@M Detlef I wasn't even born yet.

sorry for your loss......i am sure your dad did some neat stuff !

Specific training for Apollo missions was conducted mostly at Griffith Observatory in Loa Angeles, from September 1966 to mid 1970.

Guess I'm lucky my car knows the way

you cover twice the distance?

Are you suggesting Neil Armstrong flew drunk? How dare you sir! Oh I knew Neil and he never drink past the van Ryan belt!

However, the contents contained within the pub can have a detrimental effect on your return trajectory depending on the amount of said contents consumed and their affect on the users internal guidance platform.

All of Nasa's photos or images taken in the last 50 years are computer graphics they have been manipulated by Nasa to hide whats is really on the moon and Mars!

RayDT No he’s pretty much correct. Simple Google search will prove that to you. If you still believe NASA is not full of BS in 2019, what won’t you believe? Just go look at Nas his own website, it’s all CGI. Do you actually believe NASA lost the telemetry data and that’s why we cannot go back to the moon? Let me guess you’re still waiting on the commercial flights into space that get promised every five years?

@@drtidrow Rubbish, indeed!

RayDT Traveling in space is only a figment of your imagination. You are the fool not me. Plenty of evidence proving we didn’t go. You will never see Low earth orbit, you will never go beyond low earth orbit in your lifetime. All you will ever do is sit here and imagine it in your head and look at CGI photos and think it’s amazing. You will not even question why we haven’t been there in 50 years. You won’t question why NASA says we lost the telemetry data and can’t go back. Yet you’ll call me foolish for not believing we went 50 years ago in a lunar craft made out of foil. You probably believe you came from a monkey as well. Whatever, I will let you get back to your regular scheduled program.

GlobalMagicNation - I love reading the paranoid rants of you space travel deniers. The good news for you is that God watches out for drunks and fools.

They were great liers, filmmakers, photographers, propagandists and thieves. A bunch of Nazi's that ran NASA would never lie to the American public oh no. They swindled 40 billion dollars of tax payers money and for what? What do we have to show for it besides their movies and photos.

@@varuzhshakbazyan5732 Here you are again making more claims without any hard evidence to back them up.

@@joevignolor4u949 Apollo 17 magazine 134/B. Photos AS17-134-20383, 20384 and 20385. It's right there on flicker. The flag clearly has moisture on it, those photos were not taken in a vacuum. Water cannot exist on the moon in any form besides ice. Also, the flag is nothing special, it's not made of aluminum or Mylar or titanium. It's just a plain old cloth flag just like the one hanging everywhere in America. I would love to hear any explanation for how there can be moisture on the flag on the moon. If they faked those photos then the question is why? All they had to take a baseball up there and throw it. Or have one of them jump straight up like 6 feet off the ground. Did they do that ? No. Because they were always on the Earth.

@@varuzhshakbazyan5732 - Did those great liers, filmmakers, photographers, propagandists and thieves also purposely kill 7 astronauts each during the Challenger explosion in 1986 and the reentry of Columbia in 2003? Was that for our personal enjoyment?

I agree. Where are they from and can one access these?

I just got it in the mail! The build will probably happen the week after next.

Yay!! I have started building it, and it's awesome. Good luck! 🐱🚀

Yay I was going to ask that too! Can’t wait to watch you build it! 🙂

The Vintage Space I love the subtle KSP theme in the background lol

Good point. I'm not really a cat person, but it's hard to go wrong with almost any small, furry animal.

... I remember Pete in the background humping a cushion in earlier episodes ... that was funny! 😂

The WWW is for cats. 😺

@rusty nuts No doubt. ;)

@@ChristopherUSSmith Wrong, sorry... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/grp6qcd4yMibdqc.html

Live and on location please.

Not directly, KSP got their music from the same guy (who gives away his music for free)

@@sundhaug92 Nice :)

Haha I noticed the same thing

Go watch Hidden Figures. Lol. Couldnt have done it without Colored Folk. Lol.

@@pwolfman1227 Hidden Figures was a bunch of malarkey, it's true Katherine Johnson and those other ladies were indispensable but the whole thing about them suffering racism at the hands of NASA employees is pure bunk, read anything written by Johnson herself and you'll see that she was made to feel very much at home and appreciated by her coworkers at NASA and that she considered them family, but the racist movie maker couldn't resist but to lie because as with all liberals and their mentality "If that's not what happened it should be", just like "Hands up don't shoot", when it turned out that's not what happened that day the liberal media kept reporting it that way because of course "If that's not what happened it should be", I didn't get to see it in the theater but being a life long fan of the space program because I had an uncle who worked at the Cape I bought the movie as soon as it was in Walmart, after watching it at home and seeing how the NASA personnel were portrayed I immediately threw it away.

That book looks fascinating. I'd have lapped it up when I was younger, and maybe even got out the soldering iron. (These days I do too much engineering at work to want to do it at home as well. :-) )

Epi Endless It’s a good book if you’re either theoretical or an engineer. I’m in the middle. Things like rope memory - from a conceptual standpoint I get it. Run 8 wires through a core and each wire/combination represents a bit value. From an implementation standpoint - WTF?

Here is a one hour video that explains the inner workings of the Apollo guidance computer: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rt5nf8mZmrmvhYU.html

Nonsense

Indeed. And there were all the "P00 and accept" uplinks of updated REFSMMAT and state vectors from the trench, too.

Hey Jay, dead reckoning in space. I need to know more. On earth easy, but in space? If you make a mistake see ya so long ..How can they do it?

Nope, copilots didnt have same learning as pilot,.

Dead reckoning in space. Maybe short distances nope

@@JohnSmith-eo5sp Jesus.

The command module could be steered to a limited extent by rolling it during reentry. Astronaut heads towards the horizon would curve the ground track to the side. Astronaut heads towards space vs the Earth could affect distance down range. The roll orientation could be changed as required during the reentry. Despite this there were still brief time windows for maneuvers like the engine burn for leaving lunar orbit. Any delay might make it necessary for the crew to wait for the next lunar orbit and the recovery force to rush to a different location while the spacecraft was in route.

Mission control had a very good idea of where the spacecraft was and its velocity from radar and radio Doppler. This allowed MCC to uplink a final state vector some 4 hours before landing. The guidance computer then did the work although the astronauts could take over using the Entry Monitor System if necessary (or even other methods if that failed). In practice the computer did it all, every time. The broad landing point was determined by where and when you arrived back and the final midcourse correction took care of that. Whilst a final course correction refined the landing point before the SM was jettisoned, the command module was itself, to some extent steerable as it had lift and its own reaction control jets. In fact, for Apollo 11 MCC added some 300miles to their original splashdown point in order to avoid bad weather. Again, all done by the little Apollo Guidance Computer.

@@robertvirginiabeach Interesting fact, the CM was actually designed as a lifting body! It could gain (and lose) altitude just in the manner you describe during reentry.

I've read in the official Press Booklet from NASA that a vessel returning from the Moon will splash more or less in the opposite side of the world from the point it enters atmosphere. Which, as everybody knows, is at exactly 70,000 km, right when the music stops.

Gabriele Simionato Basically if you fire an engine retrograde, you will lower the perigee of the orbit exactly 180 degrees from where you fire it. The deorbit burn involves creating an elliptical orbit where the perigee hits the earth (that's landing), so the landing is 180 degrees from the burn. The actual landing point isn't exactly that on earth because of the atmosphere (in fact the atmosphere can make the capsule miss hitting the ground entirely, if the entry angle is wrong, by skimming off it). But very specifically, the design of the Apollo capsule, as we discussed, gave it the ability to steer slightly once in the atmosphere. Hence the statement you read.

Shuttle? No shuttle went to the moon only low earth orbit.

yes ... it was .. there was once a video online talking specifically about the main gyro for navigation ... and how much it weighed ... something like an old portable sewing machine ... ok lugable sewing machine

Modern gyro systems are solid state, I believe. Much smaller and lighter. But you gotta love the elegance of the Apollo Saturn system. Like a Swiss watch. A gigantic, 360 foot, 7.5 million pound thrust, 11 km/s Swiss watch, that shakes the earth like an atom bomb when it takes off and hurtles to the moon and back while never losing its style.

Don't forget, it was an Inertia Navigation System in Korean Air 007 that wandered off course on September 1st 1983 leading to a Soviet fighter shooting it down, goes back to the saying we all used to use years ago, "They can put a man on the Moon but they can't ________" (fill in the blank).

The IMU was analogue. The gimbal angles were converted into pulses by the Data Coupling Units and the pulses were the input to the guidance computer.

@@malcolmbacchus421 Fantastic. With microengineering , analogue still has plenty of uses.

Nice Scott Manley pronunciation. Fly safe.

Lovell developed that on Apollo 8. Good thing he still remembered it 16 months later. :)

Ah, was gonna say, 1969 is a long time ago, can't make plans for the past. But you mean the 50th anniversary, very cool. That sounds like a great plan.

Integrate the acceleration and add the integral to the starting speed. In 3 dimensions, of course. Also have ground based radars measure spacecraft location, distance, and velocity.

That's the whole point of inertial guidance. If you keep track of your starting point and how much you move in every direction, you know where you are and how fast you're going... so long as you don't go into gimbal lock. :)

And in addition to inertial guidance (there were redundant sets of accelerometers), and, if necessary, repeated start sighting, so long as you are in communication with Earth, you have the Doppler effect on the tracking radar and on the unified S band communications. In fact, the Doppler calculations - albeit complex enough that they could only be done by the RTCC and not the AGC - were so accurate they became the primary way of dealing with the determination. As said by others replying here, the AGC/sextant approach really became the backup not the primary method of calculating velocity and distance. The sextant and the inertial guidance system was really much more needed for ensuring the attitude of the spacecraft was correct for a burn: after all, it's pretty important when you light the engine to ensure you are pointing the right way.

c'mon. she researches these videos; expecting her to ad lib in this kind of detail is just unrealistic. She's got a life- she's not a space jukebox.

@@craigwall9536 She has already done a livestream building a lego model kit. It's not "unrealistic" to ask for a livestream Q&A. No research involved. Easy.

@@squatch545 Easy for Legos. NOT easy for Astronavigation.

Right Lock or, alternatively, maneuver nodes.

Install Real Solar System and try that again!

Me to, earliest memory that I can place a date on, July 20th 1969, I was 4, my uncle worked at the Cape for Boeing and we just lost him a couple of years ago, just last week I got some of his personal belongings from relatives in Florida, a jewelry box full of medallions and rings from the Apollo missions and Shuttle missions including Magellan, he was also on the team that examined the recovered satellite from the Challenger disaster (Boeing had a defense department satellite on it), in the 70's when things were slow at the Cape he worked as a golf pro at a resort in Florida and there's a bunch of PGA stuff in it to like tie clasps and cuff links, being from a dreary old coal mining town in Pennsylvania he was like a rock star to me when I was a kid in the 70's, it was like having Dean Martin for an uncle.

Those were filmed in a studio along with the moon walks. Spacewalks are so dangerous the rarely ever do them even on the ISS. You're gonna depressurize the ship 100,000 miles from the Earth? To retrieve tapes? It's crazy.

Varuzh Shakbazyan quiet you G’damn communist.

@@varuzhshakbazyan5732 What's crazy about it? To study the moon they had placed high resolution cameras back there in the service module and before reentry the film had to be retrieved somehow. The astronauts simply put on their spacesuits, depressurized the cabin and one of them went outside to get the film. I've seen the video taken of these spacewalks and both the astronaut and his tether are obviously floating around weightless . What proof do you have that it was faked in a studio?

Varuzh Shakbazyan don’t be an idiot. There’s a ton of evidence that they went to the moon including some presented on this channel. If there had been any doubt that the Apollo missions went to the moon the Soviets would have jumped all over it.

@@joevignolor4u949 The Eva footage could have been shot in low Earth orbit. There is no evidence that anyone has been to the moon. All of NASA's claims are suspect, their videos are fake, with the astronauts not doing anything in low gravity. Did any of them jump more than 1 foot off the ground? Did they do anything that would prove they were on moon? No. Here is all the evidence you need, go to flicker and pull up these : Apollo 17 magazine 134/B. Photos AS17-134-20383, 20384 and 20385. It's right there on flicker. The flag clearly has moisture on it, those photos were not taken in a vacuum. Water cannot exist on the moon in any form besides ice. Also, the flag is nothing special, it's not made of aluminum or Mylar or titanium. It's just a plain old cloth flag just like the one hanging everywhere in America. I would love to hear any explanation for how there can be moisture on the flag on the moon. If they faked those photos then the question is why? All they had to take a baseball up there and throw it. Or have one of them jump straight up like 6 feet off the ground. Did they do that ? No. Because they were always on the Earth.

Epi Endless Electro-mechanical fire support tables were around in World War 1 pioneered by the Royal Navy.

over horizont,.you mean over curve of the earth, really?

There is even OHR that can detect F117 and B2 stealth aircraft

Malcolm Bacchus Yes indeed. They deserve a lot of credit for “continuous aim” and for sharing it with the U.S.

*slow clap*

*slower clap*

Also the receiver is 380,000 km away and moving 1km/s

Too bad they erased the telemetry. Video tapes are so expensive!

She doesn't need anyone's forgiveness... No video producer on KZfaq does.

Said the fictional bounty jumper, smuggler and Rebel General Han Solo. ;)

No..LUKE.. I am your father!!! .....now come here boy and give your daddy a big hug!!!..oh and sorry about your hand......

lol

Bill Holland Not quite. The call refers to the Guidance Reference Release (actually at T-17s give or take a bit). The AGC has little to do with this and the astronauts don't have anything to do. Up to that point the inertial guidance unit in the Saturn (not the CSM) is being torqued to keep it in line with the earth's rotation by the IU having taken its reference from the ground marker you mention. Effectively up to this point the guidance was being held to a rigid reference point. At Guidance Reference Release, the adjustment of the gimbals in the IGU is stopped and the gimbals allow to run freely maintaining their constant inertial orientation from that point (hence the word 'release'. This should have been done at the point of launch, but was done early to stop the jarring of the engine start up throwing the settings off alignment and was felt to be less risky that the small alignment error caused by stopping the updating 17s early. This was all automatic. The astronauts didn't have to do anything.

@@malcolmbacchus421 Fascinating!

Messy stuff, ship turns on itself, highspeed, its a curvy trajectory. Dont they need special optic to see stars? Miracle the first #8 got a bullseye :)

And 1 flux capacitor.