|
Post by ajv on Aug 1, 2006 19:10:24 GMT -4
Does it make more sense that this highlight is actually light reflected from the part of Armstrong's spacesuit that was illuminated when he was taking the photographsThis is clavius.org's conclusion too. I think a TV frame would be a very nice addition to clavius's argument.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Aug 9, 2006 19:15:28 GMT -4
Here's a quick VPA for a frame from Sticks' video. Some of the shadow points are not very clear so the lines are only approximate.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on May 31, 2006 18:16:27 GMT -4
...it's that darned gecko again!If you accidentally leave out one critical word in the transcript it certainly opens up the possibility of a gecko conspiracy 120:59:13 Cernan: Let's see if I can't get a bigger bite. You on one end, and let me stand on the ****** and we might be able to get a bigger bite. See, I can't get a very big bite.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on May 31, 2006 18:07:06 GMT -4
It's from Apollo 17 GET 120:59:25 ( ALSJ). Cernan has been drilling and is having problems with the jack so Schmitt is coming across to help. Cernan kicks the cover of the treadle(?) into that position at about 120:49:51
|
|
|
Post by ajv on May 12, 2006 17:57:42 GMT -4
Most importantly, can anyone explain the Jack Garman quote?PeterB, I don't know if you read the sci.space.history group but there's a discussion about the displays with a follow up by Jack Garman. There's also a link to a 1974 report: Apollo Experience Report: Flight-Control Data Needs, Terminal Display Devices, and Ground System Configuration Requirements ( PDF 891k).
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Apr 24, 2006 20:48:30 GMT -4
It's Ed Mitchell from Apollo 14 at around GET 114:38:30 ( ALSJ) during the 1st EVA. It was filmed at 12 frames/s using the 16mm camera. However the clip appears to be running twice that rate. Shepard was running the film camera. Changed the link to show the ALSJ MPG clip.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Jun 19, 2006 16:50:29 GMT -4
Frank O'Brien's Lunar Orbit Rendezvous essay on the AFJ is good reading. It details the Coelliptic Method and the later Direct Rendezvous approach. It also describes the tracking process and some of the abort procedures etc.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Feb 23, 2006 22:48:19 GMT -4
The effect was noted in the introduction to the Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas of the Moon (1971). A PDF is available on the LPI site and there is an HTML version. IMPERFECTIONS
Certain imperfections may be observed in some of the photographs. These imperfections are directly traceable to the method of film development, the readout system, the video data, or the GRE system.
[...] "Lace" (shown in plate 116) appears as a spotted area of unprocessed film arranged in a random manner. The areas vary in size and location on the film and do not follow any pattern.
Plate 116 is IV-091-H1 which shows the same effect. Back to IV-103-H1. Image IV-098-H1 overlaps IV-103-H1 showing the lunar surface in some of the areas covered by the "lace".
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Feb 23, 2006 0:15:59 GMT -4
There is coverage of the lower part of IV-103-H1 in the Apollo 15 Panoramic camera (Rev 16) catalog around AS15-P-9360. Rotate the images 90 degress CCW to match the Lunar Orbiter images.
|
|
|
"Talk"
Feb 5, 2006 23:56:58 GMT -4
Post by ajv on Feb 5, 2006 23:56:58 GMT -4
Please... where is it? It's between the lines you transcribed at the start of the GET 10:32 transmission,
0:12 Houston (Charles Duke): Hello, Apollo 11, Houston. Goldstone says that the TV looks great, over. 0:22 Aldrin: Okay, Roger. We're er... [garbled] on earth.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Feb 2, 2006 17:55:25 GMT -4
Has anyone here tried FORTH, or use it on a regular basis? No, but I program in raw PostScript when I need to.
A few years ago, my father co-authored a textbook which had a graph showing the normal distribution in one of the appendices. However, one of the graphics artists at the publishers decided that it would look better if they redrew the diagram and it ended up with straight lines and hand adjusted Bézier curves in the proof copy. I wrote a replacement for the diagram in raw PostScript which calculated the coordinates of the curve mathematically within the embedded PostScript program itself.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Nov 28, 2005 14:43:17 GMT -4
you tend more toward a "cloud" or a "halo" around bright objectse.g. AS12-46-6820 or the classic one from Full Moon AS12-46-6826.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Oct 5, 2005 0:09:12 GMT -4
One of the newer pages on the ALSJ is the Virtual LRV page. It has a collection of images and animations of a computer modelled LRV. The Animation of Walking Hinge shows the deployment.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Sept 3, 2005 8:34:33 GMT -4
Come to that, do you really think the Lunar Module could have popped up 70 miles to meet it?No, fortunately it only had to get up to about 9 or 10 miles.The initial LM ascent orbit is about 17x83 km (10x50 miles) which is then raised to the 110km (70 mile) circular orbit by a series of small burns. The major use of the ascent engine is getting from the virtual standing start on the surface to the perilune velocity of the initial orbit which is about 1690 m/s (5540 ft/s). In the Coelliptic rendezvous method the small burns are the CSI burn of about 13 m/s (45 ft/s) and then the TPI burn of about 7 m/s (25 ft/s). Those small burn figures are more or less the same as the Hohmann transfer values for those orbital changes. N.B. The above figures use km and miles while Apollo used nautical miles. The actual figures varied between missions. Lots of details are in the AFJ - Lunar Orbit Rendezvous essay. I think I have two corrections to the Clavius page. 1 - The Clavius equation for v_p is different from equation 1.16 on Bob's page. I think the numerator in the Clavius equation should use R_a. 2 - The Clavius calculations use 14x72 km which I think is a result of misconverting the 9x45 nautical miles orbit as miles.
|
|
|
Post by ajv on Aug 20, 2005 19:00:34 GMT -4
Talking about reflections, Aldrin's visor might even have caught an image of the Earth. See the 5903 commentary at the ALSJ. Kipp Teague provides this image which has been rotated, flipped and color corrected to offset the gold visor. The bluish spot is at the top but I must admit I'm not completely convinced. The flag comes out nicely in this view though.
|
|