yo don't worry if you saw the footage from inside he got back in it's just he went too fast for us to see him but nasa will send new missions to bring back the other cameramen
At 1:30 the leader asked Cameraman " You want to pick up the Camera " Then at 3:03 the camera focussed on the ridge of the hill but moved to the sky automatically by image sensor though there was no Digital Camera at that time and no image sensor to react so quickly at all. So, Cameraman may be starving there. They should hurry up!
@@jaycharles3121 Do you know that you can reflect the laser in mirrors that were left by astronauts on the lunar surface? IS this proof enough? You have a precise coordinates on the Internet, point the laser at those coordinates, and you'll see the laser reflected. Boom,hoax debunked. Haha.
Jay Charles They lost the original tapes recorded on film in case the telecast didn’t work. What they lost were backup tapes. They didn’t “lose” the blueprints to build the Saturn V. The Saturn V was purposefully retired because it no longer had a use. Do you expect nasa to keep building a multi billion dollar 50+ year old rocket that had no use to them?
I suspect NASA would have built another spacecraft to replace the outdated craft by now. I also suspect after mastering manned moon visits, NASA would have returned post ‘72. I strongly suspect NASA would have displayed advancement in space travel, beyond aircraft (space shuttle), graphics screens, layered CGI videos, and actors in suspension harnesses. We have witnessed their capabilities, and they are severely lacking. Anyone using their higher mind knows why.
@@toberrdrawforc They have tried to build more Moon rockets and they have tried to go back to the Moon. But Nasa had a budget cut of over 4 times after Apollo and the budget continued to slowly decline. They simply didn't have the extra money (until recently) to carry out their ambitions. Research the Space Transport System proposal from 1969, The Constellation Program, and the Space Exploration Initiative.
Utterly amazing achievements; the two astronauts sound so calm in the final moments before lift off, you’d think they were popping to the shops! Incredible. I loved every minute of Apollo. Hope I’ll still be here to see the return of man on the moon.
The controller who was controlling the rover's camera had tried to get that shot on the 2 previous missions and couldn't do it, the delay of his commands going from Houston to Goldtone then to the Moon and back caused issues. They computed the delay they got from the previous attempts and for the last try, the controller started controlling the cam even before they took off.He sent the un-zoom and tilt command beforehand to make up for the delay. To be able to catch the pitch over point was a piece of work.
***** Nasa gets half of one penny from every dollar of taxes you pay. If you want to gripe about the government wasting money, talk about the development of the F-35 fighter plane, which has run a cost of over a THOUSAND BILLION dollars and STILL isn't working up to par.
***** do you wear a digital watch, use a pc? It was NASA and getting things small enough to fit into spacecraft, not American business, that let to the techno boom.
Dvenchy No, the Japanese were just manufacturers, not inventors, at least at the time. It's a different story today of course, but Apollo breakthroughs in computer tech did affect the computer industry.
Please speak for urself. Even the men who “went” were ashamed of themselves for lying. Their first interview wasn’t men ecstatic to tell the world of their great adventure. They were sullen sad and frankly didn’t wanna talk about it. Then none of them went around to schools telling all the school children to reach for the moon and when confronted about it as older men they got very angry. And buzz Aldrin now that he is really old has been recorded saying they didn’t go to the moon. See as you get older you get diahreah of the mouth and ur brain wants to cleanse the heart and soul of lies. The fact is we didn’t go to the moon. We can’t go to the moon. There is a gas up there that snuffs out all fire. So it’s impossible. But notice I said up. Yes there is an up and a down. We r the down. The earth is flat and we have a fixed firmament over us dividing the waters from the waters. So it’s us .. then a glass firmament and water above that and then God. We r His footstool. And once you realize everything in the book of Genesis is true and that God made all this and we can’t go anywhere you start to realize what matters and that’s ur relationship with Christ.
@@paulnotdownunder3172 You should see what they've used to record the moon landing and what we've done to make the footage more presentable. It's been 51 years, you can't expect the footage to remain like it was shot. I would ask you: if in your mind, it really happened, how would it have been and also looked with the technology from that time? Not as good right?
@Alf G You should see the historical part of it, they were pressured to go to the moon and the money to fund it wasn't a problem, they couldn't let the Russians get there first (they already caught up in some steps). After these moon landings, there was no need to keep going because they had already beaten the Russians, and also because they got everything they needed to make research; we still have the moon soil gathered from the Apollo crew and it's been more than enough. What we lacked is the technology to sustain life there, to live there, landing is no problem, but what's the point of spending billions when the outcome is always the same. That's what the Artemis program is aiming for, don't bother making up things, sit down and wait for 2024, we're getting back on track.
So much energy required to launch that thing into lunar orbit yet strangely no gas exhaust no dust either, the mission scientists were pretty sure they would not get footage due to the amount of gas exhaust and dust
@@AndrewAHayes the exhaust of the fuel used, aerozine 50, is already hard to see in the atmosphere, but in a vacuum, where rocket exhausts get thinner and wider, it's practically invisible, but you can see some of the descent stage's top catch fire 2:58
LOL. Nice try. This was the last Apollo mission, and the last time humans have ever been to the moon. You were watching Battlestar Gallactica, my friend.
I can't imagine what it was like to be a kid during the Apollo program and watching these missions. Too bad we haven't gone back. I would love to see a moon walk in my lifetime with the technology we have now.
nigPRO I was eleven when Apollo 11 touched down. Even as a kid watching from earth it was a incredible time. I can still see that black and white tv screen with the scratchy video and audio of Neil Armstrong making his famous speech. Apollo was awesome! Maybe we’ll get back there again and I hope we both get to see it.
I was almost 10 years old during Apollo 11. By the final several flights I set up a nerdy card table in front of our tv set and got up at odd hours for special events that I recorded. I have hours upon hours of recordings (old cassette tapes marked Apollo 17, etc) still down in my basement these 50 years later. The Apollo moon landings were the stuff of dreams for a kid just starting his teen years :D
It's camera logic with naked eyes you can see the stars exposure brightness can only do one thing see really bright things or Focus to Dark If You Focus on the dark Stars the Moon will be over brightness
Amazing to think of that LEM landing gear just sitting there in that desolate place for 50 years now -- and where it'll likely sit for tens of thousands of years, or longer, before disintegrating altogether. Call me weird, but I see that as kind of eerie, in a way.
Some stuff was seen immediately as it was TV footage. Any fairly high definition footage was taken by a 16mm cine camera, this of course had to be brought back and processed before it could be viewed.
The first thing to remember is that two spacecraft in the same orbit will move at exactly the same speed. That alone simplifies the rendezvous process, at least when compared with two aircraft attempting to stay close together. The next thing is that one dimension was taken out of the equation, with the command module performing a plane-change burn so that its orbit was perfectly aligned with the ascent path of the lunar module. After that it was a matter of careful timing. The lunar module launched into an elliptical orbit below and behind the command module. Being in a lower orbit meant that the lunar module caught up to the command module. As it did so it performed a series of burns to raise its orbit closer to that of the command module. Obviously, raising the orbit reduced the rate at which it caught up to the command module. The idea was that the lunar module would enter the same orbit as the command module when it was in the same point in its orbit as the command module. The theory was well understood, and was practiced first on the Gemini missions, then on the earlier Apollo missions. The plan (and this always happened) was for the lunar module to do all the rendezvous work while the command module stayed in its orbit. But if something went wrong during the lunar module launch, the command module pilot was trained to steer the command module to whatever orbit the lunar module had achieved.
So tell us what it should have looked. Point out anything about the above video that violates the laws of physics or the television technology of that time.
@@FosterZygote The fact it has to go 4000 mph to catch the command moduel in moons orbit the fact it's a cardboard plastic tarp that only I'd call it a toot. ( Not a fart) a little baby spark of flam then pulled up by wires to a white dot lit up going around. To the fake Background. The commentary is all this video has as proof them saying what there doing. Go check out NASA amazing unbelievable close up picture quality of the Apollo moon missions.(a white dot with a white arrow saying what the white dot is🤣) dude you can say your phisics or believe this devil worshipping Freemason cult they have a Telescope with the Catholic Church in the Vatican it's Name Lucifer. The Father of lies Satan NASA worships Satan NASA equals 666 tap my icon on my page I've done a video showing my proof of this astroNOTs to the Moon 😜😂🤣🤪👀😎
Since it takes a radio signal 1.28 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon, the cameraman in Houston had to command the camera to pan up 1.28 seconds before liftoff in order to catch the shot.
@Andre You shouldn’t concern yourself with correcting others when you have an abundance of flaws which are hopelessly correctable. Focus your attention on how to correct your own behavior & to stop being the horrible & awful person that you are.
@Andre You make this way too easy for me. Until you can explain these words you’ve quoted, you have zero credibility. _“againand”_ _”beliefes”_ _”bullshoit”_ _“claimt”_ _“commenty”_ _“debunkt”_ _”flalling”_ _”intellekt”_ _“ist”_ _“nonnse”_ _“preove”_ _“qwuite”_ _“sho”_ _“strill”_ _“sumarize”_ _“tpo”_ _“tzrying”_ _“Undtil”_ _“veryy”_ _”ware”_ _“Yeds”_ _”Youq”_ _“yourf”_ _“Yuor”_ _“yxour”_ _“youzr”_ _“yxuor”_
It's no joke either. is there anything that demonstrates America's decline as much as the rise in superstitious belief, the advocacy of ideas such as 'Intelligent Design' and conspiracism? It's so sad. Is it not said that great powers destroy themselves from within?
@@eventcone America's Founding Father's built my country on the belief of an "intelligent Design". The reference is even on our money. Maybe in your country that belief is forbidden by your atheist leaders.
@@daffidavit Such was the general belief at the time, though it was founded on nothing more than the Bible and the dogma taught by an authoritative church. To teach something for which there is no evidence is wrong. We live in a more enlightened age. Are my country's leaders atheist? I don't know. Some of them are, no doubt, whilst some of them are not. It doesn't matter. And leaders change from one year to the next.
@@eventcone Sorry, but your assumption that "there is no evidence is wrong" is wrong. There is evidence. It's called eye witness testimony. It's used everyday in court's of law in my country. I'm not sure where you are from but my guess is it's either the UK, Australia, or some other older English speaking country. The "whilst" gave it away. Either way, your courts too allow "witness testimony" as evidence. So your statement that there is "no evidence" is incorrect. If you had said "scientific evidence" then your argument would have been correct. G'day.
from what I understand the cameras stopped working after 27 hours due to the moon's dust that they could never figure out how to not get on it. The dust would cause the cameras to overheat. The panning shots gave them trouble because of the improper dimensions given which is why you see the camera pan downwards right after.
Common "call outs" of this video answered. Upvote this so people can clarify: "There's no fire!!" - The lunar module's ascent propulsion system burns hypergolic fuel which produces a transparent flame (the titan-gemini also burns hypergolic; the exhaust is transparent). Additionally, the moon has no atmosphere, meaning the rocket exhaust has an infinite volume to expand into. Take something that's already very transparent, and stretch it out to infinity. You won't be able to see it. "Nice fireworks on takeoff" - those were likely small bits of the lander or even pieces of the explosive bolts that had just detonated to separate the ascent stage from the descent stage. "There should be way more dust!" - there was a lot of dust kicked up, it just didn't linger because once again, there is no atmosphere. On Earth, there is air for the dust particles to linger around in. On the moon, there is not, so the dust falls back down as does anything else. Also, there was a solid object directly between the engine and the surface of the moon. "What about the cameraman??" - there's this thing called remote control?? The first two or three times they tried to film the LEM taking off, they failed because they hadn't perfected the camera panning with a several second delay. This last time they got it. "The engines only turned on for half a second and it's in orbit? How?" - the engines were on for a while. You just don't see the plume. It's hard to tell because your only reference frame disappears, but it is accelerating upward. Not moving at a constant speed, not falling back down, but accelerating. "How come rockets are so big on Earth, but this was so tiny?" - The LEM is very lightweight. Also, let's not forget tsiolkovsky's rocket equation. dV = Veq * ln(mf/me). The moon has a low orbit velocity of about 1.7 km/s, and the Earth has one of about 7.8 km/s (let's also not forget the effect the atmosphere plays on earth rockets). You need exponentially more fuel to accelerate only four times as fast because of the physics behind this equation. Also, hypergolic fuel is very dense, so it takes up less volume.
Sammy , I appreciate very much your explanation of the fuel . I myself have never been a denier or hoaxer, I just didn't square with the take off . You , sir , nailed it .
I'm a believer, i.e. I believe in what I see and hear minus what I don't know and am cheated by my senses.What is explanation of no sound and vibration comming from 16 kN rocket engine? EDIT: I'm referring to some other video which is recorded within LEM during the same time. Recording device captures voices (no vacuum, inside is pressurised) but do not capture any sound of working engine on which they practically sit. Also I know now there's no turbo pump. Still there're turbulences, burning, rapidly expanding gases. I'd be glad if someone with particular knowledge of this kind of rocket engine provide me with information regarding sound level which should be expected in this case. Also this is a minor discrepancy and I do not give a fu.. about it anymore.
That rocket motor had to be 100% reliable with no chance of a misfire on takeoff. After having gone through the rigors of travelling through space , that was a very tall order.
@butchtropic Also they only needed 2 out of 8 available valves to work. Getting up was a lot safer than getting down, and both of those were a LOT safer than taking off from the cape. If not for the extra safety measures taken they could have gotten a lot more weight on the moon (and more samples back) as the fuels were far less effective per weight unit.
Chris Kleckner The rocket system that took man to the moon and back had 83 rocket engines - if Iremember that correctly. Vintage Space did a special video on the number engines. What rigors are you talking about? Do you even know for yourself?
@@TheCatBilbo Bell industries is awake now. After a helicopter lands it drops the engine. The second engine it carries will bring the chopper up in the air again. Airplanes can do the same. After landing they drop two engines and use the two remaining engines for lift off. In the future cars will have two engines. One for driving forward and one for parking backwords. In area 51 there are many ufo engines the aliens dropped because they wanted to get back home after landing on our planet. I think the alien space ships visiting many planets must have had a thousand engines they dropped all around the galaxy.
@@gmailaccount1894 Um, right. I was meaning: one engine in the lander section (left on the Moon); one engine in the ascent stage (to reach orbit again); both had to work and that means having a lot of faith in them, hence the astronauts being brave. I wouldn't tell everyone about the Aliens and their many engines...the Men in Black will come find you. ;-)
Holy balls of steel. I would rather fight ten vikings to the death than get in that thing. All I can say is thanks guys. We would probably still be cavemen if not for guys like this and the people behind them.
@@unarammer2003 Ohh a flat earther. Because you saw a conspiracy video you have all the answers? Can you explain why it is not real? So they did this to fool the Russians? They will be going back soon. Will that be fake too?
@@MuckoMan ohhh sure they are going back...and they will have space force to protect them from alien attacks...grow the f**k up...you people are what's wrong with the world...when I say u people I mean the mindless masses that believe TV is reality...
@@unarammer2003 Why are you so confident? I felt that way at one time and in reality I don't really know for sure. I know they did put a lot of money into shooting giant rockets out into space. From there no one knows what happened. All I know is those guys had bigger balls than most of us.
@@landanwoodard7569 - you didn’t find those colourful sparkle bursts realistic? I’d like to think a dollar shop party popper could create a similar effect. Maybe I’ll create a similar video claiming i landed on a rainbow and have the masons push that information onto the sheeple. Oh I forgot, I’m not a part of that satanic cult!
These comments though. I truly can't believe, with what we've learned in past decades since this "event" that anyone still believes this. 🤔 I'll say it, no, we have never been on the moon.
I was the same age. I wrote to Nasa and they sent me 8x10 crew photos and mission reports even to a kid in Canada. I was thrilled and still have them. It inspired me to an aeronautical engineering career. Im sure 100s of 1000s of theres were similarly inspired. These bozos who weren’t even alive who say it was all faked really tick me off. What a slap in the face to their nation’s finest hour.
I know! I did too! And the fact that one of the two astronauts was a geologist on the moon was awesome. Man did he totally geek out over everything he saw.
Yes ,Stanley Kubrick was a great director One of the best movies... The audio script could have been a little better though.. He didn't have a big enough budget...
A lot of the space effort was for publicity, so it’s no wonder that cameras were on board and left behind on the Moon. There’s nothing explicitly strategic about going to the moon. except for the devices created along the way.
Lift off from the lunar surface fifty years ago yesterday. Knowing they were to be the last of the Apollo missions, they fit as much as they could into the 75 hours the LEM crew spent on th moon. Good that they did. Amazing achievement from beginning to end.
To all the hoaxers who think it's impossible for radio signals to travel that far and operate a camera, the first "wireless" remotely controlled torpedo was demonstrated by Nikola Tesla in 1898, 74 years before Apollo 17. Archibald Low was known as the "father of radio guidance systems" for his pioneering work on guided rockets and planes during the First World War. In 1917, he demonstrated a remote-controlled aircraft to the Royal Flying Corps and in the same year built the first wire-guided rocket. In World War I, the Imperial German Navy employed FL-boats (Fernlenkboote) against coastal shipping. These were driven by internal combustion engines and controlled remotely from a shore station through several miles of wire wound on a spool on the boat. An aircraft was used to signal directions to the shore station. EMBs carried a high explosive charge in the bow and traveled at speeds of thirty knots. The Soviet Red Army used remotely controlled teletanks during the 1930s in the Winter War against Finland and the early stages of World War II. We had devices that can pick up signals in pico and atto watts (10^-15 to 10^-18 watts for a very long time). Your phone GPS works with weaker signal strength than that and even an average FM radio receiver is sensitive enough to work with signals in the pW range. Now I hope you understand what a Watt is or how a radio receiver is. And if you come here spitting "Space is fake", then I'm sorry, I can't convince genuinely brain damaged or retarded folk.
@@yazzamx6380 Well, yes. I do question things I don't understand. That is how it is supposed to work, right? Are you telling me you don't question things that don't make sense? That explains a lot.
@@sheshotjfk8375 - You said "Well, yes. I do question things I don't understand. That is how it is supposed to work, right? " That is not what you were doing here and hence you prove the point I was getting too. If you don't understand something then you should make the effort to understand it so that your opinions can come from an informed position, that's where the questions come in. But suggesting something you don't understand is FAKE just *because* you don't understand it, is actually called denial! Hence your reply of "uh huh. Right!" is you saying I'm wrong despite the fact you don't understand it and clearly have done no research into what I'd said, so all you've offered here is denial :-|
Seriously, more than one person here isn't arguing about the LM, or about radiation, but they're arguing that rockets don't work in a vacuum. Like, basic physics.
When you come for the footage and then stay for the amusing comments produced by attention seekers who's only goal in life is to create chaos through idiotic conspiracy theories 👌
I love the footage, but I'll admit that I clicked on this for the comments. It's unreal that people are watching this on a device they pulled out of their pockets, yet they don't believe we went to the moon.
Mathew Martin the founding of America was a conspiracy. There are conspiracies throughout history. Laughing at the idea of conspiracy is as retarded as thinking everything is a conspiracy.
@@Giggiyygoo Yeah, me too ... I admit it--I've been doing this lately--also because I'm curious to see just how our civilization is pushing the boundaries of ignorance versus creativity ...
@@carbonc6065 That's a good way to put it. Sometimes these flat earthers show some creativity in the way they come up with ways to rationalize a reality that is objectively false. Sometimes they even make us think about something that we never had to explain before, simply because we never thought we would need so much proof that the earth is round, or that space travel is real. I also wonder that, if these guys can deny reality to such an extreme amount, then what is it that I may be denying on a lesser level? Even the best of us can gain weight, or let debt pile up, or stay in a bad relationship all while rationalizing it away. Maybe I'm thinking too much, and these guys are just dumb. Who knows?
@@vsetenjoyer This is amazing camera work from Houston working on at minimum a 5 second delay. The way they timed the take off with a 3 second count down on a 5 second delay. Amazing.
@@mrmighty9862 What do you mean? What is your point here? This is in no relation to what my comment was, I was simply saying how Apollo 13 was an achievement too not comparing amazingness factor of each achievement completed by Apollo missions.
They were in-house geologists they never had a chance to analyze the rocks. Only recently they did analyze a moon rock that was given by Neil Amstrong to Netherlands that turn up to be a petrified wood.
+scaloi Haha...no. The moon rock was given to the Prime Minister by ambassador J. William Middendorf. Numerous theories about this...either Middendorf kept the real rock, or the Prime Minister (who apparently absolutely loved the gift) swapped it out and kept it for himself. I tend to believe that the Prime Minister hid the real one somewhere and perhaps never told anyone until he died. OR he sold it. Why in the hell would the US government try to intentionally pass off petrified wood as a moon rock? Why not just use a piece of actual rock?
I don't know the entire story behind it, but I know that no independent geologist ever authenticated a moon rock that supposedly came from the Apollo missions. Moon rocks are on earth too. If you know the one let everybody know.
The Apollo missions were just so exciting! I remember the Apollo 17 mission well. I was a space-crazed 10 year old, and I was so disappointed that the lunar EVA's took place while I was in school! I tell younger people I feel very fortunate to have watched Apollo 11 mission (as well as all of the other Apollo missions) live as a child - missions that will be remember just not for hundreds, or even thousands, but tens of thousands of years from now when humanity set foot on another world!
+Roger Clemons Computer generated images. In the late 60s and early 70s. When a computer took up a majority of a room and could basically just do math. Sounds legit.
+InitialDsTak The doubletalk of these hoax nuts! They want to claim that NASA had the computer tecnology to produce hours of CGI, but not to run flight control software without virtually zero graphics display!
We should have gone back many times by now.. yeah. - and we likely would have, had it not been for the ALIEN UFO BEINGS WHO WARNED THE U.S. ASTRONAUTS ON THEIR APOLLO MISSION, (TO), "STAY OFF THE MOON! THIS IS NO PLACE FOR YOU!!" NASA's reply was: "OK then. You got it, Mr. E.T.'s "sirs". Message heard, received and understood. 'Your' moon. 'We' bad." End of discussion (and moon flights!) ;o)
Look up field sequential color to find out why the video looks odd. I actually have a color polaroid of the lm taking of moment, taken from the video screen at JSC. My late dad designed the circuit to separate the video signal into the 3 separate colors, to recombine into color later, so frame rate is 1/3 of normal. Remember the camera with the rotating 3 color filter in front of it? This video is as real as it gets!
These color artifacts also prove that these scenes are indeed recorded by a live video camera - not recorded on film and then broadcast afterward on video. I point this out because if the shots were hoaxed, they would have to be first recorded on film (especially for any supposed "slow motion" low gravity astronauts on moonwalk effect). You would not get the peculiar RGB separations or highlight streaks that are telltales of primitive video sensors, if the scenes were first recorded on film. Then again, I'm giving hoaxers too much credit to assume they even understand the difference between film and video.
Neil Armstrong himself made about 40 successful 'practice landings' on Earth prior to the Apollo 11 mission. The flying simulator used - the LLRV/LLTV - made about 700 successful flights and landings by the end of the Apollo program.
@@eventcone I believe it's double of what you are saying. I think Armstrong had about 40 flights in the LLTV in the last month before the Apollo mission... but, I believe he would do two landings per flight, before needing to refuel.
Craig, why would you think such silly things? Why? They had hundreds upon hundreds of practice landings in the computerized simulators. And, they all performed dozens of practice flights/landings in the LLRVs and LLTVs (actual flying simulators that were designed to simulate 1/6th G. Where are you getting your notions from? (Let me guess, a conspiracy video told you they never had practice landings, right?)
@@eventcone No thanks required. But, just to add, Armstrong also had flights in the LLRV a year before his flight. The 40 flights (two actual takeoffs and landings per flight) were just in the last month before Apollo 11. But, there was about a year when he didn't fly, because he had crashed in the LLRV, and NASA banned the use of the LLRVs after that, and wanted them to only use the LLTVs after that crash. But, the LLTVs weren't done yet. And, then, finally, when the first LLTV was done, it crashed before they turned it over to the astronauts. So, Armstrong had to wait until the 2nd LLTV was built before flying one of them again.
Request to UA-cam : A effing simple ignore system. 1. See someone who is dense and stupid. 2. Hit IGNORE 3. Done The way it is now, it's easier to launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles than it is to ignore someone who denies something that clearly happened.
The only manned lunar mission that happened during my lifetime...I was born in the summer of '72! 😉 I remember watching STS-135 lift off with my year and a half old son, and telling him that it was the only shuttle mission that he'd ever get to watch live.
@@Spark-In-The-Dark don the tinfoil hats...I'm not chasing you down that rabbit hole. But you can keep being you and keep propagating someone else's lies all you want. Just don't do it on my posts. And I assure you that they are lies.
@Brent Boswell Be careful you don't think too much so you don't give yourself an embolism. There's way too much air going through your head, for it to be safe for you to think if you believe the moonlandings were real.
You don't know what happened to that ball, when the GROUND temperature reached that hight at lunar noon, several Earth days later. Vacuum has no temperature, so it wasn't like the ball was in an oven while Shepard handled it and sent it flying.
It takes awhile for an object to heat up, even on the moon. From the time Sheppard pulled the ball out of his pocket and then hitting it was a matter of a minute or two max.
@@raulm1961 imagine how good they would do it now! Better sets, CGI ! Apps to control the delay, so you don’t need the CIA on the earpiece prompting them.. or bits of cardboard at the spaceship window! They would make it look beautiful and believable!
@@Dazza19746 Is this seriously what you are doing with your life? Why watch the videos that you claim to hate? By literally giving space agencies money from YT revenue lmao
@@MeltedToast84 where did I claim to hate it? It’s entertaining, watching how pathetic the fakery is, and also interesting to watch how people like you react vehemently defending the lie. It’s pretty much the same as religious people ‘defending their faith!!’ A large number of awaking individuals, now know about many of the lies we’ve had moulded into this ‘reality’ And please explain how ‘space agencies’ get money from some Italian guys YT channel 🤔😂
@@Dazza19746 "A large number of awaking individuals" you mean the middle-aged men with nothing better to do than listen to retarded liars like yourself? If you cant understand basic science, and i KNOW you can not as you are clearly extremely uneducated in actual physics, thats not my problem. You use your disgustingly cynical mindset to laugh at and make fun of people with opposing views. How the fuck do you expect people to join you? Your literally doing the same concept as those protestors destroying art in galleries all over the world. The fact that you are "entertained" by watching others "fail" as you call international achievements, proves to me that you are in the worst state of mental health I have ever seen. I dont know if this is because your lover ditched you (understandably) or you just had so much lying nonsense shoved down your throat that you had no other option than to join the cult. As I am now fairly concerned with your tragic state of mind, i can not for the life of me be bothered to respond anymore than I have done. Utter buffoons like yourself are far, far beyond saving and unlike you in your sad lonely little life interacting with online trolls, I actually have things to do outside of the internet. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤪🤪🤪🤪🥰🥰🥰😜😜😜😜😜😜😜 Legit you ^
So glad this footage is available to the masses. I for one would have never any desire to watch this if UA-cam were not in existence. It’s been a wild ride UA-cam
When I watched this on tv as a young guy the video would have the word simulation in the corner of the tv screen. I think the whole thing was a simulation.
Moron of the highest order. Watched it himself and grew into a manchild believing flimsy conspiracies. How old are you but still holding onto childish beliefs and the desire to feel special? Grow up old man, it's time.
This thin skin idea is a common misconception. The crew cabin of the Lunar Module was actually made of an aluminum alloy, with the various pieces welded together. In NASA's own words, "The cabin is 92 inches in diameter and is made of welded aluminum alloy which is surrounded by a 3-inch-thick layer of insulating material. A thin outer skin of aluminum covers the insulation." The misconception that the skin was as thin as aluminum foil stems from this thin outer layer being misconstrued as the ship's only skin. It also stems from many folks mistaken belief that the thin layers of mylar used as heat protection were used as the only skin of the whole ship.
Pisses me off that you didn't put the damned YEAR... I guess it was around '72 and the last mission, without Googling it? At any rate, I remember how sad it was how *routine* moon missions had become. So routine, that this mission was hardly noticed. Hardly paid any attention. They came back home and just a BIG "So what". What an amazing irony for so great an accomplishment.
This historical event, I still see it and I am moved by the precision and that they have used two cameras to document it. It is simply an amazing achievement.
@@cha7664 yeah, ok🤣🤣🤣 haha, Hey you guys, look at this ballon head over here. Dropping in with your space balls account pic all like; hi! my name is.. Who? My name is.. What? My name is; Chicka chicka Fuc*ing GlobeTard👌🏼 Get the f*** out. 😂
Only village idiots are laughing. Didn't you notice? Always has been and always will be village idiots. And nobody cares what they believe or not, except maybe the mental health services.
Perhaps 'hatred' could be driving some of the comments, but there is --- and I believe more so -- willful ignorance, plain stupidity, mindless mistrust, and the pathological need to troll. Now, if this is the part where any trolls out there want to troll me on this... go right ahead. I'm not returning to this thread, so I won't see your response. In other words... go fuck air.
@Andre What a shocking surprise to find you here, oh wait no surprise at all. You’re so predictable. Poor andre, he’s still trying to peddle his troll nonsense, pitiful! I’m just here to remind you of your defeat, because it’s so fun. Again, all the proof will be linked once again & again for everyone else & especially for your viewing pleasure. Let’s summarize the *facts...* - You made zero attempts to address the first link & therefore have forfeited. For the record the link exhibit “A” will be entered below - You present your argument as for the reason to no visible flame at take-off for the LEM due to the hypergolic fuel. Exhibit “B” will be entered below as evidence - I present Scientific proof which proves the claims of exhibit “B” to be false. Exhibit “C” proving exhibit “B” to be false will be entered below as evidence - I presented the argument of air displacement on the lunar surface with exhibit “D” of which you’ve failed to answer correctly. Exhibit “D” is entered below as evidence. - I presented exhibit “E” the argument of the problem with the lack of delay with the telecommunications to & from the lunar surface, of which you failed to answer correctly. Exhibit “E” is entered below as evidence. - I presented the argument exhibit “F” concerning the lunar dust & the lack of moisture in the lunar atmosphere, of what you failed to answer correctly. EXHIBIT “F” is entered below as evidence. - I presented the argument exhibit “G” in regards to the lack of sound transmission from the engine within the cabin of the LEM, of which you failed to answer correctly. EXHIBIT “G” is entered below as evidence. - I presented the argument exhibit “I” concerning a displacement of air effecting items on or around the lunar rover, of which you answered incorrectly. EXHIBIT “I” is entered below as evidence. LET THE RECORD SHOW THE OFFICIAL FINAL SCORE AS OF 8/1/20 IS AS FOLLOWS... *ARTAMUS*_________*07* ANDRE _________00 EXHIBIT A ua-cam.com/video/tePbGoaNROE/v-deo.html EXHIBIT B ua-cam.com/video/q-ba0CltR54/v-deo.html EXHIBIT C ua-cam.com/video/_pCtjMKeV-w/v-deo.html EXHIBIT “D” ua-cam.com/video/b6AM6R0G4jw/v-deo.html EXHIBIT “E” ua-cam.com/video/eaONDmbp9tc/v-deo.html EXHIBIT “F” ua-cam.com/video/Uqe2f5kbL58/v-deo.html EXHIBIT “G” ua-cam.com/video/z4T8J60STxM/v-deo.html EXHIBIT “I” ua-cam.com/video/9gpvHPDbQ1M/v-deo.html Let’s proceed... You have failed to accumulate a single point on the scoreboard. Therefore as a result of your incompetence, you’re left with a humiliating defeat. While you’re wallowing in the misery of being handed such a crushing & decisive defeat, I’ll savor the victory & will constantly remind you, *FOREVER!* You won’t be a happy camper, for sure. *BAAAWWWHAHAHA!*
I totally get the fact that doubters have questions. Some of the questions are natural; some are a stretch, but since every single question has a plausible answer it's obvious that deniers just WANT so BADLY for it to be a hoax that they decide before hearing the answer that it's a lie. I guess you don't have to be a flat earther to be a moon landing denier, but you DO have to be a moon landing denier to be a flat earther.
I’d have to agree with you about flat earthers needing it to be fake, but since I’m not a flat earther, I can’t speak for them. However, I think you’ve got it ass-backwards when it’s diehard moon landing believers that want it to be real sooo bad, they’ll accept this obvious garbage as being real. They’re no longer capable of critical thought & will easily accept any ridiculous explanation the proven liars put before them, no matter how absurd it may be. This crap-pile is crumbling fast & those who continue to stand on this dung-heap are liable to melt into it if they don’t jump off soon.
Artamus Gordon - So please present your favourite hoax evidence. I have seen many, and not a single one survives scrutiny. It’s all paranoia and ignorance.
Flat earthers are just plain morons. I can understand why someone would have doubts of the moon landings. It’s not based on any of the actual evidence though, and it’s never started from any actual evidence. It’s about the us motivation. Very plausible that they’d fake the landing to 1 up the Russians. Everything then collapses when you look at all the actual evidence and all the hoaxers arguments are debunked (and have been for 5 decades).
The Earth is flat the moon landing was faked and our history is a lie 9/11 was an inside job how many lies do we have to hear before the truth comes out they're pushing the satanic agenda time to wake up people we are being lied to #FLATEARTH NO DOUBT ABOUT IT
Yikes. I cannot believe the number of people who can't wrap their heads around the idea that humans have dared to pursue a dream of setting foot on the moon and actually achieved it. Is it so hard to think that a group of people dedicated years of their lives to a goal, greater than anything you will ever do in your lifetime, and were able to accomplish it with fewer resources and tighter time constraints available to you in this era? Go ahead, keep wasting your time trying to discredit the accomplishments of the men and women you envy. The world doesn't need you if all you can think to do with the resources and knowledge available to you is to ignore it all for your fragile ego. Do yourself a favor and let go of the weak, discredited arguments you've been holding onto for dear life. Use the time and energy you used to use defend these arguments and apply it to improve a part of yourself you know can be better. Time is precious and it's best used to build, not destroy.
Sure, you must be right! Lol. So, after all the effort and adventure the only real solution for proof is destroy all evidence!!!!!!! Technology especially so!!!!! Lol.
@Boris Madzarevic 😆 🤣 😂 the cameraman was left there with 50 years worth of snickers bars and died in 2013 when he ran out. He weighed 102 lbs when he died. Last person he ever talked to was president Nixon on a landline and then they lost the technology to be able to communicate and as astroNOT Don Petit said, they "lost the technology" to go back or communicate. The cameraman became a Buddhist monk in order to cope with loneliness. He dropped the mirror when he died do its no longer visible with the laser. Of course it was there until them tho and anyone thar questions it is a brainwashed moron.
Ascent engine was complete simplicity for reliability. No pumps, or other mechanical fanciness, just pressure driven propellant feed with helium pressurizer.
What I find fascinating is that around the 4:40 mark in the video, the rover's camera pans around the landing site, zooming in on descent stage absent, of course, the LM ascent portion. It gives us a glimpse as to what the sites of all 6 landing missions would look like were we lucky enough to see them as they are today. Let's hope that at some future time, we will preserve each and every one and forever be a testament to human ingenuity and the drive to explore other worlds.
Back in 1985 I had the privilege (fortuitously) to have a private dinner with Gene Cernan, a great guy. Learned he was a HS classmate of NFL great Ray Nitshke and a flight school classmate of John Akers (then CEO of IBM). An American hero!
Did John Akers say why he wkold have let B. Gates have IBM DOS intellectual property and deprive IBM investors of the future proceeds that MS DOS received? Besides "Gate is a 'genius?'" The DumbA$$!
"Apollo Program" Producer: Walt Disney deceased in 1966. Co-producer: Wernher Von Braun. Director: Stanley Kubrick Art Director: John Hoesli. Writer: Arthur C Clarke. Photographer: Geoffrey Unsworth. Current cost = 169.51 billion current dollars Something very logical is that the Apollo missions were carried out in the 🌎because if it had been true that NASA in 1962 sent its first astronaut into space, taking just "6" years to take them to the 🌙 because in 1968 they orbited it, in 1969 they walked on it , in 1972 they were for the last time, bone today "50" years later at least we were vacationing in the 🌒 and traveling to Mars.
Taking poor quality analogue video and converting it to HD does absolutely nothing to improve the quality. I could not tell much difference between the 240p it chose automatically and the 1080p maximum selection. I can't wait until we go to the moon again with modern imaging equipment so we can get REAL HD footage.
The swings effect is due to remote cameras controlled from the rover via the operator on earth trying keep the LEM in the camera view. Much like you taking a picture of a fast moving bird curving away fron you. 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. The flight path of the LEM had a 15 sec ascent follwed by "Pitchover". At pitchover the automatic computer and preset guidance system ( very primitive) would lock in two guide stars and angle the ship in the correct position to achieve orbit and rendenzous with the Command module. Yes reading reading scientific stuff can be boring but you cant do proper research without it. (Transcript is from Apollo 11) Frank O'Brien writes, "At this point, Buzz is performing an alignment of the LM's inertial platform. Rather than the traditional Program 52, which requires sighting two stars through the AOT, Program 57 is used. All platform alignments require determining the exact position of two references is space, which is all that is necessary to determine the platforms orientation to any reference. Normally, stars are used as the references, as they combine the necessary quality of being in fixed, well-defined locations in the sky. Program 57 does use one star for its orientation, but the fact the LM is on the surface allows the platform to use another well understood reference: the gravity field of the moon. Thus, performing a fix on a star, and sensing the gravity vector for its second directional reference supplies all the information necessary for the computer to align the platform to a known orientation."
Not at all, because first the axis of the sine wave would be centered on the middle of the video and not its bottom, first, and second, as there was a delay between the command and its effect, it would have looked like a square wave and not a sine wave.
Forget Moons gravity. They need 1 g acceleration and the Moon has 1/6th of that only. Since the ascending stage has had no tilt mechanism for the drive nozzle, the correction nozzles wold have to fire permanently to hold the path, but they don´t...
@james crowe it has nothing to do with our schools......it has everything to do with social media......it's a breeding ground for every crackpot theory under the sun
@@yazzamx6380 At the speed of light there would be a 4 second delay in transmission. 2 seconds from the camera to earth and then 2 seconds remote response from earth to the camera on the moon. How did the cameraman in Houston pan and zoom the camera to follow the lunar module? How were the radio communications so quick too? How were they apparently faster than the speed of light? We witness camera delays here on Earth today (2019) just from one part of the world to another, but somehow it was instantaneous 230,000 miles away on the moon. I really would like to know.
@@DCTib - No my friend, at the speed of light the delay is 1.3 seconds in each direction, where communication was via *direct line of sight* between the massive radio telescopes/dishes here on Earth and the radio dish on the rover. Before lift-off, the astronauts mounted the TV camera on the rover, where it ran off the power left in the rover's batteries. For Apollo 15, there was a problem with the TV camera and so Ed Fendell couldn't pan the camera to track the Ascent Module; ua-cam.com/video/Y5f1oWu5VtY/v-deo.html For Apollo 16, Ed Fendell tried again. He had to *listen to the countdown and move the TV camera controls seconds before it reached zero* so that the commands reached the camera at just the right time to follow the Ascent Module. He timed the start correctly but he couldn't pan the camera up fast enough (because the astronauts parked the rover closer to the LM than planned), and so the Ascent Module went off the top of the screen; ua-cam.com/video/yn1S-flYkaQ/v-deo.html Apollo 17 was Ed's third and last chance. Guided again by the countdown so that he could react just before it reached zero, Ed managed to zoom the TV camera out and then panned the camera up at the correct speed, where this time he successfully kept the Ascent Module within the shot, as seen in this topic video.
I’m still amazed at this time (2019) that the Americans could pull this trip off. I remember as a kid when this took place but did not realize just how hard it was for this mission to succeed. I really wonder what NASA could do with todays technology on going back to the moon. One thing for sure is that there will be wonderful pictures and videos/cameras. Maybe they could leave a couple of live feed PTZ cameras for us to play with via the internet !!!!
Ross in Ontario Like you, I remember those days. One thing is for certain. If we go back, there would be a new generation of conspiracy lunatics calling it a hoax.
@@kingmanta7679 critical parts of the technology are lost because the men who designed and built them by hand are dead. This was one of the disadvantages of doing the space race under a time constraint without modern-day computer and engineering technology. We will have to reinvent such technology and join it to much more advanced technology, or perhaps find completely different ways of accomplishing a return to the Moon. that does not mean that the evidence we have that they actually did go to the Moon successfully isn't accurate oh, it just means we don't have all the information and Technology to do so presently. also NASA's budget is much less than it was in the 1960s when we were doing this race to the moon, And also the national and political will is not unified behind this goal as it was then.
@@biggawinnacrapsa3870 This particular situation was in everyone's mind from the very beginning, since there had never been a 'launch' from any other place but the Earth. It was Collin's nightmare scenario at the lunar orbit, for flying alone back home would have been devastating. But the lander launching itself out of nowhere with two guys strolling around is a different nightmare.
NASA is planning other moon mission in 2024 to bring back cameraman
You didn't know that the camera to record the footage was located on the lunar rover and operated remotely from mission control?
Sailor Man you didnt know it was a joke?
That was a simple but great one 😆🤣
yo don't worry if you saw the footage from inside he got back in it's just he went too fast for us to see him but nasa will send new missions to bring back the other cameramen
At 1:30 the leader asked Cameraman " You want to pick up the Camera " Then at 3:03 the camera focussed on the ridge of the hill but moved to the sky automatically by image sensor though there was no Digital Camera at that time and no image sensor to react so quickly at all. So, Cameraman may be starving there. They should hurry up!
After two previous failed attempts, they finally got the liftoff camera programmed correctly. Great and historic video.
about 2004 NASA said that they 'Lost' the tapes of Apollo and cant find the blueprints for the ship either...Hmmm...
@@jaycharles3121 Do you know that you can reflect the laser in mirrors that were left by astronauts on the lunar surface?
IS this proof enough?
You have a precise coordinates on the Internet, point the laser at those coordinates, and you'll see the laser reflected.
Boom,hoax debunked. Haha.
Jay Charles They lost the original tapes recorded on film in case the telecast didn’t work. What they lost were backup tapes.
They didn’t “lose” the blueprints to build the Saturn V. The Saturn V was purposefully retired because it no longer had a use. Do you expect nasa to keep building a multi billion dollar 50+ year old rocket that had no use to them?
I suspect NASA would have built another spacecraft to replace the outdated craft by now. I also suspect after mastering manned moon visits, NASA would have returned post ‘72. I strongly suspect NASA would have displayed advancement in space travel, beyond aircraft (space shuttle), graphics screens, layered CGI videos, and actors in suspension harnesses. We have witnessed their capabilities, and they are severely lacking.
Anyone using their higher mind knows why.
@@toberrdrawforc They have tried to build more Moon rockets and they have tried to go back to the Moon. But Nasa had a budget cut of over 4 times after Apollo and the budget continued to slowly decline. They simply didn't have the extra money (until recently) to carry out their ambitions. Research the Space Transport System proposal from 1969, The Constellation Program, and the Space Exploration Initiative.
Utterly amazing achievements; the two astronauts sound so calm in the final moments before lift off, you’d think they were popping to the shops! Incredible. I loved every minute of Apollo. Hope I’ll still be here to see the return of man on the moon.
Because it’s fake
@@TheEpoxyExpert no.
@@TheEpoxyExpert Yeah, because in the video the moon looks greyish, but everyone knows it is yellow and made out of cheese!
Their heart rates told a different story. Neil A was famed for having a really low one though even during the stressful parts.
They were probably totally concentrated on all instruments and controls. No time to even think about being nervous.
The controller who was controlling the rover's camera had tried to get that shot on the 2 previous missions and couldn't do it, the delay of his commands going from Houston to Goldtone then to the Moon and back caused issues.
They computed the delay they got from the previous attempts and for the last try, the controller started controlling the cam even before they took off.He sent the un-zoom and tilt command beforehand to make up for the delay.
To be able to catch the pitch over point was a piece of work.
Wow. Cool. 👍
Thanks for that, It's something I've wondered about for a while.
Zoomer30
Yeah right.....lol
Merendo Bereglidditz
Not really, just way past the technology of the time lol
@@thearcadian290
Withdrawn. 😞
This never gets old.
Half a century ago actually, that's old. And never bothered to go back since. 🤔
A GREAT era in American history. A time when men with great determination and huge balls did great things. I long for that era. (sigh).
***** Nasa gets half of one penny from every dollar of taxes you pay. If you want to gripe about the government wasting money, talk about the development of the F-35 fighter plane, which has run a cost of over a THOUSAND BILLION dollars and STILL isn't working up to par.
***** do you wear a digital watch, use a pc? It was NASA and getting things small enough to fit into spacecraft, not American business, that let to the techno boom.
+Tom Johnson are you kidding me? it was that Japanese not NASA.
Dvenchy No, the Japanese were just manufacturers, not inventors, at least at the time. It's a different story today of course, but Apollo breakthroughs in computer tech did affect the computer industry.
Still not been back there…
Humanity is proud of you guys. Well done.
It was the greatest lie ever above the JFK assassination geat work lads
Just USA citizens are proud of they, nothink more
Please speak for urself. Even the men who “went” were ashamed of themselves for lying. Their first interview wasn’t men ecstatic to tell the world of their great adventure. They were sullen sad and frankly didn’t wanna talk about it. Then none of them went around to schools telling all the school children to reach for the moon and when confronted about it as older men they got very angry. And buzz Aldrin now that he is really old has been recorded saying they didn’t go to the moon. See as you get older you get diahreah of the mouth and ur brain wants to cleanse the heart and soul of lies. The fact is we didn’t go to the moon. We can’t go to the moon. There is a gas up there that snuffs out all fire. So it’s impossible. But notice I said up. Yes there is an up and a down. We r the down. The earth is flat and we have a fixed firmament over us dividing the waters from the waters. So it’s us .. then a glass firmament and water above that and then God. We r His footstool. And once you realize everything in the book of Genesis is true and that God made all this and we can’t go anywhere you start to realize what matters and that’s ur relationship with Christ.
One of the last greatest moments of engineering magnificence in the 20th Century.
One can only imagine.
@SJ S Probably, maybe Egyptians believed that too!
Greatest hoax of mankind. Look at the LEM rocking from the window view at 2x speed. Brainwashed zombies.
@@paulnotdownunder3172 You should see what they've used to record the moon landing and what we've done to make the footage more presentable. It's been 51 years, you can't expect the footage to remain like it was shot. I would ask you: if in your mind, it really happened, how would it have been and also looked with the technology from that time? Not as good right?
@Alf G You should see the historical part of it, they were pressured to go to the moon and the money to fund it wasn't a problem, they couldn't let the Russians get there first (they already caught up in some steps). After these moon landings, there was no need to keep going because they had already beaten the Russians, and also because they got everything they needed to make research; we still have the moon soil gathered from the Apollo crew and it's been more than enough. What we lacked is the technology to sustain life there, to live there, landing is no problem, but what's the point of spending billions when the outcome is always the same. That's what the Artemis program is aiming for, don't bother making up things, sit down and wait for 2024, we're getting back on track.
Looks authentic to me! First time seeing the extended recording from the LRV camera. Thank you! What an exciting era this was.
So much energy required to launch that thing into lunar orbit yet strangely no gas exhaust no dust either, the mission scientists were pretty sure they would not get footage due to the amount of gas exhaust and dust
@@AndrewAHayes the exhaust of the fuel used, aerozine 50, is already hard to see in the atmosphere, but in a vacuum, where rocket exhausts get thinner and wider, it's practically invisible, but you can see some of the descent stage's top catch fire 2:58
0.25x speed from 3:02 look at that nice engine blast
I see an igniter activation.
@@kenrose3464 eee what a meticolous.
Where is the dust. Oh. The artist forgot it.. Bwaahhaahhhaahhaa
@@stevewittwer7444 LOL "the artist"
thats the effect you got from blowing of firecrackers
Was great to see live, great to see again.
I so agree. This was amazing when it happened and still is amazing to so these many years later.
Science is awesome.
I remember seeing one of the later Apollo missions (with the moon rover) on TV as a little kid.
LOL. Nice try. This was the last Apollo mission, and the last time humans have ever been to the moon. You were watching Battlestar Gallactica, my friend.
@@BayviewFinch "Later" meaning "toward the end of the program".
And people still somehow believe this is fake
Its crazy to think all that gear will still be in the exact same place untouched as it was left all those years ago
Hillarious!!!
you humans are amazing whether you're creating or destroying.
that's why we visit you so much.
I can't imagine what it was like to be a kid during the Apollo program and watching these missions. Too bad we haven't gone back. I would love to see a moon walk in my lifetime with the technology we have now.
nigPRO I was eleven when Apollo 11 touched down. Even as a kid watching from earth it was a incredible time. I can still see that black and white tv screen with the scratchy video and audio of Neil Armstrong making his famous speech. Apollo was awesome! Maybe we’ll get back there again and I hope we both get to see it.
MOON,LROC,STRUCTURES ua-cam.com/video/uz1KLRfxTCc/v-deo.html
I was almost 10 years old during Apollo 11. By the final several flights I set up a nerdy card table in front of our tv set and got up at odd hours for special events that I recorded. I have hours upon hours of recordings (old cassette tapes marked Apollo 17, etc) still down in my basement these 50 years later. The Apollo moon landings were the stuff of dreams for a kid just starting his teen years :D
Artemis is funded. The astronauts have been named, and are in training. And, the craft are being designed and built right now.
@@rockethead7
Yada yada yada rockethead, yawn... we've heard it ALL before.
But we won't hold our breath.
3:02 … and... we... are.. OUTTA HERE!!!!
Nice Hollywood background :)
Derp.
It's camera logic with naked eyes you can see the stars exposure brightness can only do one thing see really bright things or Focus to Dark If You Focus on the dark Stars the Moon will be over brightness
Amazing to think of that LEM landing gear just sitting there in that desolate place for 50 years now -- and where it'll likely sit for tens of thousands of years, or longer, before disintegrating altogether. Call me weird, but I see that as kind of eerie, in a way.
maybe if and when we go back there they will use it for parts for something else when they build a settlement on the moon.
The world didn’t have to wait until they were back on earth to see the video
Some stuff was seen immediately as it was TV footage. Any fairly high definition footage was taken by a 16mm cine camera, this of course had to be brought back and processed before it could be viewed.
The navigation amazes me. How they will rendez-vous in three dimensional space right speed right altitude etc.
Radar.
The first thing to remember is that two spacecraft in the same orbit will move at exactly the same speed. That alone simplifies the rendezvous process, at least when compared with two aircraft attempting to stay close together.
The next thing is that one dimension was taken out of the equation, with the command module performing a plane-change burn so that its orbit was perfectly aligned with the ascent path of the lunar module.
After that it was a matter of careful timing. The lunar module launched into an elliptical orbit below and behind the command module. Being in a lower orbit meant that the lunar module caught up to the command module. As it did so it performed a series of burns to raise its orbit closer to that of the command module. Obviously, raising the orbit reduced the rate at which it caught up to the command module. The idea was that the lunar module would enter the same orbit as the command module when it was in the same point in its orbit as the command module.
The theory was well understood, and was practiced first on the Gemini missions, then on the earlier Apollo missions.
The plan (and this always happened) was for the lunar module to do all the rendezvous work while the command module stayed in its orbit. But if something went wrong during the lunar module launch, the command module pilot was trained to steer the command module to whatever orbit the lunar module had achieved.
The problems they had with the cameras is exactly like the problems in broadcasting in that era.
It's a movie. They had help from Hollywood experts. Kubrick.
Massive evidence that we went to the moon. One goonball Felicio says we didn’t and the sheeple say it was faked.
@@normahostetler7859 Wash your mouth. Never ever call out Stanley Kubrick again on this.
Fantastic work hollywood :)
@@andrewpeterson4753 im sure it did happen... in hollywood
Who is videotaping in the outside?.
They say it's remote control hahahahhahaha can you belive that shit 🤣🤣🤣
Ivan majić - Zašto ne?
Ivan majić - You don't believe in remote control?
Interesting...
Remote control is now fake?
@@julesdomes6064 don't play smart bc you are not 😉
Ivan majić - So why is it not remote control? You know what remote control is, right?
The graphics are “out of this world” 🤣
Like you're bad jokes.
Damien Oleary back at you
Damien Oleary it’s “your” btw
So tell us what it should have looked. Point out anything about the above video that violates the laws of physics or the television technology of that time.
@@FosterZygote The fact it has to go 4000 mph to catch the command moduel in moons orbit the fact it's a cardboard plastic tarp that only I'd call it a toot. ( Not a fart) a little baby spark of flam then pulled up by wires to a white dot lit up going around. To the fake Background. The commentary is all this video has as proof them saying what there doing. Go check out NASA amazing unbelievable close up picture quality of the Apollo moon missions.(a white dot with a white arrow saying what the white dot is🤣) dude you can say your phisics or believe this devil worshipping Freemason cult they have a Telescope with the Catholic Church in the Vatican it's Name Lucifer. The Father of lies Satan NASA worships Satan NASA equals 666 tap my icon on my page I've done a video showing my proof of this astroNOTs to the Moon 😜😂🤣🤪👀😎
If anyone thinks that is real, I feel sorry for you.
What village idiots believe or not is completely irrelevant.
Since it takes a radio signal 1.28 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon, the cameraman in Houston had to command the camera to pan up 1.28 seconds before liftoff in order to catch the shot.
Actually it was just a dude behind the camera.
@Andre
You shouldn’t concern yourself with correcting others when you have an abundance of flaws which are hopelessly correctable. Focus your attention on how to correct your own behavior & to stop being the horrible & awful person that you are.
@Andre You make this way too easy for me. Until you can explain these words you’ve quoted, you have zero credibility.
_“againand”_
_”beliefes”_
_”bullshoit”_
_“claimt”_
_“commenty”_
_“debunkt”_
_”flalling”_
_”intellekt”_
_“ist”_
_“nonnse”_
_“preove”_
_“qwuite”_
_“sho”_
_“strill”_
_“sumarize”_
_“tpo”_
_“tzrying”_
_“Undtil”_
_“veryy”_
_”ware”_
_“Yeds”_
_”Youq”_
_“yourf”_
_“Yuor”_
_“yxour”_
_“youzr”_
_“yxuor”_
Americans 1969: 'We put a man on the moon, we lead the world in scientific and technological know-how.'
Americans 2020: '5G is witchcraft.'
😂😂 they used up all their brain power getting to the moon...
It's no joke either. is there anything that demonstrates America's decline as much as the rise in superstitious belief, the advocacy of ideas such as 'Intelligent Design' and conspiracism? It's so sad.
Is it not said that great powers destroy themselves from within?
@@eventcone America's Founding Father's built my country on the belief of an "intelligent Design". The reference is even on our money. Maybe in your country that belief is forbidden by your atheist leaders.
@@daffidavit Such was the general belief at the time, though it was founded on nothing more than the Bible and the dogma taught by an authoritative church.
To teach something for which there is no evidence is wrong. We live in a more enlightened age.
Are my country's leaders atheist? I don't know. Some of them are, no doubt, whilst some of them are not. It doesn't matter. And leaders change from one year to the next.
@@eventcone Sorry, but your assumption that "there is no evidence is wrong" is wrong. There is evidence. It's called eye witness testimony. It's used everyday in court's of law in my country. I'm not sure where you are from but my guess is it's either the UK, Australia, or some other older English speaking country. The "whilst" gave it away. Either way, your courts too allow "witness testimony" as evidence. So your statement that there is "no evidence" is incorrect. If you had said "scientific evidence" then your argument would have been correct. G'day.
It's like a 50's sci-fi film.
No,
The sci fi looks more realistic!
And that is how the masses are fooled by NASA!
@@hayrayna1314 the background is just wrong, I have not ever seen anything take off like that on Earth either, comical, i cannot believe it.
@J CalhounThe Americans just keep pulling off the biggest cons in history.
It was only in this last Apollo liftoff that they could pan upwards as he LEM rose off the moon.
from what I understand the cameras stopped working after 27 hours due to the moon's dust that they could never figure out how to not get on it. The dust would cause the cameras to overheat. The panning shots gave them trouble because of the improper dimensions given which is why you see the camera pan downwards right after.
It’s cool to watch the module rise and disappear into the clouds.
Clouds on the moon? Really?
The camera man: hey wait for me
Fala Lala LoL 😂 would be funny except it was a remote controlled camera
@@christineayres5339 Yes. A TV remote, with a long cable.
Maker Marx lol
Like Matt Damon left on Mars..
@@christineayres5339 it was a joke
Common "call outs" of this video answered. Upvote this so people can clarify:
"There's no fire!!" - The lunar module's ascent propulsion system burns hypergolic fuel which produces a transparent flame (the titan-gemini also burns hypergolic; the exhaust is transparent). Additionally, the moon has no atmosphere, meaning the rocket exhaust has an infinite volume to expand into. Take something that's already very transparent, and stretch it out to infinity. You won't be able to see it.
"Nice fireworks on takeoff" - those were likely small bits of the lander or even pieces of the explosive bolts that had just detonated to separate the ascent stage from the descent stage.
"There should be way more dust!" - there was a lot of dust kicked up, it just didn't linger because once again, there is no atmosphere. On Earth, there is air for the dust particles to linger around in. On the moon, there is not, so the dust falls back down as does anything else. Also, there was a solid object directly between the engine and the surface of the moon.
"What about the cameraman??" - there's this thing called remote control?? The first two or three times they tried to film the LEM taking off, they failed because they hadn't perfected the camera panning with a several second delay. This last time they got it.
"The engines only turned on for half a second and it's in orbit? How?" - the engines were on for a while. You just don't see the plume. It's hard to tell because your only reference frame disappears, but it is accelerating upward. Not moving at a constant speed, not falling back down, but accelerating.
"How come rockets are so big on Earth, but this was so tiny?" - The LEM is very lightweight. Also, let's not forget tsiolkovsky's rocket equation. dV = Veq * ln(mf/me). The moon has a low orbit velocity of about 1.7 km/s, and the Earth has one of about 7.8 km/s (let's also not forget the effect the atmosphere plays on earth rockets). You need exponentially more fuel to accelerate only four times as fast because of the physics behind this equation. Also, hypergolic fuel is very dense, so it takes up less volume.
Sammy , I appreciate very much your explanation of the fuel . I myself have never been a denier or hoaxer, I just didn't square with the take off . You , sir , nailed it .
Are you serious? I couldn't think of a cool name like Boyce Hopkins in a million years@shillslayer
shillslayer Who’s lying? You have anything to contradict OP’s comment?
Ok I'll stop lying. I don't think @Boyce Hopkins is a very cool name. Sorry@shillslayer (And Boyce)
I'm a believer, i.e. I believe in what I see and hear minus what I don't know and am cheated by my senses.What is explanation of no sound and vibration comming from 16 kN rocket engine?
EDIT: I'm referring to some other video which is recorded within LEM during the same time. Recording device captures voices (no vacuum, inside is pressurised) but do not capture any sound of working engine on which they practically sit. Also I know now there's no turbo pump. Still there're turbulences, burning, rapidly expanding gases. I'd be glad if someone with particular knowledge of this kind of rocket engine provide me with information regarding sound level which should be expected in this case. Also this is a minor discrepancy and I do not give a fu.. about it anymore.
3:03 I must go, my planet needs me!
That rocket motor had to be 100% reliable with no chance of a misfire on takeoff. After having gone through the rigors of travelling through space , that was a very tall order.
Very funny 😂
@butchtropic Also they only needed 2 out of 8 available valves to work. Getting up was a lot safer than getting down, and both of those were a LOT safer than taking off from the cape. If not for the extra safety measures taken they could have gotten a lot more weight on the moon (and more samples back) as the fuels were far less effective per weight unit.
@butchtropic Quite so. Scott Manley actually just made a video about one of the ways they might try to fix it, which is why this struck a chord.
butchtropic Can you imagine blasting off from the moon with the hatch still open! I think that was what SM said?
Chris Kleckner
The rocket system that took man to the moon and back had 83 rocket engines - if Iremember that correctly. Vintage Space did a special video on the number engines. What rigors are you talking about? Do you even know for yourself?
One engine for landing. Another for leaving the moon.
Yup, not much room for error! Brave men.
@@TheCatBilbo Bell industries is awake now. After a helicopter lands it drops the engine. The second engine it carries will bring the chopper up in the air again. Airplanes can do the same. After landing they drop two engines and use the two remaining engines for lift off. In the future cars will have two engines. One for driving forward and one for parking backwords. In area 51 there are many ufo engines the aliens dropped because they wanted to get back home after landing on our planet. I think the alien space ships visiting many planets must have had a thousand engines they dropped all around the galaxy.
@@gmailaccount1894 Um, right. I was meaning: one engine in the lander section (left on the Moon); one engine in the ascent stage (to reach orbit again); both had to work and that means having a lot of faith in them, hence the astronauts being brave.
I wouldn't tell everyone about the Aliens and their many engines...the Men in Black will come find you. ;-)
It's one small engine for land, one giant exhaust for leaving.
And none never failed... whats the odds
Holy balls of steel. I would rather fight ten vikings to the death than get in that thing. All I can say is thanks guys. We would probably still be cavemen if not for guys like this and the people behind them.
Do grown folks believe this is real??? You have got to be joking...there is no way a grown person can believe this is real...
@@unarammer2003 Ohh a flat earther. Because you saw a conspiracy video you have all the answers? Can you explain why it is not real? So they did this to fool the Russians? They will be going back soon. Will that be fake too?
@@MuckoMan I don't debate with delusional people that believe this nonsense is reality...
@@MuckoMan ohhh sure they are going back...and they will have space force to protect them from alien attacks...grow the f**k up...you people are what's wrong with the world...when I say u people I mean the mindless masses that believe TV is reality...
@@unarammer2003 Why are you so confident? I felt that way at one time and in reality I don't really know for sure. I know they did put a lot of money into shooting giant rockets out into space. From there no one knows what happened. All I know is those guys had bigger balls than most of us.
What a marvel of engineering and example of bravery.
Bravery as in having the audacity to pass off a low budget sci fi movie scene as a actual achievement of human ingenuity? 😆
Funny thing is they claim the technology is now destroyed and can't be rebuilt.
@@landanwoodard7569 - you didn’t find those colourful sparkle bursts realistic? I’d like to think a dollar shop party popper could create a similar effect. Maybe I’ll create a similar video claiming i landed on a rainbow and have the masons push that information onto the sheeple. Oh I forgot, I’m not a part of that satanic cult!
@@landanwoodard7569 how do u know it’s fake baby
Yeah so historic that they destroyed the technology and lost all the documents. So now we are struggling to send even a monkey.
These comments though. I truly can't believe, with what we've learned in past decades since this "event" that anyone still believes this. 🤔 I'll say it, no, we have never been on the moon.
'You' haven't learnt anything.
So, what have 'we' learned?
from age 6 to age 10 I loved Apollo and saw most, if not all of the launches and lunar exits. Such an inspiring time!
I was the same age. I wrote to Nasa and they sent me 8x10 crew photos and mission reports even to a kid in Canada. I was thrilled and still have them. It inspired me to an aeronautical engineering career. Im sure 100s of 1000s of theres were similarly inspired. These bozos who weren’t even alive who say it was all faked really tick me off. What a slap in the face to their nation’s finest hour.
Frikin gullible you are. Its a prop. A toy. Even a child can see that
But..who filmed the take off?
@@snorungar70a camera mounted to the LRV which was remote operated by a person back on Earth
@fraplu....they only had trad Hasselblad cameras.idiot
This is SFX! Mission Impossible. Bigest Fake News.
If it WAS 'fake news', it wouldn't just be the stupid people saying so, would it?
Fake as all hell, how embarrassing.
I saw this on LIVE TV - as it happened - in real time. Striking!! UNFORGETTABLE.
I know! I did too! And the fact that one of the two astronauts was a geologist on the moon was awesome. Man did he totally geek out over everything he saw.
Yes ,Stanley Kubrick was a great director
One of the best movies... The audio script could have been a little better though.. He didn't have a big enough budget...
Me too!
@@Cameron46 You are on the wrong channel. This is for grown-ups.
@@julesdomes6064 Replied the bot !!
The next moon landing we're going to have moon selfies.
Taken with Santa clause..
Dont hold your breath lol
And Willzy X
A lot of the space effort was for publicity, so it’s no wonder that cameras were on board and left behind on the Moon.
There’s nothing explicitly strategic about going to the moon. except for the devices created along the way.
With girls showing their naked body
Lift off from the lunar surface fifty years ago yesterday. Knowing they were to be the last of the Apollo missions, they fit as much as they could into the 75 hours the LEM crew spent on th moon. Good that they did. Amazing achievement from beginning to end.
To all the hoaxers who think it's impossible for radio signals to travel that far and operate a camera, the first "wireless" remotely controlled torpedo was demonstrated by Nikola Tesla in 1898, 74 years before Apollo 17. Archibald Low was known as the "father of radio guidance systems" for his pioneering work on guided rockets and planes during the First World War. In 1917, he demonstrated a remote-controlled aircraft to the Royal Flying Corps and in the same year built the first wire-guided rocket.
In World War I, the Imperial German Navy employed FL-boats (Fernlenkboote) against coastal shipping. These were driven by internal combustion engines and controlled remotely from a shore station through several miles of wire wound on a spool on the boat. An aircraft was used to signal directions to the shore station. EMBs carried a high explosive charge in the bow and traveled at speeds of thirty knots. The Soviet Red Army used remotely controlled teletanks during the 1930s in the Winter War against Finland and the early stages of World War II.
We had devices that can pick up signals in pico and atto watts (10^-15 to 10^-18 watts for a very long time). Your phone GPS works with weaker signal strength than that and even an average FM radio receiver is sensitive enough to work with signals in the pW range.
Now I hope you understand what a Watt is or how a radio receiver is. And if you come here spitting "Space is fake", then I'm sorry, I can't convince genuinely brain damaged or retarded folk.
my man
Great comment but your wasting your time trying to convince the moon hoax morons .
Sorry mate but you could send these people to the moon and they would be calling you a liar
Tbh you’re right
Im not retarded but im damn sure man hasnt set foot on the moon and never will
Afterwards the camera man just walks back to his hous on the far side.
From Apollo 15 onwards, the TV camera was remotely controlled by Ed Fendell at mission control.
@@yazzamx6380 uh huh. Right!
@@sheshotjfk8375 - So because you don't understand something you question it? :-)
@@yazzamx6380 Well, yes. I do question things I don't understand. That is how it is supposed to work, right? Are you telling me you don't question things that don't make sense? That explains a lot.
@@sheshotjfk8375 - You said "Well, yes. I do question things I don't understand. That is how it is supposed to work, right? "
That is not what you were doing here and hence you prove the point I was getting too.
If you don't understand something then you should make the effort to understand it so that your opinions can come from an informed position, that's where the questions come in.
But suggesting something you don't understand is FAKE just *because* you don't understand it, is actually called denial!
Hence your reply of "uh huh. Right!" is you saying I'm wrong despite the fact you don't understand it and clearly have done no research into what I'd said, so all you've offered here is denial :-|
nice holywood movie
Nope. Next? :-)
It was fake.
@@ElearningDigest - It was real.
We should all ignore any nonsense we may read down here below. Instead, we should be admiring that these were the final moments of men on the moon.
@@neatstuff8200 okay
@If you laugh you sub! Sure. Something like that
@If you laugh you sub! I've looked it up several times and each time it gets more and more bogus so no thank you.
@If you laugh you sub! pff alright. I gotcha
They left the cameraman behind.
“Ahh shoot!” Not what you want to hear right before lift off. Lol
What I thought too 🤣
What happened? Did they just realize they forgot our cameraman?
The comment section is hilarious.
Always 😅
It's really not though. It's as enraging as it is depressing.
🌝🌝🌝😀😀😀😀😀😀😀🌙🌙🌙🌛🏃🏃🏃🏃🏃🎃🎃🎃🎃🎈🎈🎉🎊🎆🐸🐸👽👽👽👽👽👽😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👺👺👺👺🎄⭐⭐🌠🌂🌂🎇🎇🎆🎊🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Seriously, more than one person here isn't arguing about the LM, or about radiation, but they're arguing that rockets don't work in a vacuum. Like, basic physics.
@@compwiz101 I was only arguing about whether there are giant ants on Mars.. I believe there are but most don't. 😀😀😀😀🌎🌎🐜🐜🐜🐜🐜🐜🐜🐜🐜🐜👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽😷😷👾👾👾
When you come for the footage and then stay for the amusing comments produced by attention seekers who's only goal in life is to create chaos through idiotic conspiracy theories 👌
I love the footage, but I'll admit that I clicked on this for the comments. It's unreal that people are watching this on a device they pulled out of their pockets, yet they don't believe we went to the moon.
Mathew Martin the founding of America was a conspiracy. There are conspiracies throughout history. Laughing at the idea of conspiracy is as retarded as thinking everything is a conspiracy.
it's no longer a theory when the lie becomes blatant.
@@Giggiyygoo Yeah, me too ... I admit it--I've been doing this lately--also because I'm curious to see just how our civilization is pushing the boundaries of ignorance versus creativity ...
@@carbonc6065 That's a good way to put it. Sometimes these flat earthers show some creativity in the way they come up with ways to rationalize a reality that is objectively false. Sometimes they even make us think about something that we never had to explain before, simply because we never thought we would need so much proof that the earth is round, or that space travel is real. I also wonder that, if these guys can deny reality to such an extreme amount, then what is it that I may be denying on a lesser level? Even the best of us can gain weight, or let debt pile up, or stay in a bad relationship all while rationalizing it away. Maybe I'm thinking too much, and these guys are just dumb. Who knows?
Extraordinary achievements
Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17
Awesome work
13 was still an achievement, they were the farthest from Earth anyone has ever been and returned safely from a dangerous failure.
@@vsetenjoyer sure they did.
@@mrmighty9862 What're you tryna get at here?
@@vsetenjoyer This is amazing camera work from Houston working on at minimum a 5 second delay. The way they timed the take off with a 3 second count down on a 5 second delay. Amazing.
@@mrmighty9862 What do you mean? What is your point here? This is in no relation to what my comment was, I was simply saying how Apollo 13 was an achievement too not comparing amazingness factor of each achievement completed by Apollo missions.
hoax forever
@Dooray MArshall nasa is the fraud. not me
I'm surprise there are people who still believe in this hoax.
Yes, yes.....thousands and thousands of people have been able to keep it a secret.
And how they managed to fool all those geologists (experts in the subject) with their 'fake' moon rocks.
They were in-house geologists they never had a chance to analyze the rocks. Only recently they did analyze a moon rock that was given by Neil Amstrong to Netherlands that turn up to be a petrified wood.
+scaloi Haha...no. The moon rock was given to the Prime Minister by ambassador J. William Middendorf. Numerous theories about this...either Middendorf kept the real rock, or the Prime Minister (who apparently absolutely loved the gift) swapped it out and kept it for himself. I tend to believe that the Prime Minister hid the real one somewhere and perhaps never told anyone until he died. OR he sold it.
Why in the hell would the US government try to intentionally pass off petrified wood as a moon rock? Why not just use a piece of actual rock?
I don't know the entire story behind it, but I know that no independent geologist ever authenticated a moon rock that supposedly came from the Apollo missions. Moon rocks are on earth too. If you know the one let everybody know.
The Apollo missions were just so exciting! I remember the Apollo 17 mission well. I was a space-crazed 10 year old, and I was so disappointed that the lunar EVA's took place while I was in school! I tell younger people I feel very fortunate to have watched Apollo 11 mission (as well as all of the other Apollo missions) live as a child - missions that will be remember just not for hundreds, or even thousands, but tens of thousands of years from now when humanity set foot on another world!
I Hope Artemis mission will visit the Apollo 11 landing site. After morethan 5 decades... ✨🙏
Like Apollo 12 they visit the surveyor 3 landing site...
Lol this vid cracks me up everytime, it's so goofy
I know. Flatters and hoax nuts are pretty easily entertained.
Same here 😂😂😂😂😂
Next Mandela effect will be: “We’re on our way, Montpellier.” ha..
Real men. Real steel. The right stuff.
agreed
How lonely and still the Moon appears after the liftoff. We should go back again now.
+Roger Clemons But where would they get a studio that could fit the moon in it??
+Roger Clemons Computer generated images. In the late 60s and early 70s. When a computer took up a majority of a room and could basically just do math. Sounds legit.
+InitialDsTak The doubletalk of these hoax nuts! They want to claim that NASA had the computer tecnology to produce hours of CGI, but not to run flight control software without virtually zero graphics display!
+eventcone Oh, we've had Photoshop and CGI software since the 30s. The Illuminati just didn't release it until recently.
We should have gone back many times by now.. yeah. - and we likely would have, had it not been for the ALIEN UFO BEINGS WHO WARNED THE U.S. ASTRONAUTS ON THEIR APOLLO MISSION, (TO), "STAY OFF THE MOON! THIS IS NO PLACE FOR YOU!!" NASA's reply was: "OK then. You got it, Mr. E.T.'s "sirs". Message heard, received and understood. 'Your' moon. 'We' bad." End of discussion (and moon flights!) ;o)
Look up field sequential color to find out why the video looks odd. I actually have a color polaroid of the lm taking of moment, taken from the video screen at JSC. My late dad designed the circuit to separate the video signal into the 3 separate colors, to recombine into color later, so frame rate is 1/3 of normal. Remember the camera with the rotating 3 color filter in front of it? This video is as real as it gets!
These color artifacts also prove that these scenes are indeed recorded by a live video camera - not recorded on film and then broadcast afterward on video. I point this out because if the shots were hoaxed, they would have to be first recorded on film (especially for any supposed "slow motion" low gravity astronauts on moonwalk effect). You would not get the peculiar RGB separations or highlight streaks that are telltales of primitive video sensors, if the scenes were first recorded on film. Then again, I'm giving hoaxers too much credit to assume they even understand the difference between film and video.
Six Apollo missions & not one successful practice landing on Earth (let alone in the Moons 1/6 Earth gravity) Absolutely ridiculous
Neil Armstrong himself made about 40 successful 'practice landings' on Earth prior to the Apollo 11 mission. The flying simulator used - the LLRV/LLTV - made about 700 successful flights and landings by the end of the Apollo program.
@@eventcone
I believe it's double of what you are saying. I think Armstrong had about 40 flights in the LLTV in the last month before the Apollo mission... but, I believe he would do two landings per flight, before needing to refuel.
Craig, why would you think such silly things? Why? They had hundreds upon hundreds of practice landings in the computerized simulators. And, they all performed dozens of practice flights/landings in the LLRVs and LLTVs (actual flying simulators that were designed to simulate 1/6th G. Where are you getting your notions from? (Let me guess, a conspiracy video told you they never had practice landings, right?)
@@rockethead7 Thanks for the info (again). :-)
@@eventcone
No thanks required. But, just to add, Armstrong also had flights in the LLRV a year before his flight. The 40 flights (two actual takeoffs and landings per flight) were just in the last month before Apollo 11. But, there was about a year when he didn't fly, because he had crashed in the LLRV, and NASA banned the use of the LLRVs after that, and wanted them to only use the LLTVs after that crash. But, the LLTVs weren't done yet. And, then, finally, when the first LLTV was done, it crashed before they turned it over to the astronauts. So, Armstrong had to wait until the 2nd LLTV was built before flying one of them again.
Request to UA-cam : A effing simple ignore system.
1. See someone who is dense and stupid.
2. Hit IGNORE
3. Done
The way it is now, it's easier to launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles than it is to ignore someone who denies something that clearly happened.
I kinda like that.
If they don't know they're ignored
it's like standing in an empty
room just raving.
Great idea.
The only manned lunar mission that happened during my lifetime...I was born in the summer of '72! 😉 I remember watching STS-135 lift off with my year and a half old son, and telling him that it was the only shuttle mission that he'd ever get to watch live.
Happy 50th!
You actually believe the moon landings were real??? 😆 🤣 😂
@@Spark-In-The-Dark don the tinfoil hats...I'm not chasing you down that rabbit hole. But you can keep being you and keep propagating someone else's lies all you want. Just don't do it on my posts. And I assure you that they are lies.
@Brent Boswell Be careful you don't think too much so you don't give yourself an embolism. There's way too much air going through your head, for it to be safe for you to think if you believe the moonlandings were real.
@@Spark-In-The-Dark You actually believe the moon landings were fake??? 😆 🤣 😂
😂 And people believe this crap.
🤡
Except the village idiots of the world.
HOAX?,...Don't forget the golf ball that alan shepherd hit over a mile away that did not melt or go soft in 253 f (123 c).
You don't know what happened to that ball, when the GROUND temperature reached that hight at lunar noon, several Earth days later.
Vacuum has no temperature, so it wasn't like the ball was in an oven while Shepard handled it and sent it flying.
It takes awhile for an object to heat up, even on the moon. From the time Sheppard pulled the ball out of his pocket and then hitting it was a matter of a minute or two max.
It's an old fake news, 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Awwww❤ You must be super smart and special!
@@julesdomes6064bless his special little heart...🤣
Feel free to provide evidence any time...we'll wait.
Still great to watch this decades later. It never gets old. Brilliant.
Right. It never does.
@@raulm1961 imagine how good they would do it now! Better sets, CGI ! Apps to control the delay, so you don’t need the CIA on the earpiece prompting them.. or bits of cardboard at the spaceship window! They would make it look beautiful and believable!
@@Dazza19746 Is this seriously what you are doing with your life?
Why watch the videos that you claim to hate? By literally giving space agencies money from YT revenue lmao
@@MeltedToast84 where did I claim to hate it?
It’s entertaining, watching how pathetic the fakery is, and also interesting to watch how people like you react vehemently defending the lie.
It’s pretty much the same as religious people ‘defending their faith!!’
A large number of awaking individuals, now know about many of the lies we’ve had moulded into this ‘reality’
And please explain how ‘space agencies’ get money from some Italian guys YT channel 🤔😂
@@Dazza19746
"A large number of awaking individuals" you mean the middle-aged men with nothing better to do than listen to retarded liars like yourself?
If you cant understand basic science, and i KNOW you can not as you are clearly extremely uneducated in actual physics, thats not my problem.
You use your disgustingly cynical mindset to laugh at and make fun of people with opposing views. How the fuck do you expect people to join you? Your literally doing the same concept as those protestors destroying art in galleries all over the world.
The fact that you are "entertained" by watching others "fail" as you call international achievements, proves to me that you are in the worst state of mental health I have ever seen. I dont know if this is because your lover ditched you (understandably) or you just had so much lying nonsense shoved down your throat that you had no other option than to join the cult.
As I am now fairly concerned with your tragic state of mind, i can not for the life of me be bothered to respond anymore than I have done. Utter buffoons like yourself are far, far beyond saving and unlike you in your sad lonely little life interacting with online trolls, I actually have things to do outside of the internet.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤪🤪🤪🤪🥰🥰🥰😜😜😜😜😜😜😜
Legit you ^
So glad this footage is available to the masses. I for one would have never any desire to watch this if UA-cam were not in existence. It’s been a wild ride UA-cam
I just can't help anthropomorphizing the lunar rover and feeling like it must be horribly sad as it watches its astronauts fly away forever.
Mike O'Sullivan
Ooohhhh Kay
Elon will send someone to drift it on the moon someday. 😂
When I watched this on tv as a young guy the video would have the word simulation in the corner of the tv screen. I think the whole thing was a simulation.
This video is clearly not a simulation.
Moron of the highest order. Watched it himself and grew into a manchild believing flimsy conspiracies. How old are you but still holding onto childish beliefs and the desire to feel special? Grow up old man, it's time.
Incredible bravery on the part of the astronauts, whose lives depended on this tiny spaceship with walls not much thicker than aluminum foil.
This thin skin idea is a common misconception. The crew cabin of the Lunar Module was actually made of an aluminum alloy, with the various pieces welded together. In NASA's own words, "The cabin is 92 inches in diameter and is made of welded aluminum alloy which is surrounded by a 3-inch-thick layer of insulating material. A thin outer skin of aluminum covers the insulation."
The misconception that the skin was as thin as aluminum foil stems from this thin outer layer being misconstrued as the ship's only skin. It also stems from many folks mistaken belief that the thin layers of mylar used as heat protection were used as the only skin of the whole ship.
Amazing how they got back in what was the equivalent of a ready meal carton
Pisses me off that you didn't put the damned YEAR... I guess it was around '72 and the last mission, without Googling it? At any rate, I remember how sad it was how *routine* moon missions had become. So routine, that this mission was hardly noticed. Hardly paid any attention. They came back home and just a BIG "So what". What an amazing irony for so great an accomplishment.
This historical event, I still see it and I am moved by the precision and that they have used two cameras to document it. It is simply an amazing achievement.
😂😂😂
@@aemrt5745 it’s amazing alright. An amazing fraud that so many are still falling for.
@@aemrt5745 so clever it still to this day has you fooled 😂😂😂
LOL!
@@cha7664 yeah, ok🤣🤣🤣 haha, Hey you guys, look at this ballon head over here. Dropping in with your space balls account pic all like; hi! my name is.. Who? My name is.. What? My name is; Chicka chicka Fuc*ing GlobeTard👌🏼 Get the f*** out. 😂
In case you haven't noticed, everybody is laughing at and mocking your goofy lift off from "the moon".
Only village idiots are laughing. Didn't you notice?
Always has been and always will be village idiots. And nobody cares what they believe or not, except maybe the mental health services.
@@julesdomes6064 it's fake & you know it, crackpot 😂
Some of the commentators show a serious hatred for science.
Perhaps 'hatred' could be driving some of the comments, but there is --- and I believe more so -- willful ignorance, plain stupidity, mindless mistrust, and the pathological need to troll. Now, if this is the part where any trolls out there want to troll me on this... go right ahead. I'm not returning to this thread, so I won't see your response. In other words... go fuck air.
@@hlcepeda Yeah, the Deep State would Never Lie! Trust them about everything. Like the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Same era.
@Andre
What a shocking surprise to find you here, oh wait no surprise at all. You’re so predictable. Poor andre, he’s still trying to peddle his troll nonsense, pitiful!
I’m just here to remind you of your defeat, because it’s so fun. Again, all the proof will be linked once again & again for everyone else & especially for your viewing pleasure.
Let’s summarize the *facts...*
- You made zero attempts to
address the first link &
therefore have forfeited.
For the record the link
exhibit “A” will be entered
below
- You present your argument as for the reason to no visible flame at take-off for the LEM due to the hypergolic fuel. Exhibit “B” will be entered below as evidence
- I present Scientific proof which proves the claims of exhibit “B” to be false. Exhibit “C” proving exhibit “B” to be false will be entered below as evidence
- I presented the argument of air displacement on the lunar surface with exhibit “D” of which you’ve failed to answer correctly. Exhibit “D” is entered below as evidence.
- I presented exhibit “E” the argument of the problem with the lack of delay with the telecommunications to & from the lunar surface, of which you failed to answer correctly. Exhibit “E” is entered below as evidence.
- I presented the argument exhibit “F” concerning the lunar dust & the lack of moisture in the lunar atmosphere, of what you failed to answer correctly. EXHIBIT “F” is entered below as evidence.
- I presented the argument exhibit “G” in regards to the lack of sound transmission from the engine within the cabin of the LEM, of which you failed to answer correctly. EXHIBIT “G” is entered below as evidence.
- I presented the argument exhibit “I” concerning a displacement of air effecting items on or around the lunar rover, of which you answered incorrectly. EXHIBIT “I” is entered below as evidence.
LET THE RECORD SHOW THE OFFICIAL FINAL SCORE AS OF 8/1/20 IS AS FOLLOWS...
*ARTAMUS*_________*07*
ANDRE _________00
EXHIBIT A
ua-cam.com/video/tePbGoaNROE/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT B
ua-cam.com/video/q-ba0CltR54/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT C
ua-cam.com/video/_pCtjMKeV-w/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT “D”
ua-cam.com/video/b6AM6R0G4jw/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT “E”
ua-cam.com/video/eaONDmbp9tc/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT “F”
ua-cam.com/video/Uqe2f5kbL58/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT “G”
ua-cam.com/video/z4T8J60STxM/v-deo.html
EXHIBIT “I”
ua-cam.com/video/9gpvHPDbQ1M/v-deo.html
Let’s proceed...
You have failed to accumulate a single point on the scoreboard. Therefore as a result of your incompetence, you’re left with a humiliating defeat. While you’re wallowing in the misery of being handed such a crushing & decisive defeat, I’ll savor the victory & will constantly remind you, *FOREVER!* You won’t be a happy camper, for sure.
*BAAAWWWHAHAHA!*
I totally get the fact that doubters have questions. Some of the questions are natural; some are a stretch, but since every single question has a plausible answer it's obvious that deniers just WANT so BADLY for it to be a hoax that they decide before hearing the answer that it's a lie. I guess you don't have to be a flat earther to be a moon landing denier, but you DO have to be a moon landing denier to be a flat earther.
I’d have to agree with you about flat earthers needing it to be fake, but since I’m not a flat earther, I can’t speak for them. However, I think you’ve got it ass-backwards when it’s diehard moon landing believers that want it to be real sooo bad, they’ll accept this obvious garbage as being real. They’re no longer capable of critical thought & will easily accept any ridiculous explanation the proven liars put before them, no matter how absurd it may be. This crap-pile is crumbling fast & those who continue to stand on this dung-heap are liable to melt into it if they don’t jump off soon.
Artamus Gordon - So please present your favourite hoax evidence.
I have seen many, and not a single one survives scrutiny. It’s all paranoia and ignorance.
Artamus Gordon I’m waiting for your best evidence of this hoax. Just one.
Flat earthers are just plain morons.
I can understand why someone would have doubts of the moon landings. It’s not based on any of the actual evidence though, and it’s never started from any actual evidence. It’s about the us motivation. Very plausible that they’d fake the landing to 1 up the Russians. Everything then collapses when you look at all the actual evidence and all the hoaxers arguments are debunked (and have been for 5 decades).
The Earth is flat the moon landing was faked and our history is a lie 9/11 was an inside job how many lies do we have to hear before the truth comes out they're pushing the satanic agenda time to wake up people we are being lied to #FLATEARTH NO DOUBT ABOUT IT
Grew up with, breathed it, lived it about as much as a school kid could...and still can't get enough of it. Thank you for posting.
You belive in this movie? Maybe you don't know but Star Wars is based on a true story 🤣🤣🤣
Do you really think this is real? ?
@sundownsolutions2 I don’t think you’re real.
T.J. Cunningham
Is this the mission where Collins is circling ?
@Toberr Drawforc This is Apollo 17.
Stanley K did a very good job of that... 😉🤣
That joke is getting very old. And some demented conspiracy theorists may think you are serious.
Yaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwn... nice try.
It would be fun to see just ONE original comment from the conspirasheep herd 😴
The joke is that some people still believe this happened fifty years later.
Great Apollo 17 lunar module liftoff. We wish Artemis a successful return to the Moon.
China as well
Yikes. I cannot believe the number of people who can't wrap their heads around the idea that humans have dared to pursue a dream of setting foot on the moon and actually achieved it. Is it so hard to think that a group of people dedicated years of their lives to a goal, greater than anything you will ever do in your lifetime, and were able to accomplish it with fewer resources and tighter time constraints available to you in this era? Go ahead, keep wasting your time trying to discredit the accomplishments of the men and women you envy. The world doesn't need you if all you can think to do with the resources and knowledge available to you is to ignore it all for your fragile ego.
Do yourself a favor and let go of the weak, discredited arguments you've been holding onto for dear life. Use the time and energy you used to use defend these arguments and apply it to improve a part of yourself you know can be better. Time is precious and it's best used to build, not destroy.
Sure, you must be right!
Lol.
So, after all the effort and adventure the only real solution for proof is destroy all evidence!!!!!!! Technology especially so!!!!!
Lol.
Love it.
Amazing....I can't imagine the horrible claustrophobia of being in that tiny spaceship....brave guys and an unimaginable experience.
@Teddy Hunt I have.!
@Boris Madzarevic 😆 🤣 😂 the cameraman was left there with 50 years worth of snickers bars and died in 2013 when he ran out. He weighed 102 lbs when he died. Last person he ever talked to was president Nixon on a landline and then they lost the technology to be able to communicate and as astroNOT Don Petit said, they "lost the technology" to go back or communicate. The cameraman became a Buddhist monk in order to cope with loneliness. He dropped the mirror when he died do its no longer visible with the laser. Of course it was there until them tho and anyone thar questions it is a brainwashed moron.
@Trevor Smith it was more like a hoax
Not to mention having to crap in their “space” suits. As if….
more over, the smell.
You really need to slow that suspension bunggy system down a little...that liftoff was as bad as an amusement ride 😑
I remember watching this live.
How did they filmed the landing from 200m away?
They didn't film the LANDING except from inside the LM. They remote-controlled the camera on the rover to film the TAKEOFF.
The rover was 1 kilometre away and the camera mounted on it was controlled by Houston.
Ascent engine was complete simplicity for reliability. No pumps, or other mechanical fanciness, just pressure driven propellant feed with helium pressurizer.
Yeah, all they had to do was open a valve if something went wrong
What I find fascinating is that around the 4:40 mark in the video, the rover's camera pans around the landing site, zooming in on descent stage absent, of course, the LM ascent portion. It gives us a glimpse as to what the sites of all 6 landing missions would look like were we lucky enough to see them as they are today. Let's hope that at some future time, we will preserve each and every one and forever be a testament to human ingenuity and the drive to explore other worlds.
I find it fascinating that a camera was there to film it. Did they leave the man who filmed it?
The film was good thru radiation! LMFAO
@@TheEpoxyExpert it was the camera on the lunar river they left
@@TheEpoxyExpert It one thing to be ignorant. It’s another to display it so publicly.
Back in 1985 I had the privilege (fortuitously) to have a private dinner with Gene Cernan, a great guy. Learned he was a HS classmate of NFL great Ray Nitshke and a flight school classmate of John Akers (then CEO of IBM). An American hero!
I wish I could meet one astronaut from apollo missions
Must have been awesome!! He was really cool and devoted his life to sharing with the world. Real hero!!
Rene Jakobsen
He was a really cool guy. Sad that he passed.
Lucky!
Did John Akers say why he wkold have let B. Gates have IBM DOS intellectual property and deprive IBM investors of the future proceeds that MS DOS received? Besides "Gate is a 'genius?'" The DumbA$$!
"Apollo Program"
Producer: Walt Disney deceased in 1966.
Co-producer: Wernher Von Braun.
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Art Director: John Hoesli.
Writer: Arthur C Clarke.
Photographer: Geoffrey Unsworth.
Current cost = 169.51 billion current dollars
Something very logical is that the Apollo missions were carried out in the 🌎because if it had been true that NASA in 1962 sent its first astronaut into space, taking just "6" years to take them to the 🌙 because in 1968 they orbited it, in 1969 they walked on it , in 1972 they were for the last time, bone today "50" years later at least we were vacationing in the 🌒 and traveling to Mars.
Well done on being ignorant, champ.
.
477 "Dislikes" ??? This is EXACTLY what it says it is. What, exactly, is "wrong" with it ??
.
It's the flatties. Also, I'm collecting money to buy ferris bueller a new kidney, but they run around 15 grand, so, would you mind...
Taking poor quality analogue video and converting it to HD does absolutely nothing to improve the quality. I could not tell much difference between the 240p it chose automatically and the 1080p maximum selection.
I can't wait until we go to the moon again with modern imaging equipment so we can get REAL HD footage.
Why theres dumb people that say we've never landed in moon they just stupid. The most are mexicans
We need 4K at least
@Lester Scruggs you fucking idiot. How did someone as stupid as you live long enough to learn to write?
@@rasimbot 16k upscale anyone ? No ? Arf !
we are going back in 2025! :)
The swings effect is due to remote cameras controlled from the rover via the operator on earth trying keep the LEM in the camera view. Much like you taking a picture of a fast moving bird curving away fron you.
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.
The flight path of the LEM had a 15 sec ascent follwed by "Pitchover". At pitchover the automatic computer and preset guidance system ( very primitive) would lock in two guide stars and angle the ship in the correct position to achieve orbit and rendenzous with the Command module.
Yes reading reading scientific stuff can be boring but you cant do proper research without it.
(Transcript is from Apollo 11)
Frank O'Brien writes, "At this point, Buzz is performing an alignment of the LM's inertial platform. Rather than the traditional Program 52, which requires sighting two stars through the AOT, Program 57 is used. All platform alignments require determining the exact position of two references is space, which is all that is necessary to determine the platforms orientation to any reference. Normally, stars are used as the references, as they combine the necessary quality of being in fixed, well-defined locations in the sky. Program 57 does use one star for its orientation, but the fact the LM is on the surface allows the platform to use another well understood reference: the gravity field of the moon. Thus, performing a fix on a star, and sensing the gravity vector for its second directional reference supplies all the information necessary for the computer to align the platform to a known orientation."
Not at all, because first the axis of the sine wave would be centered on the middle of the video and not its bottom, first, and second, as there was a delay between the command and its effect, it would have looked like a square wave and not a sine wave.
Forget Moons gravity. They need 1 g acceleration and the Moon has 1/6th of that only. Since the ascending stage has had no tilt mechanism for the drive nozzle, the correction nozzles wold have to fire permanently to hold the path, but they don´t...
The ignorance of basic physics in these comments is disturbing
Bad science and misinformation is the underpinning of all Moon hoaxes.
These conspiracy theorists are seriously the greatest idiots ever . They are a joke.
i wonder who controlled that camera at lift off so accurately
@@xTROLLINGx You seriously think that it did it all by itself? It was controlled from inside the module by remote.
@james crowe it has nothing to do with our schools......it has everything to do with social media......it's a breeding ground for every crackpot theory under the sun
Incredible engineering achievement
And the first handheld calculators were still in development.
Incredible pack of lies
Yep, a great achievement :-)
@@choclatesaltyballz Low self esteem issues? I guess science wasn't a strong subject for you...
incredible, yes
Who was controlling the remote camera showing the takeoff from the surface?
Was Houston controlling that camera?
Correct my friend. From Apollo 15 onwards the Apollo TV cameras were remotely controlled by Ed Fendell at mission control.
Obviously somebody in a Hollywood studio.
Just getting moon-landing deniers are losers!
@@yazzamx6380 At the speed of light there would be a 4 second delay in transmission. 2 seconds from the camera to earth and then 2 seconds remote response from earth to the camera on the moon. How did the cameraman in Houston pan and zoom the camera to follow the lunar module? How were the radio communications so quick too? How were they apparently faster than the speed of light? We witness camera delays here on Earth today (2019) just from one part of the world to another, but somehow it was instantaneous 230,000 miles away on the moon. I really would like to know.
DCTib nice observation
@@DCTib - No my friend, at the speed of light the delay is 1.3 seconds in each direction, where communication was via *direct line of sight* between the massive radio telescopes/dishes here on Earth and the radio dish on the rover.
Before lift-off, the astronauts mounted the TV camera on the rover, where it ran off the power left in the rover's batteries. For Apollo 15, there was a problem with the TV camera and so Ed Fendell couldn't pan the camera to track the Ascent Module;
ua-cam.com/video/Y5f1oWu5VtY/v-deo.html
For Apollo 16, Ed Fendell tried again. He had to *listen to the countdown and move the TV camera controls seconds before it reached zero* so that the commands reached the camera at just the right time to follow the Ascent Module. He timed the start correctly but he couldn't pan the camera up fast enough (because the astronauts parked the rover closer to the LM than planned), and so the Ascent Module went off the top of the screen;
ua-cam.com/video/yn1S-flYkaQ/v-deo.html
Apollo 17 was Ed's third and last chance. Guided again by the countdown so that he could react just before it reached zero, Ed managed to zoom the TV camera out and then panned the camera up at the correct speed, where this time he successfully kept the Ascent Module within the shot, as seen in this topic video.
Poor jing
I’m still amazed at this time (2019) that the Americans could pull this trip off. I remember as a kid when this took place but did not realize just how hard it was for this mission to succeed. I really wonder what NASA could do with todays technology on going back to the moon. One thing for sure is that there will be wonderful pictures and videos/cameras. Maybe they could leave a couple of live feed PTZ cameras for us to play with via the internet !!!!
Ross in Ontario
Like you, I remember those days. One thing is for certain. If we go back, there would be a new generation of conspiracy lunatics calling it a hoax.
@@kabkab8441 I agree..some people just live in that small place called a brain...and some folks just have no free space for expansion..
Maybe someday they will make it to the moon,, maybe, if they can find the lost technology
@@kingmanta7679 The tech isn't lost; the will is.
@@kingmanta7679 critical parts of the technology are lost because the men who designed and built them by hand are dead. This was one of the disadvantages of doing the space race under a time constraint without modern-day computer and engineering technology. We will have to reinvent such technology and join it to much more advanced technology, or perhaps find completely different ways of accomplishing a return to the Moon. that does not mean that the evidence we have that they actually did go to the Moon successfully isn't accurate oh, it just means we don't have all the information and Technology to do so presently. also NASA's budget is much less than it was in the 1960s when we were doing this race to the moon, And also the national and political will is not unified behind this goal as it was then.
I thought of a nightmare scenario whereby the thing deploys itself with the astronauts still walking (or driving) on the moon...
That would make a badass movie honestly lol
...oops...
Or he pushes the button and nothing happens. Hope you brought plenty of Granola bars.
Just call AAA. They will jump you...
@@biggawinnacrapsa3870 This particular situation was in everyone's mind from the very beginning, since there had never been a 'launch' from any other place but the Earth. It was Collin's nightmare scenario at the lunar orbit, for flying alone back home would have been devastating. But the lander launching itself out of nowhere with two guys strolling around is a different nightmare.