They got his cousin.

It's quite shocking how our use of language seems to have degraded over the years.

Some Nazis were hanged in Nuremberg, some others flew to the moon. Great story...

. Excellent propaganda, maybe.. this is science FICTION. not truth.

@@mikearthut781 LOL, you think the Moon isn't real, too?

Pro trick: you can watch series at Flixzone. I've been using it for watching loads of movies these days.

@Santino Larry Yea, been watching on Flixzone for months myself :D

@Santino Larry Definitely, I've been watching on Flixzone for since november myself :D

Outer space travel is 100% science fiction. All of it.

Operation Paperclip's poster boy. No one can never deny his genius. When I was a kid I bought into the white washing of his Nazi past, thanks to Walt Disney and US Government. I believe Von Braun was a pragmatic man and he did what he had to do to earn his freedom and citizenship. I believe that he was a hardcore Nazi and probably harbored some resentment to his American masters for helping the USSR defeat his Homeland.

Indeed

If you search him there's plenty of chat here including his Farewell speech, it certainly makes one feel we know more about such individuals doesn't it.

@@DaveSCameron Thanks.

He's also on Disney's Man In Space. More in depth.

Man was a damn hero!

@@tarstarkusz and a Nazi

I understand that he was tested to a partial genius, 137 parts to 149.

@@Flightstar What does that mean?

Positive history is still taught in public schools. It's just that they also teach about some of the not so positive things so we don't repeat the same mistakes, and people who base their identities on those not so positive things don't like those not so positive things being portrayed as not so positive. People who ignore the positive history being taught and focus on the negative history are just upset that their toxic world view is being cast in a negative light.

“positive history”? Newspeak, much?

Any time I eat at Ol’ Heidelberg or Hildegard's I'm like God Bless Operation Paperclip. Meh. I like my schnitzel.

@@JoeOvercoat I think a lot of history is positive, but not by our modern standards. A lot of history is about flawed people overcoming massive obstacles and trying to not be killed and tortured every step of the way. Granted, there is a lot of blatantly evil stuff that happens, but the survivors of most of these tragedies are examples of how strong the human spirit is. It takes a lot of effort to transcend bitter resentment and useless suffering, and we have many examples from every culture of the everyday heroes that have done it.

If you really grew up in Alabama then you should know that it is Redstone (one word) not Red Stone.

Strangelove wasn't nearly as adorable as Wernher

They deleted the ending where he said And that all there is to say about that mein Fuhrer

He likely saved our ass from theRussians

@@hertzair1186 one of the greatest minds of the 20th century.

Glad we did not watch his arm rising up in the hitlerian salute and he punishing his arm as dr. Strangelove used to do... 🤣🤣😂🤔

A Dr Strangelove moment for sure.

Old habits die hard.

....And where it comes down is up to you!

great catch oops 🙈😄

thats the problem with impuls-reaction-drive. If we want to travel thro space seriously, we need a field-based-drive..

The sad thing is that it is almost as if automobiles were powered with steam. Archaic technology.

It's crazy how much spacex's starship idea mirrors the winged ship shown in the diagrams here. I wonder if they're taking direct notes

@@izzie9526 I think you need a new eyeglass prescription. ROFL

The sky is not "outer space". The old Nazi and his cronies were wrong.

Before humans had put anything in orbit. This is two or three years before Sputnik.

@@Mishn0 You're going to need to prove the radius value of the earth for that claim. The radius value has been debunked thousands of times. No radius value means they don't have a tangent point for the orbital telemetry. The jig is up. We know it's fake.

@@slow-mo_moonbuggy LOL, ignoring the fact that you can look at a website to find out when you can see the ISS passing by in its orbit overhead with your naked eyes...or, take a pair of binoculars out an hour or so after sunset and look up and see literally dozens of satellites in an hour or so... Why would you need to know the precise radius of the earth to be able to achieve orbit around this obviously spherical planet? If you're off by a little, it would change the orbital velocity and thus the values of apogee and perigee, but not whether you'd be able to get into orbit. I think you flattards are just trolling, no one could really be that dumb.

I agree. Sure looks like LeMay

Yes, it does at 23:13. He would have been about 49, if the film was done in 1955. Good catch, both of you!

@@billw1266 Nah....looks a bit like LeMay but not him. Freeze at that point and then look up LeMay image...he had closer set eyes and a more pronounced chin/lower jaw.

All that smoke was probably helping them to stay awake.

Hey look kids! It's a flattie!

@@nyccollin You can't prove one thing you've said. But you go on ahead and live your make-believe life. No one takes you seriously.

Balltards get worked up easy.

@@IronCypher No one is more "worked up" than the flatties who keep trying to convince everyone they're right. No one with half a brain takes you guys and your make believe BS seriously.

@@cybercat1531 Utah salt FLATS 100s of miles of FLAT LANDS. Eye LEVEL water LEVEL sea LEVEL WHY ALL THE LEVELS use your God given senses The horizon is a HORIZONTAL LINE 360° always!!! lighthouse prove level earth Observable Testable Repeatable LEVELFACTS Shalom

Yep now people drink like fish and they're legalizing weed left and right. I've read that a lot of companies are abandoning the weed legal states and relocating their businesses- tired of having to pay good for nothing stoners who won't work or are too stoned to do the job right, just tear stuff up and screw stuff up as much as they get done right... not worth it to them to stay there. In 10-15 years we'll have a health care "crisis" from all the burned out stoners coughing up lungs and their brains too burned out to take care of themselves, and too riddled with other health problems to be anything but a public health burden, while the weed states are suffering from massive cost overruns in public health trying to take care of them and massive funding shortfalls from loss of businesses and jobs. Then the gubmint will try to go the other way again and outlaw it and of course the genie will be out of the bottle and they'll have riots demanding it stay legal. SO stupid! Two things I can't stand-- d@mn worthless drunks and scumbag dope smokers... OL J R : )

Von Braun was more "amoral" than "immoral". He didn't care who was paying the bills, he didn't care about the "collateral damage" of slave labor, he didn't care about the "end user's" application of his work. He just wanted to be able to build rockets and advance the science of space flight. He wasn't a weapons builder, he was a space scientists who built weapons for the Nazis because that's where the easy money was. After the war the easy money was the US Army and later, NASA. The Army's Redstone rocket, which eventually launched Alan Shepard's first sub-orbital flight, was an only slightly improved V-2.

He wasn't the only nazi with nazi ideology the U.S. snagged during operation paper clip.

He was arrested by the SS at one point because they suspected he cared more about spaceflight with his rockets and developing weapons for the Reich. He was only eventually released because he was essential to the V-2 project... OL J R :)

Nuclear missiles were going to be a thing, and we wanted them first. End of story.

All about efficiency. Particularly if you're sitting a rocket down onto a planet or moon.

Mercury flights were up to nine g's.

To his credit he did say that the 9G was for sake of maximum efficiency and that lower G forces were doable with a "slight increase in the amount of fuel."

@@RockinRobbins13 Armstrong would have found that handy but he didn't need it.

@@tsfullerton Holy cow! I have no idea how many G's he pulled hooked to the mad Agena death machine, but it was more than 9.

Yeah, and the Nazis just all died off and disappeared in 1946.

Even the X-15 program, which first reached there, hadn't flown yet. And as von Braun predicted, they had to use thrusters, not wing control surfaces to orient their spacecraft.

@61gisele Thanks, He listed quite a few unknowns in hims lecture and it would have only taken 1 miscalculation for a major catastrophe to occur and this was back before computers as we know them. I guess the first Astronaut were much braver then I originally thought.

It’s called theoretic science.

Frankly, I was disappointed he didn't discuss the exploitation of concentration camp labour in inhuman conditions as part of this 🙁 Perhaps he forgot? Or, maybe that was all somebody else's fault?

Tumbril It’s called pragmatism.

@@moggridge1 There was virtually no discussion of any such thing at this time. The kvetching about Auschwitz didn't start until later. It really wasn't until the later part of the 60s that anyone cared about this stuff, mostly because that is around the time Jews began to have a big presence in the academy.

Future history teacher, he

If he was an "officer in the SS" it was because he had to be in order to build rockets. He didn't want to kill the Jews, he just didn't care if they were killed if that got him the funding. Not a ringing endorsement of his morals, but a point to consider. He thought space was more important than some random people he didn't know. I bet that's how a lot of scientists are if they aren't under public scrutiny.

Yes, Transfixed, that's what it was for me. It was much later when I saw him in person. My Sophomore year in college he came to speak on campus.

@@tsfullerton a very good 'claim to fame' in my opinion, the only historical figure that I saw in person was Douglas Badar the legless fighter pilot from WW2. in the late 70s.

His presentation illustrates the difference between a rocket scientist and the average human.

@@MrGeoffHilton Yes. Douglas Bader. I watched his documentary on the Heroes Channel and read him on Wiki.

Something about his eyes... hypnotic

Yup, he missed that one like Microsoft missed the Internet.

10/10 for a very good comment; short, sweet and to the point...well said! How do I know?....I was there in the 50's, buying all von Braun Space Frontier books with Chesley Bonestell illustrations....still got them.

Read the "Project Horizon" Air Force study from this approximate time period... USAF planning to build 12 man moon base and eventually put nuclear missiles on the Moon LOL:) It's online just got to use a search engine. Later! OL J R :)

Thank you! Cheers! Help us save and post more orphaned films! Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm

What? Is that almost 30,000 mph? What?

jmmahony - Both focal points would be inside the Earth.

@@TatevossianA They can be, but one would be at (or very near) the center of the earth. Strictly speaking, when one object orbits another, both are actually orbiting the CG of the system, but when one of those objects is vastly more massive than the other, the larger object barely moves, and the other object is on an elliptical orbit, with one focal point essentially at the location of the other object. Whether the other focal point is inside the larger object is just a question of how elliptical the orbit is, how large that orbit is, and how large the larger object is. When a comet comes into the inner solar system, that is just one part (the perihelion) of a long elliptical orbit, most of which (including the far point, or apehelion) is beyond Neptune. So the other focal point is waaaay outside the sun.

@@jmmahony It's an illustration for mere mortals. Not Kerbal experts.

@@Mishn0 The majority of people watching this video are likely interested in space travel, and the point being discussed is a pretty basic aspect of orbital mechanics and "rocket science 101". The diagram is blatantly wrong, and would be confusing for anyone just learning the subject, so I thought it was worth pointing out. Now that I've explained my motivation for posting my comment, what was the motivation for your response?

@@jmmahony The film was't produced for people that have been exposed to space travel for 70 years. It was produced for those military officers who had never been exposed to this, because NO ONE had ever been exposed to this, because this hadn't existed before. I'm pointing this out because your comment is completely irrelevant to why this video was made. The reason you posted this is to enable you to show us all how frigging smart you are. Period. Here's another clue, we don't care.

The SS arrested him at one point, because they figured he was more interested in space than military applications of his rockets and missiles. They only released him because he was essential to the V-2 project. OL J R :)

He worked for the US Army. His audience was military big-wigs. Should von Braun have talked about Teflon? Armies kill people and break things. That was a part of what he talked about in this lecture tailored to fit his audience. Something wrong with that?

@@RockinRobbins13

@@jaminova_1969 Von Braun was not a military man.

Every German military man had to do his duty. That is not a crime. The criminals were the Nazis in control.

This is before smoke detectors, obviously. Yikes! What a conflagration.

Is correct spelling and grammar impossible also?

The military were the ones with the budget. Civilian industry would never fund the work he wanted to do.

Yeah...I wonder how many of those guys in the room flew B-17 missions with the 8th AF into Germany.....it had to be weird...

Because the pull of gravity is weaker the higher you go.

In 1955 those film cameras were gigantic on heavy tripods. He felt the camera swing to focus on him....

I seen same...even earlier though when Von said bullet would follow the curvature of the earth. Lol when they all know its level!!! Shalom

Hahahahahaha

I just saw the diagram< quickly paused the video and went down to the comments sec. to see if some 1 had what's in my mind , and found your comment .😁 Yes, the diagram is faulty .

Probly one of the things still to be worked out. They didn't know EVERYTHING in '55! Basically you just have to slow down enough to put the perigee of the orbit down into the deeper parts of the atmosphere, air drag will do the rest. Theoretically if you retroburned your engine long enough, you could drop back into the atmosphere without a heat shield-- but it would basically take almost as much fuel as it took to put you into orbit in the first place! Conservation of momentum and energy transfer and all that. Later! OL J R: )

That's comical. Looks like the room is on fire.

Is 2 years really "far before"? The Soviets were already taking space a lot more seriously by the time this was filmed, that's why they shocked the world with Sputnik only 2 years after this film, and launched a probe at the moon only 2 years after that, despite the USA having far more funding.

There was also an admiral with a seegar. Flag officers had a floor ashtray between chairs, with lower-ranked officers using a regular ashtray or empty coffee cup in their laps. Smoking was catered-to in just about every aspect of society aside from combustible atmospheres and SOME medical facilities.

It sure was a different time!

Everyone else finds you boorish and stupid.

@@LiLi-or2gm how rude...least they know the realm they reside.

The moon is inside with us!!! Sun 2

@@LiLi-or2gm I disagree and don't attempt to speak for me, Li Li, you troll. I find Wrel Rel much more interesting and capable of independent thought than you who I find to be a simple, narrow-minded slave who regurgitates what you are told and thinks what your masters tell you to think.

@@erastusturnipseed1097 Oh, aren't you the salty one! Of course you find this BS interesting- you have no real understanding of physical phenomena. You probably find all kinds of other silly crap to be "interesting."

Our first manned flights were in ballistic missiles.

At the time there was little distinction between missile and rocket. They were interchangeable terms. This is the time they diverged, thanks to Dwight Eisenhower's initial requirement that manned space be a civilian enterprise. That failed and von Braun, working for the Army, snatched our cookies out of the fire and prevented us from experiencing utter failure. Good on him. This video shows how essential he was to technologies which saved millions of lives so far and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Von Braun stands entirely vindicated by his redemptive efforts after the war. Salute!

@@RockinRobbins13 True, but NASA wouldn't be formed until the Space Act of 1958, well after Sputnik and mostly as a response to it. Eisenhower knew the military saw space as "the next high ground" and were all over it, fighting their usual turf wars. Eisenhower and the brass basically gave the first orbital satellite mission to the Naval Research Lab's "Vanguard" rocket, because it was being conducted by an all-American team. The Army's team was Von Braun and his Germans working at Redstone Arsenal for DARPA. Von Braun had been capable of inserting a small payload into orbit for some time by the fall of 1957, using his "Jupiter C" rocket which was a modified Redstone with a couple of aggregate solid propellant Sergeant rocket motor upper stages, which was being used to launch various reentry vehicle shapes and materials on suborbital trajectories, then using the upper stages to DRIVE them back down at extremely high speeds into the atmosphere to develop heat shield technology for ICBM warheads. There was a LOT of experimental work going on at the time and nobody was quite sure how to do it. The brass had forbidden Von Braun's team from attempting an orbital launch, to permit the Naval Research Lab team time to finish their Vanguard and launch it, per their orders from upstairs. IIRC they even short-fueled Von Braun's Jupiter-C launches to prevent the possibility of it "accidentally" going into orbit. OF course the Soviets caught them off guard with Sputnik 1, some said Eisenhower DELIBERATELY allowed the Soviets to launch a satellite first in order to establish the "freedom of the skies" doctrine, that a satellite in orbit can overfly a country without violating their "airspace" like an aircraft overflight would, so that the coming age of spy satellites couldn't be complained about as a violation of their airspace or whatever... It's a rather flimsy argument with no supportive evidence that I've seen, but the argument or reason is valid enough, but I'm of the opinion "never contribute to secret activities motivated by uncommon insight what is more readily explained by pure happenstance". At any rate, the Soviets got to orbit first, and the NRL's Vanguard rocket famously exploded on the pad after a lifting off a few feet and falling back, in the famous "Flopnik" or "Kaputnik" fiasco in front of the world press. After that Eisenhower reluctantly turned Von Braun's team loose to put up a US satellite as soon as possible, which became Explorer 1, which discovered the Van Allen Radiation Belts nobody knew were there. Eisenhower had held them back in the first place because he didn't like how it would look in the world press to have the first US satellite put up by a "German" team, though most had become US citizens by that time (including Von Braun who basically led the others to do so by example). Eisenhower would have preferred it be an "All American" team to get the credit for the first satellite, as it would make better press. BUT the NRL's failure with Vanguard left him with basically no choice-- better a German emigre American team put up a satellite than NO US satellite AT ALL. Sputnik had created quite a stir in the US and led to the conclusion (erroneous) that there was a missile gap and the Soviets were ahead technologically and the US had fallen behind and education was insufficiently rigorous and not preparing students for the challenges of the future to prevent a "Red World" and all sorts of basically hysteria... though a lot of good came out of it in the end. BUT it was all a lot of unpleasant noise to the politicians at the time, some of whom made a lot of hay out of it (including Kennedy in his Presidential bid against Nixon in 1960). Later! OL J R :)

@@lukestrawwalker _"some said Eisenhower DELIBERATELY allowed the Soviets to launch a satellite first in order to establish the "freedom of the skies" doctrine, that a satellite in orbit can overfly a country without violating their "airspace" like an aircraft overflight would, so that the coming age of spy satellites couldn't be complained about as a violation of their airspace or whatever... It's a rather flimsy argument"_ But your position here is internally inconsistent. First you say _"Von Braun had been capable of inserting a small payload into orbit for some time by the fall of 1957,"_ And that totally undermines your second contention that the legal aspect was just a "flimsy excuse." And although you contend _"no supportive evidence that I've seen"_ but the entire issue was conducted in public at the United Nations. During the International Geophysical Year, the US and USSR were committed to launching satellites. However, the Russians, at the United Nations raised the point that under international law, property rights extended from their borders on the ground upwardly an infinite distance in altitude, therefore any overflights by satellite over the USSR would have grave consequences. This was the impetus for the formation of NASA, a completely civilian (American had nothing to do with it. NASA also used foreigners, especially Canadians) agency, and the Vanguard team was an entirely civilian effort. Avoiding the appearance of a military satellite was of prime importance, something that was also repeatedly on the six o'clock news. Even a civilian satellite would encounter international law trespass problems, so Eisenhower DID make the conscious decision to let the Russians launch first, since they were the sponsor of the "overflights are illegal" argument. If the Soviets overflew the US and we made no claim of trespass, then the law would have to change and the Russians couldn't protest, since it was THEIR satellite doing the trespassing. This aerospace historian, Amy Shira Teitel, can clear up any discrepancies if I've got anything wrong. Basically Eisenhower had proposed an international treaty designating the space above countries to be considered open, with overflight by both countries to allow reconnaissance as a means of opening up information on the activities of both sides as a way of promoting peace instead of paranoia. The Soviets vigorously opposed that concept, closing down America's ability to orbit a spacecraft first. Allowing the Soviets to do it first would tie their hands and keep them from arguing against it. This video covers that, although not covering American space policy in the late 50's in as detailed a manner as her other video I watched, but can't seem to find right now. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ZtZzaqSSmNmUYI0.html However this video lays out the facts that required the Soviets to orbit first. Interestingly, much is made about the failure of Vanguard and Von Braun "saving the day." But Sputnik was ALSO the Soviet backup plan! kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nrR_h6p8mtild4U.html

Thier lead propaganda guy took himself and six kids out....sad.

kpkndusa No such thing when this was made. “Light” cigarettes, that is.

I'm sure Stalin made an offer they couldn't resist. Don't forget communists are one mindedness --they are not burdened by public opinion. Look at communist China's ever growing power expansion even is space expiration and look at us --worried about genderless bathrooms, sex reassignment in the military, the monetary burden of illegal immigration, etc. --too many distractions.

They had Von Braun's equal genius in Sergei Korolev. In some ways Korolev was more genius than Von Braun. While the Soviets did round some some second-rate German V-2 people that were communists or socialists and didn't want to work for the Americans, and took them back to Moscow where they were cloistered in their own lab because Stalin was paranoid about "counter-revolutionary ideas" where they worked on the V-2 stuff the Soviets managed to scavenge from Germany and Poland after the war, building and flying a handful of V-2's and demonstrating the technology for the Soviets (including Korolev), when they tried to put forward ideas for improved V-2's and new rockets, they were rebuffed-- Korolev and Glushko and the other Soviet "chief designers" already had their own ideas and soon were flying their own Soviet home-built version of the V-2 (called the R-2) and looking far beyond it to more improvements they had in mind and soon put into practice. They were the first to figure out that if you separated the warhead from the missile after engine burnout it was a h3ll of a lot more accurate, so that's one of the first big improvements they made, and soon their R-5 missiles were flying and the R-7 Semyorka became their first ICBM, which also was used to orbit the Sputniks and other satellites, the first manned spacecraft, Vostock, and still is flying to this day in evolved form as the "Soyuz launcher", the US astronauts only way into space from shuttle retirement in 2011 until SpaceX Crew Dragon launches started a few years back. OL J R :)

For real!!! Nothing but the same explanations and lame cartoon slide shows

yip.

And just now is being realized as an addition to the ISS. It's up there and functioning now. Bigelow is the company that did it.

@@RockinRobbins13 Bigelow is bankrupt now. Their ideas for inflatable habitats seem to have worked.

@Brian Roome lol, right, that "queen" isn't even human.

He was arrested by the SS at one point because they suspected he cared more about spaceflight with his rockets and developing weapons for the Reich. He was only eventually released because he was essential to the V-2 project... OL J R :)

LOL, you still think "those Ebil NAHTZEES" were the Bag Guys in WWII? Guess what? You were LIED TO, your whole life.

Yes and no. If you put people in a missile, it's a ship. "Missile" doesn't mean "weapon". It means "flying object".

Great catch. In order for something to be a missle it needs a target. And it ultimately needs to end it's trajectory by hitting that target.