guess the question is was this staged on earth and they screwed up by not considering the camera man?

The filming of the lander leaving the surface of the moon, was done by radio control.

That camera and mount is still sitting on the surface of the moon.

That's a good question because the camera on vid 1 if it is legit then it means that it may still function and why haven't we seen images from that camera since then?

One image from that camera would have put this "moon landing fake" to rest a long time ago, but that's not the case. Unless I am missing something here too.

Great question!

Remote control is the only plausible explanation I can think of, but it would probably have had to have been done from the lander or the orbiter. Otherwise reaction time would have been too much of an issue.

I have been wondering about this myself for a while actually.

But someone like Armap or Phage can probably clear this up in a jiffy.

reply to post by TwiTcHomatic


If it was done by a camera on the surface and "radio controlled" from earth does it mean that every second the operator moves the camera it would take few seconds to reach moon?! and if so wouldn't it create a more shaky camera shot?

This is filmed super smooth and towards the end you can see the camera operator moves the camera to keep so that the ship is still on film! I would assume to control another object from such distance with the 70s technology would take at least few second response time!

The second video is easy to find out who the cameraman were in the second one, the lunar module had a camera mounted to it, when it was coming towards the docking ship waiting in orbit another camera was also mounted on that to get a receiving image of the lander.

But the fist video I am not to sure how that one was done, probably a tracking device was put on to the camera, that is pretty simple tech.

When I was younger I used to wonder the same thing.

There was only about a 2 second delay from the Earth to the moon. The camera was also operated by someone from NASA (mission control).

I remember seeing a documentary that talked about it a few years back.

reply to post by okimas


But there are many more NASA videos, that shows the ship from a long distance, even chasing it towards the moons orbit, does "lunar module" move that fast/close to the docking ship?

I'll see if I can find more example of this!

the camera on vid 1 if it is legit then it means that it may still function and why haven't we seen images from that camera since then?

Where are the rest of the videos, I"m sure it worked for good few years before it broke!

[edit on 10-9-2009 by freighttrain]

The television camera was mounted on the rover which Gene parked about 145 meters east of (behind) the lunar module. The ascent stage ignites and climbs, spacecraft foil and dust flying in all directions. Ed Fendell in Houston anticipates exactly the timing of ignition, lift-off, and the rate of climb, and the camera tilts to follows the ascent.

This is from the info section right next to the first video. Who is to say how good Ed Fendell was at taking account of the time lag, an "timing of ignition, lift-off, and the rate of climb...."?

(Edit for being really, really crap at html)

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Karilla]

reply to post by freighttrain

Lunar lift-off film for Apollo 17. The television camera was mounted on the rover which Gene parked about 145 meters east of (behind) the lunar module. The ascent stage ignites and climbs, spacecraft foil and dust flying in all directions. Ed Fendell in Houston anticipates exactly the timing of ignition, lift-off, and the rate of climb, and the camera tilts to follows the ascent. At pitchover, the throat of the ascent engine points down at the camera and its combustion is visible as a small bright light. The clip ends as Challenger reaches an altitude of 1,500 feet.

From the Youtube description. Sounds cut and dry to me.

Sorry didn't the above post.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by alyosha1981]

I remember seeing an interview with the technician who was responsible for the shot, he said it was the hardest thing he had ever done, not for the technical difficulty, but to in charge of something so important.

He said the commands had to be sent taking into account the delay because of the distance, 2 seconds I believe, he said he had hardly any sleep because he kept running the calculations over and over, I remember he also said about 3 mins before the command was to be sent he had serious doubts and had to do a quick scribble to recheck, but he seems to have got it right.

As for there being nothing from the camera after leaving, my guess would be the module was used as a relay station to broadcast the pictures home, either the lander or the orbiter, maybe that's why?

I wonder if what they have in orbit now could send a command to the rover and see if it can be reactivated? it was built to survive the radiation so perhaps they could still get it to work?

Anyone know anyone who works for Nasa who could find out if any of the cameras left up there could be reactivated?

Originally posted by azzllin

Anyone know anyone who works for Nasa who could find out if any of the cameras left up there could be reactivated?

I do not work for NASA and I don't know any "insiders", but since the Lunar Rovers were battery powered I don't think it is possible to reactive the TV cameras:

Power was provided by two 36-volt silver-zinc potassium hydroxide non-rechargeable batteries with a capacity of 121 amp-hr. These were used to power the drive and steering motors and also a 36 volt utility outlet mounted on front of the LRV to power the communications relay unit or the TV camera.

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...