THE APOLLO 5 MISSION NASA APOLLO PROGRAM LUNAR MODULE FILM 77444
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 03. 2019
- reated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1967, this color film touts the preparation and ultimate success of Apollo 5 - which on January 22, 1968, became the first unmanned flight of the Apollo Lunar Module (LM) as the United States continued its plan to land on the moon. it was the final major piece of Apollo hardware to be tested. The film opens with the module resting atop a Saturn 1B launch vehicle. At mark 01:18, the viewer is told that this very rocket was originally designed to be used a year earlier and launch the crew of Apollo 1 - Virgil “Gus” Grissom, Edward H. White, and Roger Chaffee - into a low Earth orbital flight, but the January 27, 1967 cabin fire that killed all three astronauts left the Saturn 1B standing at on Pad 37 at the months passed. At mark 01:50, the viewer is shown Mission Control in Houston, and introduced to astronauts Jim McDivitt and Rusty Schweickart (who along with Dave Scott performed the first manned flight of a LM as part of Apollo 9 in March 1969). Astronauts Frank Borman and Bill Anders are introduced at mark 02:00 - Borman, Anders, and Jim Lovell were the crew of Apollo 8, the first manned spacecraft to leave Earth orbit in December 1968.
“Apollo 5 is one of the most complex space missions ever flown. It has been compared to taking a brand new design airplane with brand new design engines, and flying it from New York to Los Angeles by remote control,” the narrator states at mark 02:25, emphasizing the overwhelming complexity of the mission and its importance - determining whether the spacecraft is safe for man.
At mark 03:10, Anders provides the viewer with an explanation of the lunar module and its main job - to successfully land on the moon’s surface and then return the crew to the Command Service Module in lunar orbit. “The LM is really the taxi that provides the transportation between the orbiting Command Module and the lunar surface,” Borman adds at mark 03:58.
Because the LM was designed to operate in a weightless environment, the film explains that testing it against Earth’s gravity posed a problem. The solution came via a man-made vacuum of an engine test stand, shown beginning at mark 04:50. Yet the real test would come only during the flight test.
Borman rejoins the narration at mark 05:33, explaining that great care had to be exercised during the unmanned Apollo 5 test to ensure the safety of the Apollo program moving forward. “This is the first flight of the vehicle; naturally we’ll all be looking at it with very keen interest,” he says.
At mark 06:16, the Saturn rocket ignites and thrusts upward with its fragile cargo into Earth orbit. Beginning at mark 07:05, the NASA film shows a simulation as to what occurred next as aerodynamic shroud covering LM-1 is jettisoned and the module is eventually deployed. Tracking stations on Earth are shown following the spacecraft’s path while back in Houston, engineers perform a series of tests. At mark 09:07, the LM sends out a warning signal as the first planned 39 second descent engine burn was started but aborted by the onboard guidance computer after only four seconds. (Prior to launch there was a suspected fuel leak and a decision was made to delay arming the engine until the time of ignition, which increased the time required for the propellant tanks to pressurize and thrust to build to the required level.) They then performed the "fire in the hole" test and another ascent engine burn. After 11 hours and 10 minutes the test was over, and control of the two stages was terminated. The stages were left in a low enough orbit that atmospheric drag would cause their orbits to decay and re-enter the atmosphere. The ascent stage re-entered on January 24 and burned up; the descent stage re-entered on February 12 and fell into the Pacific Ocean.
“Throughout the flight of Apollo 5, the Lunar Module had performed magnificently. All systems operated as predicted or far exceeded the predictions. The inability of an onboard computer to cope with a programming error was overcome by the infinitely more flexible mind of man,” the narrator concludes beginning at mark 15:22. And with that, Mission Control and NASA Flight Director Gene Kranz relax, light up cigars, and keep aiming for the moon.
We encourage viewers to add comments and, especially, to provide additional information about our videos by adding a comment! See something interesting? Tell people what it is and what they can see by writing something for example like: "01:00:12:00 -- President Roosevelt is seen meeting with Winston Churchill at the Quebec Conference."
This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD and 2k. For more information visit www.PeriscopeFilm.com
I love hearing the voice of Gene Krantz...
He was the voice of confidence. You know the man cared about the astronauts, and the mission!!
*Kranz 🙂
As a child in the 60's, every time a Gemini rocket launch took place our teacher would wheel out the TV, and we all watched it, live. Truly an honor to be part of that generation. And these flat-earthers and lunar landing deniers are as foolish as any deceiver in history.
Why don’t they go back?
Why don’t they go back and put a real time video camera aimed back at earth?
I’d say because they never landed on the moon.
@@frankstephenson1746 NASA's budget was stripped by about 95 percent after Apollo.
We have camera spacecraft already that watch Earth and send back photos every few minutes.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver anyone that made it to the moon back in ‘69 would have mounted a camera back at earth. Now all the images look cgi
Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the obvious.
@@frankstephenson1746
There was no CGI in 1969, you dolt.
@@jshepard152 didn’t say there was. The modern images all look fake.
The point is they would have real images from ‘69
They would have real time shots pointed back at earth. And it would be constant due to the synchro orbit.
And by the way my IQ is 160 and I play guitar for a living a@&hole
Old school, slide rule engineering at its best!
I'm telling you what that was some impressive mathematical engineering. How they calculated just by their wits, knowledge, paper and pencil 😃
Yep, my Pop passed last year, was going through his things and found his slide rule. I cried holding it thinking how smart he was and that few people today doubt their own ability of being genius level. it was so easy for him to perfom complex calculations that take up an entire page of paper. it was not so much for me. LOL asking for help with math homework was a painful experience. - mindblowing!
missing my Father.
I was 13 years old when we landed and never really knew about this flight's details. Thanks for this history lesson.
You are now 3 years-old, judging by your infantile anonymous fake name.
I was a couple months short of 13 at the time. I remember how interesting it all was.
It never happened 😂.
Wake up!!
Tom Kelly the LM program manager for Grumman, wrote an excellent book about the lunar module. Incredible detail as if he kept meticulous notes. Published in 2001 "Moon Lander: How We Developed the Apollo Lunar Module" and Kelly died in 2002. Also Tom Hanks HBO Apollo series in late 1990s had an episode following Kelly on how he lead the team, or his team led the program as one part showed how the team spent a weekend creating a wooden mockup to show astronauts can be standing and only need one forward window for each. This was ***key*** to the LM design that saved considerable weight and size without so many heavy windows as originally planned.
Interesting on last part where they light up victory cigars in MOCR. Fast forward to 1990s and beyond where smoking is prohibited in federal buildings. A presentation by Kranz in 1990s, he mentioned "us old guys should smuggle some cigars into mission control."
Read that book by Tom Kelly. Very good from this engineer's point of view!
Following up on the Tom Hanks HBO Apollo episode of the LM, at the end of the episode it has Tom Kelly looking at the LM delivered for Apollo 5 as the crane carries it deep into the VAB as he sees that will be the last time he will see the first flightworthy model of his spacecraft. He has that look "yep, there goes my baby. YEAH!"
Hate to be the party pooper here, but they never went.
@@pleasepermitmetospeakohgre1504 And you know what: you can't be 100% sure you exist! How do I know? Well, I've seen some pretty convincing documentaries about the so called 'party poopers'!
@@pleasepermitmetospeakohgre1504 You are not allowed to speak oh small one. You have such limited knowledge.
Amazing, those days were so exciting.
They sure were!
Indeed! Including the mutual assured destruction threat with the Soviet Union And the Vietnam war.
Definitely exciting.
SO GOOD. As a long time Apollo fan, this is a GREAT show. So much technical content that most people would hate, but I heard things from Gene Krantz and the MC loop that I never heard before.
Finally! I have found video of the Apollo 5 launch!
I looked this up, cause you never hear about mission #5. Glad to know now.
It wasn't nothing but an unmanned test flight, the public didn't get into that much. They did get into knowing how their taxes were being spent though, that is why this video was created in the first place.
This unmanned LM test was originally scheduled for April, 1967.
Had the Apollo 1 tragedy not occurred, Apollo 1 would have flown in February, 1967 on a flight of at least eleven days, perhaps even sixteen days.
April, 1967 would have been the first unnamed test of the Saturn 5 rocket. and the first unmanned LM test flight.
In June of 1967, there were to have been three missions. One would have been an unnamed LM that would have been launched by a Saturn 1-B.
A second manned Apollo would have been launched on a Saturn 1-B to dock with the previously launched LM for a manned low earth orbit test.
The third launch would have been the second unmanned launch if the Saturn 5.
August would have seen the first manned Saturn 5 launch, with a high earth orbit test (several thousand miles) of the LM.
October, 1967 would have seen the first lunar mission, a lunar orbital flight and lunar landing rehearsal.
Christmastime 1967 would have been the first manned lunar landingof
Supposedly, had they lived, the Apollo 1 crew of Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee, and Ed White would also flown that mission and that Grissom and Chaffee, instead of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, would have been the first two men in the moon.....and that the landing might have been on Christmas Eve, 1967.
It's more agreed that if Apollo 1 hadn't happened - they wouldn't have gotten to the moon. Too many safety failures, shoddy work. It took those three men for the program to take a step back a moment and do things differently. Even then, many issues happened and the majority of missions was almost down to sheer luck.
This is so classic I had one of these rockets when I was growing up it is a good memory 's thank u may God bless you all. 😀😀😀😀😀😀😀🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
You mean you had a MODEL of this rocket.
@@generalyellor8188 lol I did too, a Revell model with lunar module separate, took many months to build, really enjoyed it.
I had a model of the Saturn V but not the 1B
Gods are fictional. Grow up.
These uploads are priceless. Even casual space buffs either aren't aware of the flights after the 1 disaster (usually jumping right to 7). Interesting that their still going with the 1B but as I recall, I think the V was ready but too much for the objectives of the pre lunar missions that needed TLI.
Wasn't apollo 5's booster the one originally intended for Apollo 1?
My father designed the propulsion systems
Really?! That is so cool! I got to hold in my hand the actual hold-down bolts for the shuttle in 1984. But that's the closest I ever got to Apollo.
When men were men and not ashamed of it
And women wore short skirts and didn't complain about it
Like the closing shots of Rusty, Jim and Frank.
Interesting thanks for sharing this with us
They got a far superior command module because of the fire and the success of the program and landings...
Only Apollo 13 had problems due to a 02 tank explosion and they took fixes after that. A third tank placed at a different location and a super extra battery was installed for more emergency power if needed.
There was three tanks to start with. And they added an extra 200ah battery just to power the Command Module.
The real issue with the explosion. The tank assembly was designed to be onboard Apollo 8, but it slipped on the platform mounting bolts. When it was being installed. So they removed it. Then put the one designed for Apollo 13 on it.
Think about that. Apollo 8 went to the moon without a LEM. Had that tank assembly been installed on it. There was no chance of them making it back. As that one tank was damaged years early from over voltage. And nobody knew about the voltage changes NASA made. It was never passed down to the technicians. That actually tested the tanks.
Great video, thanks for sharing !
Thank you!
Can’t ever forget the sound of Gene Kranz voice.
I still have goose bumps
Awesome thank you
Love our channel? Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm
You can almost hear a 16mm projector in the background.
Sponge Bob is running it... I swear!!
I love the history of those early, obscure Apollo test flight. From the first Saturn I launch in 1961 to the troubled Apollo 6 test flight of the mighty Saturn V.
I always find it amusing how those, let's be generous and call them 'misguided' individuals, seem to think that the whole space program and moon landing just occurred one day out of the blue.
As if the astronauts woke up one morning and hopped into a rocket that was built the night before out of tin foil and sticky tape completely ignoring all the years of work that went into the end result. To watch these films of the test flights is incredible as you see what went into them. But no, just ignore all that and cry 'fake' which is an insult to every single person who contributed to this monumental achievement.
But of course, they would never bother to watch stuff like this as it doesn't fit their idiotic narrative. I used to feel sorry for those people, but their ignorance is deliberate and determined so it's hard to feel pity for people like that.
@@tomstamford6837 Standing ovation.
@@andreabindolini7452 Thank you 😇
God I love this channel
There is much criticism of NASA. And we know that government pressure always forces NASA's budget restraints to limit safeguards which accounts for the two shuttle disasters. And we also know how everything the government runs is tainted with ambition and corruption.
But what we see today is how NASA's infrastructure is the best foundation for private spaceflight enterprise. They will take the helm proving they can accomplish far more than government run institutions. And for American innovators over our government's ineptitude we give thanks.
‘Budget restrictions’? Taxpayers gave Bloated, pork driven Federal Agency NASA $20 freaking billion per year over the 5 long decades since Apollo, yet dead-wood NASA produced one shameless pork unsustainable, unaffordable dead-end boondoggle after another.. Shuttle, Constellation, now SLS/Orion..
To Hell with NASA.. it should be downsized or eliminated, replaced with x-prizes paid to American private enterprises accomplishing US space goals like Lunar colonies, Americans on Mars, trips to asteroids..
NASA fan-boys blame anyone/anything else, the military, Congress, Shelby, taxpayers, contractors, etc for Federal Agency NASA pervasive gross incompetence, sloth, waste, irresponsible management failures, massive cost & schedule overruns for pretty much EVERY NASA project.…
Sad that American taxpayers are forced to pay for the hordes of dead-wood uncaring, incompetent paper-shufflers at Federal Agency NASA… NASA has screwed up, corrupted every contractor they have had, including ULA. thankfully Musk, Bezos, Allen & others finally said “FU NASA, we’ll do it ourselves”. When NASA pitches a project with grossly wrong cost and schedule estimates, then grossly mismanages contractors then NASA is the problem.
There is no profit in the exploration of space. Profiteers have zero interest in Saturn, star clusters, or organic molecules in a galactic dust cloud.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver Wrong. Through history The great science advances & explorations were from private enterprise, private individuals, foundations, universities, wealthy benefactors, etc not greedy, corrupt, wasteful, uncaring, incompetent Government. Altruistic private individuals like Goddard, Wright Brothers, Fermi, Einstein, Gallegos, Newton, etc. All the great astronomical observatories. Now Elon Musk, Bezos, Paul Allen, etc break the Failed Federal Agency Nasa stranglehold on US manned space.. Private individuals, foundations, universities care about science, technology & exploration… Government/NASA is a parasite that only cares about propagating, expanding itself.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver how ridiculous your staement, space exploration gave us all kinds of things including tech that allows us to spew bullshit on this internet every day, wow.
@@Fortwentt As I said, there's no money in knowledge about Saturn or the galaxy. When another means to derive technology is found, space exploration will be abandoned.
One heck of a remote control RC flying device.
Captivating. What an inspiring time Apollo was..! Naysayers always say " spend money on the poor not Moon missions" , but the reality was Nasa's budget was a tiny percentage of GDP ( see Micheal Collins book Carrying the Fire for the figures ). One observation/criticism, at around 6:40 Gene Krantz says " go on IP , meaning go on Internal Power, however the video shows an already in flight Saturn 1. A rocket that is atatched still to its launch tower uses ground power, general y around 60secs before launch, controllers disable and confirm the Rockets batteries can initiate the launch sequence. So a little lag between audio and video, but , nitpicking done...thankyou for a wonderfull trip down memory lane...!
Thing about that is, billions have been spent on the poor across the globe prior to the program and billions continue to be spent, so it's not as if money isn't given over to them. I'm talking globally. It's not likely that such allocation of financial resources will end either.
The problem is that corrupt governments and agencies siphon off that aid money to stash away in their Swiss bank accounts. That is the real crime... not a space program, but the waste of administrative costs by those working in distributing aid money or services and blatant theft of that money. Perhaps those naysayers should be making a bigger noise about that than a space program. No one seems to criticize a country like India, with their endemic and crippling poverty, social issues, etc, yet feel necessary to send probes to Mars for example.
At the very least a space program is not an army, weapons or destruction of people and property. Thinking about the obscene amounts of money spent on warfare should occupy their minds. Science and the acquisition of knowledge is never a waste of money, but it's short-sighted thinking like that which completely misses the point and where their focus should be.
Dave: In this case, 'IP' meant 'Impact Point', and was a call dealing with Range Safety.
I mean the astronauts of the time didn't get paid as much as one would have thought. Yes they created an entire community in Pebble beach, and Houston but the housing back then wasn't what it is today they could live comfortably but the true passion was flight and testing. They could have gotten pennies and it would not have mattered, the space fever was real and still is with some of us.
@@Drummerchick2003 I wonder how many of those, "spend money on the poor," bunch actually give their hard earned dollars to charities to make sure their special "poor" people they care so much about get assistance?
Or if they bother to protest to their government who are the ones that fund NASA and the space program to use that money for the poor... along with arms spending and taking former presidents golfing, propping up totalitarian regimes?
Makes you wonder about their priorities doesn't it?
@@tomstamford6837 this is making you not understand that science and politics was never supposed to be, hence why they had to golf and make business deals. Your missing the entire point, if governments never got involved with space then we would be past our solar system by now. Space fever is real and has affected all nations, private sector is where it’s at; and that creates job, passions, dreams, goals, better civilization. The possibilities are endless, and let’s be real true homeless is by the government bad policies; and peoples bad decisions.
First throttatable rocket? Forgetting the XLR99 in the X-15s?
The LM engine was directly derived from the Centaur upper stage and the Agena target vehicle. It was the most flown vacuum engine at the time.
Wow...and they couldn’t even see it.
Giving flat earthers migraines.
No. They just yell "FFFFAAAAAKKEEEEE!!!! CGI!!!!" and slap each other's backs for how super smart and special they are.😀
@@julesdomes6064 They are having a tougher time these days yelling fake when so many other countries and even private companies are involved in the modern day space race.
@@ForbiddTV Makes no difference to them, apparently.
Just means that soon just about the entire world is ganging up to lie to them for no credible reason at all. 😆
I'm guessing you guys never saw the 'return' press conference.
Worth a watch if you believe these landings were actually real.
I'm guessing you guys never saw the 'return' press conference?
Worth a watch if you believe these landings were actually real.
An alien watching this might be baffled to understand what those white cigarettes had to do with the process of this mission. 😜
Interesting how the flight schedules would change. Borman and Anders would never fly the LM.
Anders was bitterly disappointed by the changing schedules. You're not supposed to be, when you're a professional, but you could see he was disappointed.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver wouldnt you be?!
@@Fortwentt Anytime a routine scheduling system starts a juggling act it's bad news--usually for the person being juggled.
@@Fortwentt I’d never get over it!
@@timvandenbrink4461 Neither would I. But Anders was the right stuff and therefore handled it.
I ain't the right stuff, so I'm better off watching those who are. 😀
we are again at this point in our history. lets hope we don't run out of money this time.
7:33 Fred Haise
I was an avid Apollo program in the 60s and 70s and don’t ever recall Apollo 5 ... or 2, 3, 4, or 6
They didn't number the flights that flew until Apollo 4. There were a lot of unmanned vehicle tests -- mostly with Saturn 1's/1B's and boilerplate (engineering mock-ups approximating manned flight vehicles) hardware. Several of the surviving boilerplate command modules are in museums around the Untied States. They were instrumented flight hardware but never equipped with environmental control systems.
There was an Apollo 1 mission but it was cancelled after the pad fire that killed 3 astronauts during a test (January 27, 1967). The designation "Apollo 1" was never reused for another test mission.
Apollo 4, 5, 6 were not well advertised because they were unmanned missions.
Apollo 4 and 6 tested the Saturn V rocket with a Command Module but no Lunar Module because they were having problems developing the LM and the first manned LM tests were delayed until 1969 (Apollo 9).
Apollo 5 did test the LM (the only unmanned LM test) but it wasn't a full-up LM in the sense that A) they had no landing legs to save on weight and B) the batteries and oxygen tanks were only partially loaded. The batteries were partially discharged to prevent over-voltage of the electronics and the oxygen tanks were only partially filled to save weight and also because it was unmanned.
Apollo 5 used a Saturn 1B, a much less powerful rocket than the Saturn V, to put it into orbit. [The Saturn 1B is an uprated version of the earlier Saturn 1 rocket but otherwise similar in appearance.] Because of this, they didn't test a command module along with the LM. It was a lunar module-only test. The Saturn 1B could NOT boost both the Command Module and Lunar Module on the same booster rocket into orbit. Most Saturn 1B's that were flown boosted Command Modules into orbit. The last flight of a Saturn 1B was the Apollo mission that flew as part of the Apollo/Soyuz test project.
The last flown Saturn V was used to boost the Skylab (1) space station into orbit.
There are leftover Saturn rockets and rocket components there weren't used (Saturn 1's, 1B's, and V's) in museums around the United States. None of them (except a few preserved engines), of course, are in condition to ever be used for manned or unmanned flights. They haven't been in climate-controlled storage for well over 40 years and there was never any serious intention to fly any of those rockets after the Apollo program wound down...
@@AvengerII thank you
@@jmadratz Hey, it's not a problem!
I only learned about NASA's crazy numbering system recently.
They did a TON of test flights, unmanned, of the Saturn 1's before they flew people on any of these Saturn rockets.
This (the 1960s) is my favorite period of NASA, too.
I've been fortunate to go to several museums around the United States and see flown hardware from the 1960s and 1970s. I've been to the aerospace museums at San Diego, Washington DC (the original NASM, not the Dulles annex -- yet), Dayton, Wapakoneta (Neil Armstrong's childhood town), and Chicago. Oh, and Kennedy Space Center in 1980.
After Apollo 1 fire they changed a bunch of things and had to retest them all.
0:53 was that ol' LBJ trying to sneak in to the launch control room? 😂😂
In numerous places in the video and in the commentary they refer the launch pad where the Apollo 1 astronauts died and where Apollo 5 launched as being "Pad 37". Indeed it was not pad 37, but rather Pad 34. I can't believe they got this simple fact incorrect so many times and places . . .
6:16 flames are there
In uk we still have black and white tv
Wouldn’t bother me.
You have TV? 😉
Steely eyed Missile Men. Those days . . . not now.
The single time a LM flew without docking and extraction!
I was still at school
Amazing achievement to get a man on the moon in such a short time frame, the greatest engineering feat of all time. What has happened to American engineering? The Artemis monstrosity, if it ever manages to get into space, will never be part of a successful manned moon mission.
Great video! Could use Dolby filtering to reduce the audio hiss.
Could use 1.5 toilets to reduce water usage.
Do it yourself ! Why not?
Why, keeps the authenticity of the times?
@@Drummerchick2003 Because Periscope Film is in the business of archiving and preserving government and military films. And as they say on their website they are the best in the business. They remove as much film artifact as possible during the digitization process which is clearly not with keeping with the authenticity of the times, right? So, why not remove a little of the audio artifact while they are at it?
@@fredcrayon who cares About time stamps? which is important to historians and seeing if the film has been edited in such a way that it is altering history? Why is it so triggering at least we are lucky enough to witness it again or for the first time, depending on your age. After a while there will be no one left who actually witnessed it so maybe learn from the people who were there instead of complaining about a damn time stamp. I’m not trying to be rude but time is ticking and we are only getting older.
It's not Cape Kennedy. It's Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral.
Thats correct now, but it was Cape Kennedy from 1963 to 1973.
@@benreese55 Zing!
Good one Ben. 👍
I thought the apollo 4 LM burn took it out of earth orbit and it was still orbiting the sun. Or is that the apollo 9 LM?
I don't believe Apollo 4 had a LM.
@@kitcanyon658 no it didn’t. But maybe you mean the 3rd stage did a TLI burn to leave earth orbit? Because a LM wouldn’t have anywhere near the thrust to take the spacecraft out of earth orbit
@@sblack48 : I was just pointing out that 4 didn't have a LM, that's all. Unfortunately I'm not up on which object was left in a solar orbit after a burn.
Apollo 10's 3rd stage and it's luner module are both in a heliocentric orbit.
@@kitcanyon658 i think they said it had a “boiler plate” LM whatever that means
Back when failure was not an option!
exactly, there was no such thing as an accident.
The NASA of today is no where near as productive as the NASA of the Apollo days. These guys had focus and determination. Now NASA Is just a jobs program.
They also had nearly double the budget
That probably makes the most difference
The Mars rovers were outstanding. NASA is not "just a jobs" program. I wish people like you would enlighten up some....too much arrogance.
@@brokensoap1717 ‘Budget restrictions’? Taxpayers gave Bloated, pork driven Federal Agency NASA $20 freaking billion per year over the 5 long decades since Apollo, yet dead-wood NASA produced one shameless pork unsustainable, unaffordable dead-end boondoggle after another.. Shuttle, Constellation, now SLS/Orion..
To Hell with NASA.. it should be downsized or eliminated, replaced with x-prizes paid to American private enterprises accomplishing US space goals like Lunar colonies, Americans on Mars, trips to asteroids..
NASA fan-boys blame anyone/anything else, the military, Congress, Shelby, taxpayers, contractors, etc for Federal Agency NASA pervasive gross incompetence, sloth, waste, irresponsible management failures, massive cost & schedule overruns for pretty much EVERY NASA project.…
Sad that American taxpayers are forced to pay for the hordes of dead-wood uncaring, incompetent paper-shufflers at Federal Agency NASA… NASA has screwed up, corrupted every contractor they have had, including ULA. thankfully Musk, Bezos, Allen & others finally said “FU NASA, we’ll do it ourselves”. When NASA pitches a project with grossly wrong cost and schedule estimates, then grossly mismanages contractors then NASA is the problem.
An "Affirmative Action" jobs program for "under-represented" demographics at that.
@@brokensoap1717
Baloney. Budget constraints force innovation while expensive, bloated projects often fail. NASA has lousy management today, no clear goals, and, in fairness to them, it's run by Congress and the President. But its just a shadow of what it was in the 60s.
Adverts ruin this.
Then pay for the CZcams premium service to have to have them removed. Duh.
@@generalyellor8188 just install an add blocker, Duh
-277 degrees Celsius in space?
Those are some cool astronauts…
Below 0 K. Yes, that's a first.😀
@@julesdomes6064 google temperature in space
And to think nowadays computers can dismiss four fifths of all these people for an equally impactant mission. What an unpredictable boring yet dangerous world man made. “ Open the pod-bay door Hal...” “ Sorry Dave, Im afraid I can’t do that”.
Hopefully, we're not that far gone! AI: artificial intelligence ( artificial - fake ) !!!!! DON'T BE AN IDIOT!!!
If SpaceX CEO Elon Musk himself reasonably warns against letting AI take too much control of humanity’s day to day affairs and technology, he does have a very valid point.
We cannot over rely on AI for everything. @Miguel has a very valid point.
Some Tesla car drivers were stupidly removing themselves from the human gene pool by genuinely assuming that Autopilot in their cars was fully autonomous (despite the fact Tesla was crystal clear it wasn’t).
We might use technology to ease our daily lives, but we MUST be prepared to override it when a dangerous situation presents itself and that technology blissfully unaware, leads us into oblivion.
So called Nerd. And proud of it…..🤓
aaand.....cue the conspiracy idiots
@@datathunderstorm just saw something on the news in LA a few days ago, tesla car ran a red or something, driver got in trouble,
Far out! 👍🇳🇿
Apollo 8 was changed because the LM wasn’t ready. So they went to the moon first and then 9 tested the LM
Also because Russia was planning a mission to orbit the moon to beat out the US.
The forgotten Apollo missions 9 and 10.
@@richardg1426 Apollo 10's crew was the most experienced of any in the Apollo program.
@@raybin6873 didnt their shit blow up on the ground?
I met Borman. His son flew with my dad
I met him, too, and got his autograph. Still have it! 🙂
9:52
Apollo 5 use Apollo 7 Slylab 1973 and Apollo/Soyuz 1975 I got Talk Commander Frank Borman Orbit Moon Apollo 8 1968 Sad 😥Never got See Moon Landing 1972 I was Babie 2025 if Happened I be 55 Year old
Apollo/sayuz single handlely ended the cold War, in my opinion.
Can't believe the CGI was this good back in the 60's.
Wonder why you can’t ... maybe it wasn’t *real* CGI?
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 How can CGI be real or fake its just CGI...
@@gutter1 Yet you find it hard to believe it really could be CGI ...
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 Why would I find it hard to believe it is CGI?
@@gutter1 You said it yourself.
A channel that deletes comments?
Removing truth's protective layers?
I won't be using or recommending this site anymore.
Bye
Stop lying. You will get further in life.
Have a good whinge Mr Sookie Bubba
You're leaving? Gosh, what a loss.
Do you mean, “deleted nonsense”?
🇺🇲
Why on earth would the Americans risk an expensive, vitally important booster rocket by keeping it outside and exposed to the elements for a year ? Surely that's a mistake in the narrative.
Patiently waiting for America’s manned space program to escape the 1960s.
/In the 21st century...
Algorithm.
😅😆😅
Danger will Robinson did you know that they did not carry any breathing air with them? oh just a small bottle on their suits
I too don't believe they went.
Well, you start with kindergarten......
What you believe is not just irrelevant, but worthless.
Because you lack the intellect to understand what happened.
An excellent video, thank you, although I could do without the intrusive and distracting time stamp and logo.
Here's the issue: Tens of thousands of films similar to this one have been lost forever -- destroyed -- and many others are at risk. Our company preserves these precious bits of history one film at a time. How do we afford to do that? By selling them as stock footage to documentary filmmakers and broadcasters. If we did not have a counter, we could not afford to post films like these online, and no films would be preserved. It's that simple. So we ask you to bear with the watermark and timecodes.
In the past we tried many different systems including placing our timer at the bottom corner of our videos. What happened? Unscrupulous CZcams users downloaded our vids, blew them up so the timer was not visible, and re-posted them as their own content! We had to use content control to have the videos removed and shut down these channels. It's hard enough work preserving these films and posting them, without having to spend precious time dealing with policing thievery -- and not what we devoted ourselves to do.
Love our channel and want to support what we do? You can help us save and post more orphaned films! Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm Even a really tiny contribution can make a difference.
these videos aren't free
@@PeriscopeFilm thank you for preserving history you do great work. "You can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all the people all the time". How true that statement is 😉.
@@PeriscopeFilm i like the watermark and time code for some reason. Really gives it that archived feel
3:42 rocket propulsion, first ever successful rocket landing, way way back, now its a piece of.... cake!
On nasa footage there was no ascent seen flames. Think to exit those you can not wear a packsac.
Door was square to accommodate wearing the backpack.
@@MrEh5 the forward hatch of LM-13 confirm that the typical LM forward hatch is 32 inches square.
The LMP opened the door. It was hinged on his side, so he had to crowd toward his side of the cabin and hold the door open against his legs. The commander would then turn round, get down on his hands and knees, and back out onto the porch.
- would LOVE to see Them crowl out /in with all their gear, but despite 6 picnics that was never filmed :(
@@marcleblanc3602 that's how one of the switches got bumped and broken.
@@MrEh5 yeah... miracle only one got it, very tight quarters for EVA suiting :)
Good thing the nexts were less clumsy.
Hypergolic fuel, so no flames.
UMM UMM WHAT
it's not even funny .....:)
It's factual, not meant to be funny.
If you want comedy, including proud ignorance, go to your favorite conspiracy theorist channels.
Space was always just Cold War dreams and special effects. Now we've woken up and see the fakery.
James Hawke having a DUH moment.
Except no, you’ve seen the fakery with your uneducated and ignorant eyes.
The big lie
FU
@@FutureSystem738 The truth hurts eh?
@@Bibiisachildkiller When you can prove it then maybe you can say "the truth". Good luck with that.
@@Bibiisachildkiller Apollo 5 was a lie? Which part specifically?
@@willoughbykrenzteinburg The lunar landings were a lie
people supposed to believe all this nonsense ... ?
What makes you think it is a lie?
The Dunce is strong in this one
Until you can recreate every exact detail of the actual Moon landings without actually going to the Moon, you are not going to be able to convince me they were faked.
Go on. Convince me.
Awww...❤️ A conspiracy theorist!
Must be super smart and special.😀
You seriously think the Soviet Union would of allowed the US to get away with a hoax?
We nev4r went to moon,only low earth orbit...
Of course not. Now go and have a nice lie down.
There's always at least one, guaranteed!
question is is where is that thing?
Prove it
ah the classic teenage retort :)
I hate rocket ships