Apollo in sharper focus

Jim Cool, El Paso, Texas — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 02:48:31 GMT

Have you run across the book "Harrison A. Storms and the Race for Space?" I'm not sure about the title. An acquaintance asked me to read it and verify what was said about Stormy. I was staff to the Chief Engineer's Office, Apollo Space Project, North American Aviation from inception of the program until after we made it to the moon. It was a good read and fairly accurate. l would like to have the correct name of the book mentioned above as I would like to acquire it for my library.

Apollo in sharper focus

jake Seattle WA — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 05:45:34 GMT

That is such a clear shot of the moon surface! Really, beautiful and alien.

Apollo in sharper focus

Dale Stanek,Sarasota, Florida — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:41:19 GMT

As fascinating as it was as a kid to watch all the moon shots, it is also a sobering thought now as an adult to realize that the moon mission was mainly just a political stunt. We absolutely had to beat the Russians to the moon at whatever cost. Once we did that, look what happened---last two missions cancelled, and so far, we have never been back!In fact, since then, man has not again left Earth orbit.

Apollo in sharper focus

Mark wakely — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:00:27 GMT

I always thought that "Apollo 13: Lost Moon" by astronaut Jim Lovell was one of the most compelling books about the Apollo program, and not just for its inherent drama. The book also gives clear explanations about some of the more technical aspects of Apollo and portrays the astronauts, engineers and mission controllers not as supermen, but as human with all their foibles and flaws. There’s also a surprising amount of humor despite the dangers the astronauts faced.

In short, it’s a great book.

Apollo in sharper focus

Eric, Salinas, CA — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:11:32 GMT

An article that evokes fond memories Alan. Ahh the good old days of the late 60's and early 70's when watching the Apollo missions was so cool because everything they were doing was brand new. While I watched the original showing in black and white it sure is nice to see the video now in color. Truly the Apollo astronauts were men with their magnificent flying machines.

I remember that some thought the whole thing was staged, and if it had been the Soviets would have blown the whistle on us right quick. Nice to see we're going back again though it sure took us a long time to get back to exploring other worlds and to learn how to work and live there.

Apollo in sharper focus

Rakesh Sharma, San Mateo, Caliornia — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 19:13:30 GMT

Dale Stanek,Sarasota, Florida
As fascinating as it was as a kid to watch all the moon shots, it is also a sobering thought now as an adult to realize that the moon mission was mainly just a political stunt. We absolutely had to beat the Russians to the moon at whatever cost.
-------------------------
I think calling the moon landing a mainly political stunt is oversimplifying things, but I get your perspective. Sometimes that's how technological progress goes - a by product of competition.

We didn't go back to the moon because it is lifeless. There is no water, air or pressure to support life. The cost of the trips don't justify the returns after the first few landings. Maybe Mars will be different?

Apollo in sharper focus

Marc — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 22:39:51 GMT

I remember watching the landing on a 9" B&W portable TV while on vacation that summer. The photo above is so much clearer than the images I watched that day.
Can someone explain why I don't see any stars in the background of the photo? I have a friend who uses this as an excuse to support his claim that this was staged.

[ALAN ADDS: It's because of the contrast range in the moon photos. The reflected sunlight is so bright that the stars are washed out of the sky. Here's what Bad Astronomy's Phil Plait has to say about that: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#stars]

Apollo in sharper focus

Tim ,Fort Wayne, IN — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:05:36 GMT

great studio shot, you still think we were actually there? lol.

Apollo in sharper focus

midwest USA — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 02:12:19 GMT

One question? I am told that special reflectors were left on the moon were the Aplollo missions landed. If so why can´t we see from the surface at the observitory´s, say in Hawaii, the equipment left by the crews first hand with our own eyes? This would put an end to all the speculation about Fabrication.

Apollo in sharper focus

Linda Shephard, Albuquerque, New Mexico — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 04:14:03 GMT

beautiful photo

Apollo in sharper focus

Kristen Erickson, Washington DC — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 21:07:21 GMT

Keep up on all the latest NASA activities and how to Celebrate Apollo: Exploring the Moon, Discovering Earth at www.nasa.gov/apollo40th

Apollo in sharper focus

Val, Salt Lake City, UT — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:32:48 GMT

The reflectors left on the moon are still used today. Observatories all over the world bounce lasers off of them to measure the exact distance between earcth and the moon. It's how we know that the moons orbit is still changing slightly year-to-year.

Apollo in sharper focus

John, Youngstown, OH — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 00:57:22 GMT

great studio shot, you still think we were actually there? lol.
Yes, Tim they were there.
And were there for another five landings.
Get over it, it happened.

Apollo in sharper focus

Marc — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:48:17 GMT

Alan, Thanks for the link to "badastronomy". It explained many things.

Apollo in sharper focus

Martin, Orlando — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 03:57:48 GMT

midwest: It's true, reflectors were left on the moon. But the moon is much too far away to see these through a telescope. They *can* be seen by striking them with an laser beam and seeing the reflection, and this is done all the time.

Apollo in sharper focus

Frank Glover, Rochester, NY — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 05:01:45 GMT

"great studio shot, you still think we were actually there? lol"

So, you think the surface of the Moon should look like what instead?

"One question? I am told that special reflectors were left on the moon were the Aplollo missions landed. If so why can´t we see from the surface at the observitory´s, say in Hawaii, the equipment left by the crews first hand with our own eyes? This would put an end to all the speculation about Fabrication."

The laser retroreflectors are only a couple feet across. They're meant to be good reflectors of laser light from Earth. If you have the right equipment (which isn't cheap), you *can* detect the reflected energy from them and they've verified the fact that the Moon's orbit is very gradually moving away from Earth.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/

Besides, the conspiracy theorists already believe they were put there by unmanned landers...

Apollo in sharper focus

ross, suprise, az — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:38:28 GMT

To answer midwest USA, there are just too small. However the reflectors can still be used to reflex laser beams back to us, if you have powerful enough equipment.

Apollo in sharper focus

Frank, Dallas, TX — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 14:01:33 GMT

"I am told that special reflectors were left on the moon were the Aplollo missions landed. If so why can´t we see from the surface at the observitory´s, say in Hawaii, the equipment left by the crews first hand with our own eyes?"

There are prisimatic reflectors that can be hit with a laser that give a detectable reflection. Its how we know the precise distance to the moon, and how we know that the moon is getting further away from the earth at the rate of about 6 inches a year. As far as seeing them directly, you would need something with a lot more resolution than mauna kea. I'm not sure that even the hubble could do it.

Apollo in sharper focus

C.Andrew — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:00:44 GMT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_Experiment

Read all about what was left on the moon... They actually went, it was NOT a hoax.

Apollo in sharper focus

j9 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:10:05 GMT

midwest USA -- The lunar reflectors are still being used:

http://physics.nist.gov/News/Update/940718.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_Experiment

Apollo in sharper focus

j9 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:11:33 GMT

I personally am waiting for the final results of this -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Orbiter_Image_Recovery_Project

Apollo in sharper focus

Dr. Marvin Rubenstein — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:16:06 GMT

I covered the Apollo 11 from the Kennedy Space Center as an 18 year old college newspaper reporter. At that time we had such great dreams and ambitions for further manned space flight and exploration. Comopared to the greatness of the Apollo missions, what have we done since? We cancelled the last 3 Apollo missions, stopped building the Saturn V, which remains the most reliable heavy lift launch vehicle ever built; and then put all of our faith into the complex, unrealistic and delicate Space Shuttle. Rather than improve this system, we are abondoning its heavy lift capacity and putting all our trust, for at least a few years, with the Russians. We have not left low earth orbit for almost 40 years, and have become so timid that we had an emergency rescue vehicle on the pad during the Hubble repair mission. Will the next generation of crew vehicles be more reliable, safer or even be built; and will they take anyone elsewhere than to the ISS? Lets get back to exploration, and taking chances. Progressively, lets go back to the moon, build a permanent base, then explore nearby asteroids and finally head for Mars.

Apollo in sharper focus

Edwin E Aldrin Jr. — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:30:56 GMT

It's amazing how they get a soundstage to look like the real thing.

in the digital age, it's going to be fun to see how hollywood recreates this supposedly " historic " event.

Apollo in sharper focus

Brian, New Roads, LA — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:32:52 GMT

In my opinion, "How Apollo Flew to the Moon" is a great book on the step-by-step mission mechanics of Apollo.

Apollo in sharper focus

John in Wisconsin — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:46:12 GMT

midwest USA:

You can't see them with a telescope because they are more than 200,000 miles away and not very large. However, they CAN be detected with laser beams and are regularly used to measure the exact distance to the moon to within 3 cm.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/

Apollo in sharper focus

Gary Pirics, Austin, Texas — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:47:18 GMT

The book that Jim Cool is referring to is "Angle of Attack". It's an outstanding book about Harrison Storms and the team at North American that built the Saturn second stage and the Command Module. Very good book on the technology, politics and people involved in this effort. Highly recommended.

Apollo in sharper focus

midwest USA — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 04:05:37 GMT

Thanks for the info I hoped it was possible to see it, too bad though, I think if we could look up occasionaly and see the flag, some of the other equipment there it might help restore some of the faith back that seems forever lost in government, thats what the nay sayers are really saying, it´s not really about NASA.
The space program seems to have it´s prioritys in check while the rest of the world has its eyes on there crotch, or a gun. One last question? Is there a map with a dot on it that shows were on the moon we landed? I was around when they went, and I dont have a clue except it was on the lighted side.

[ALAN ADDS: Here's a simple, clickable map:]

http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~durda/Apollo/landing_sites.html

Apollo in sharper focus

John in Wisconsin — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:12:59 GMT

There may be hope in the near future to see the equipment again. I've heard that at least one of the teams competing in the Lunar X prize is planning on attempting to land near enough to one of the sites that their rover can drive over and photograph the site. I can't remember where I read about that, but here is a link to the Lunar X Prize.

http://www.googlelunarxprize.org/

Apollo in sharper focus

jimmie baton rouge la. — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:33:28 GMT

where is all the stars in the back ground? where is the hole under the craft after it landed? don't u people know when a craft lands it uses its jet engines to slow it down therefore it would push dust up all around the craft and all over it . I see none of these things in this picture. also why is there a white blur in yhis pic ? If u are in space there would be no white blur like this

Apollo in sharper focus

Frank Glover, Rochester, NY — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:15:29 GMT

"where is all the stars in the back ground?"

If you used a camera apteture and/or exposure that would bring out the weak light of stars, you'd massively *over* expose the foreground. Try to photograph the stars during an artificially lit, open stadium spots event and see what happens. This has nothing to do with the Moon, learn something about photography.

"where is the hole under the craft after it landed? don't u people know when a craft lands it uses its jet engines to slow it down therefore it would push dust up all around the craft and all over it . I see none of these things in this picture."

Thin layer of dust over rock. How much of a hole can you expect? If you remember the DC-X experimental vehicle, it once made an emergency landing away from the intended landing pad. Hard gypsum New Mexico desert. Four hydrogen-oxygen RL-10 rocket engines. So little effect on the surface, that they had to put a stake in the ground to pinpoint the landing site after moving the vehicle. No, not every rocket engine will cut a big crater on landing, even on Earth. Sorry.

And *because* there's no air, what dust that gets stirred up, departs in a purely ballistic manner. (On Apollo 15 [whose LM was named 'Falcon'] one of the astronauts demonstrated that a Falcon feather falls just as fast as his geologist's hammer) There's no chance that turbulent air Will 'blow' dust back on the lander (and how much of it would you expect, anyway?)

Many of the things you think are normal through Earthly experience, *don't happen* in vacuum and low gravity. (A flag can't wave, but one supported with stiff rods will *vibrate* longer with no air to help damp the oscillations down. You may have seen ISS/Hubble solar arrays do similar things.)

"also why is there a white blur in yhis pic ? If u are in space there would be no white blur like this"

What do you mean? Lens flare and other reflections within the lenses don't care where you are. (Try another nighttime shot with a single bright light just off to one side of you) Again, learn something about photography and optics. (Indeed, a lot of CGI these days *fakes* lens flare, just because we've come to instinctively expect it.)