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.
Originally posted by ppk55
[1] The 2 photos are taken 27 frames apart
[2] The astronaut descended into a crater to take the second one
[3] The sun moved at least 2 degrees in elevation between these photos
[4] Every photo they took had the horizon at a different level as evidenced in the pans above.
[5] They had no viewfinder
[6] The 2nd photo was omitted from the pan
[7] to be confirmed, that the astronaut had the usual fixed, chest mounted camera. Which means he would have to tilt his body to match the suns position exactly, even without a viewfinder.
Frames is not a measurement of time, unless they are a constant, like 24 frames per second. When someone takes a photo whenever they want you cannot use the number of photos as a measurement of time between photos, you don't have that information.
Originally posted by ppk55
So what was it at frame 6766 ? Based on the 1 degree movement between those 13 frames, I'd say another 1 degree based on the next 15 frames.
AS12-46-6731 (OF300) ( 170k or 1075k )
116:22:29 Rightward of 6730. Down-Sun view. The larger of the two mounds that Pete and Al will investigate after deploying the ALSEP is visible at the right side just below the local horizon. As can be seen in a traverse map ( 715k ), the large mound is about 22 degrees north of west as seen from the LM. At the time Pete took this picture ( about 1244 GMT/UTC on 19 November 1969 ), the Sun was almost exactly east of the spacecraft at an azimuth of 91 degrees and at an elevation of 8.4 degrees. The north rim of Head Crater is on a line about halfway between the tip of Pete's shadow and the mound. As Pete mentions at 118:27:12, he mistakenly took the pan at 15-foot focus instead of 74-foot focus.
AS12-46-6739 (OF300) ( 129k or 757k )
116:22:29 Rightward of 6738. Up-Sun view of the LM and S-band antenna. As mentioned above, the Sun's elevation is about 7.6 degrees. As Pete mentions at 118:27:12, he mistakenly took the pan at 15-foot focus instead of 74-foot focus.
In the above quote, a shadow of 14 meters for an object 2 metres high means a Sun elevation of 8.1, not 8.4, if I am not mistaken.
AS12-46-6751 (OF300) ( 169k or 1025k )
116:24:47 Rightward of 6751, with the S-Band antenna on the left, the antenna cover next right, and the U.S. flag just to the right of Pete's shadow. Note that Pete mistakenly took the pan at 15-foot focus rather than 74-foot focus. Pete took the pan at about 1248 GMT/UTC on 19 November 1969, when the Sun was about 8.4 degrees above the eastern horizon. If the top of Pete's helmet was 2 meters above the ground, on a level surface his shadow would have been 14 meters long.
Intrepid Thru the Yankee Clipper Sextant ( 22k )
Dick Gordon spotted both the LM and Surveyor III on the surface, using the Command Module sextant during his pass over the landing site at 114:22:28. At Houston's suggestion, he used the DAC to film his next pass and this is a frame from that film sequence. At that time, the solar elevation was about 8.1 degrees and the LM sahdow about 160 feet. Ulli Lotzmann provided the frame and a labeled version.
Originally posted by ngchunter
Originally posted by packinupngoin
This one just speaks for itself.
So you think ISS is a hoax too? How do you explain the fact that amateurs like myself can track ISS based on its orbital elements and see it just fine?
www.youtube.com...
Mapping Camera System
The purpose of the mapping camera system was to obtain photographs of high geometric precision of all lunar surface features overflown by the spacecraft in sunlight. This camera system consisted of a 76-millimeter Fairchild mapping camera (SIM3) using 5-inch film, a 3-inch stellar camera using 35-millimeter film, and a laser altimeter. The electrically operated system was powered by 115 volts, 400 Hertz alternating current (AC), and 28 volts direct current (DC) spacecraft power.
...
(skip)
...
The stellar camera was mounted on an axis at 96° from that of the mapping so that it photographed the sky while the mapping camera photographed the lunar surface. Any photography designated "stellar" refers to this photography, except that discussed as Special Photography and Experiments. The film cassette containing stellar and mapping photography was removed from the SIM bay by the command module pilot during trans-Earth trajectory and was returned to Earth in the command module.
If you have a rover on the Moon already why are you spending 89 million to impact a part of the Moon? We already knew there was water underneath the surface!
Originally posted by packinupngoin
The ISS is real and it is in LOW EARTH ORBIT.
The space walks on the other hand are simulated, b/c man does not have a pressure suit good enough to handle that environment.
Here are a few of my final take home pts:
~Man has not set foot on the Moon, any other thought process is wishful (pretend) thinking.
~The Mars landers are suspect.
~The purpose, impact, and results of the LCROSS are very suspect. HERE IS THE KICKER: If you have a rover on the Moon already why are you spending 89 million to impact a part of the Moon? We already knew there was water underneath the surface!
Originally posted by ngchunter
Originally posted by packinupngoin
~The purpose, impact, and results of the LCROSS are very suspect. HERE IS THE KICKER: If you have a rover on the Moon already why are you spending 89 million to impact a part of the Moon? We already knew there was water underneath the surface!
We suspected, but we didn't know the amount that would be found in the permanently shadowed regions. We have no active rovers on the moon though, don't know where you got that notion.
Originally posted by packinupngoin
Sigh if we are going to believe that Man went to the Moon on the Apollo missions wouldn't we assume that they had a rover on the Moon that was active at the time.
Wait a minute I just noticed something that I had noticed before.
Apollo 11
Launched 16 July 1969
Landed on Moon 20 July 1969 SO YOU MEAN TO TELL ME IT TOOK 4 DAYS TO GET TO THE MOON?! WHAT???
Sea of Tranquility
Returned to Earth 24 July 1969
Wow and they returned only 4 days later. Yet i'm ignorant for questioning this.
On the LCROSS mission web page it says the LCROSS mission was launched on 06/18/2009 and the impact date was 10/09/09.
It took at least 3 months.
How were we able to get to the Moon so quickly in 1969???
False.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Don't forget, each Apollo mission (except 13, of course) conducted an EVA to retrieve the film from the SM camera. This camera took photos from Lunar orbit, and had to be retrieved from outside, and brought into the CM, before reentry...since the Service Module (SM) is jettisoned, and does not return to Earth (well, it does, but burns up on entry...):
False.
Keep yourselves clean of this 'new dark ages' social engineers, at least just for your own sanity.
I am new to this forum and genuinely interested in historical research and technical details of Apollo that are not possible to obtain from history.nasa.gov
...and I do not subscribe to so called moon hoax ...
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by bokonon2010
Since this thread is mostly about the problems that 'one' ATS member seems to have, with some so-called 'anomalies' that he/she thinks they see. When in fact, it is easily explained, each time.
Capcom: Roger, we need tool number 3 and tool number W out of the tool kit.
SC: Okay, 3 and W out of the tool kit.
Capcom: Right, put number 3 in the tool W ratchet and insert tool 3 in the hex opening in the chlorine injector port.
SC: Okay, that looks like where it's probably leaking.
Capcom: Once you've got tool number 3 well engaged in that injection port, turn it about a quarter of a turn.
SC: Okay, Houston. It looks like that did it.
Capcom: 15, Houston. We're looking now at the best procedure for getting the water system operating again and in the meantime we trust you have your hands full of water up there.
SC: Oh, yeah. All we have to do now is hang out a few towels to dry, but it looks like we're in good shape.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bokonon2010
Do you mean this:
Capcom: Roger, we need tool number 3 and tool number W out of the tool kit.
SC: Okay, 3 and W out of the tool kit.
Capcom: Right, put number 3 in the tool W ratchet and insert tool 3 in the hex opening in the chlorine injector port.
SC: Okay, that looks like where it's probably leaking.
Capcom: Once you've got tool number 3 well engaged in that injection port, turn it about a quarter of a turn.
SC: Okay, Houston. It looks like that did it.
Capcom: 15, Houston. We're looking now at the best procedure for getting the water system operating again and in the meantime we trust you have your hands full of water up there.
SC: Oh, yeah. All we have to do now is hang out a few towels to dry, but it looks like we're in good shape.
www.jsc.nasa.gov...
What's your point?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bokonon2010
Oh. That water leak.
What's the problem? 25 pounds of water?.
Now if that isn't what you're talking about, please just say it now.
138:03:56 Scott: Morning, Houston. This is Falcon.
138:04:00 Fullerton: Roger, Falcon; Houston. Loud and clear. And when you're up and ready to converse, let me know.
138:04:11 Scott: Okay, Gordo. Will do.
138:04:15 Fullerton: Rog. First thing we've been concerned about - I guess we'll start off with this - is, according to our data, you lost about 25 pounds of water during the post-EVA yesterday; and, it appears that it leaked out during that problem you had with the broken bacteria filter. What we're wondering is if you've looked around carefully in the cabin, and noticed any sign of that 25 pounds of water. We suggest looking back behind the ascent engine cover, because it possibly would have run back there (because of the LM tilt) and not have been obvious to you. Over.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by bokonon2010
I don't know what your particular problem is, if it's just an issue with the English language not being your native tongue...
...but it appears that you're asking how a water leak on the LM could exist, because the Ascent Module would have been exposed to vacuum druing EVA 1?
Naturally, you are correct about the vacuum exposure. AND, as I'm certain you intend (but play games by not coming right out and mentioning it, but instead drop veiled insults) any liquid water exposed to hard vacuum would quickly sublimate.
HOWEVER....what has led you to think the water leak happened ONLY when the cabin was depressurized??
(Hint: It occured while they were ASLEEP!]
After EVA 1, and they were IN the LM ("Falcon"). You are aware that they repressurized between EVAs, and removed their helmets, right?
I would think that a thorough examination of all the historical records would have uncovered this already, and made this exchange on ATS pointless --- because it is.
Originally posted by history.nasa.gov... 126:18:06
[They will report the broken bacteria filter at 127:52:48. At 130:32:01 and 130:54:42, Houston will tell Dave and Jim that they may have lost 25-pounds of water due to the leak. And, finally, at 138:04:15, just shortly after wake-up, Houston will ask them to look behind the engine cover and clean up any water they might find.]