The Smoking Gun of Bart's "Smoking Gun" Footage

[Mr Gorsky]

emcsq said:

You talk about false assumptions. Well maybe you need to be a little more flexible to the possibility that members may not log in for a week or longer or they are initially unfamiliar with or unaware of the messaging system here and that therefore they do not get to read a vital PM and to correct an accidental rule-violation. Because that is exactly what transpired in my case.

Which is all well and good except that when I am logged in the top of the page always contains a note that I "... have 0 messages, 0 are new". It is not that easy to remain unaware that a private messaging system exists, nor that you have something in there that you haven't read yet.

LO did also post in this thread at least twice that he was waiting for a response from you as regards your multiple accounts.

I am pleased that you have sorted that out, and can now continue to post your comments and questions regarding Apollo, but we can all do without the sort of paranoid whining that is typical of many believers in the Apollo Hoax theory.

[sts60]

In emcsq's defense, I'll simply note that I often neglect to check the messages notice, and have overlooked PMs for some time. Some message boards generate a pop-up or take you to a "you have new messages" page first, but at least this version of Proboards doesn't do that.

All water under the bridge now. emcsq, do you think after reading the replies that still photos could have been taken through another window? I'm just curious; I generally avoid photographic questions, as I've no particular expertise in them.

[JayUtah]

In emcsq's defense, I'll simply note that I often neglect to check the messages notice, and have overlooked PMs for some time.

Same here, however I don't think that excuses having been notified in the public thread itself. LunarOrbit's public statement was clearly addressed to him and sufficiently explanatory. If emcsq then doesn't respond either to the private or to the public message, wilfull evasion becomes a defensible conclusion. The wrong conclusion, apparently, in this case, but a reasonable one.

emcsq, do you think after reading the replies that still photos could have been taken through another window?

Personally I don't favor the explanation that it was taken through another window. Here is the spacecraft in question.
newsdesk.si.edu/images_full/images/museums/nasm/objects/photo_3.jpg
The side hatch has been removed here for display, but it would have held Window 3. Window 5, through which the television camera photographed Earth, is at the top left. Window 4 is the only other window on the side of the spacecraft facing Earth, just below and to the right of Window 5. However if you examine Window 2 to the right of the hatch, which is the symmetrical correspondent to Window 4, you can see that its pane faces forward along the spacecraft axis and does not afford a view to the side. Windows 2 and 4 are intended to be used during docking.

A better explanation in my opinion is that the 70mm still photo was taken just prior to or just after the television camera was photographing through the window.

[emcsq]

Very well Jay, I accept your informed conclusions.

However, I would add - hopefully without again being perceived as being a dreaded CT, that all the A11 Hasselblad TLC earth images that appear to be available, do roughly coincide with the television Xmissions do they not?

When you consider the TV broadcasts in total only accounted for a very tiny fraction of the total time span of the lunar coast, it seems slight;y odd that they took the 250mm Hassleblads at roughly the same time as they were doing the TV?

Correct me if I am mistaken, because in no way is this comment meant to challenge at all the verity of the landings, -but merely an observation of an apparent anomaly that I would appreciate being clarified.

Thanking you .

[dwight]

G'day emcsq,

I dont have the mission flightplan at hand, but it would make sense to group photographic and tv activity together. Perhaps someone who has the documentation could verify this.

[gwiz]

Most of the time during trans-lunar or trans-earth coast, the spacecraft was in the PTC "barbecue roll" mode to even out the solar heating. The roll was only stopped for the scheduled TV transmissions, so that would also be the obvious time to get out the long lens and take the still pictures, too, without having to chase the earth from window to window.

[JayUtah]

The Apollo 11 flight plan mentions photographing Earth with the Hasselblad cameras only once at about GET 09:00, and recommends Earth photography "as convenient." The photographic operations plan lists no significant objectives for Earth photography, leaving it to the discretion of the crew. Nevertheless Rolls 36 and 44 contain a number of photographs taken of Earth from GET 03:00 up to the stowage of the cameras for Earth landing. I don't see any evidence to support a notion that the TLC photography was inappropriately limited. Since the spacecraft was specifically positioned to facilitate Earth photography for the first telecast, I don't find it the least odd that both television and still photography were done at that time. If you go to the trouble of setting up a photo-op, you ought to use it.

While Apollo 11 has great historical significance for the successful landing, it did not differ materially from Apollos 8 and 10 in terms of the translunar coast operation, during which periods of those prior missions substantial Earth photography had already been done. That is an important consideration for setting expectations. The photo plan for Apollo 11 appropriately did not emphasize Earth photography.

[emcsq]

Fair enough explanation; thanks for that.

An exception however, may be in TV Xmission 2, where it appears the BBQ initiation is underway, even part-way through the telecast.

[PhantomWolf]

I think this really is something a lot of HBs miss. While 11 was the first to land, it was the third to do the Earth to Moon trip and in the end, there are only so many photos you can take of the Earth. Interestingly, while Apollo 17 still took about around 30 images of the Earth at a distance, Apollo 10 took nearly 100.

[JayUtah]

PTC is only one revolution per hour, so the roll rate is not really the issue. However, you can only see out of the CM in certain directions, so PTC rolls will render various selected targets out of an effective line of sight for large portions of each hour. So you need both the line of sight and the time and willingness to take photographs at that moment. The stack tended to cone during PTC rolls, eliminating additional line-of-sight possibilities. I've been in one Apollo command module and one Apollo boilerplate -- it really is rather difficult to find good fields of view because of interior equipment, even if the spacecraft attitude is favorable.

[emcsq]

Jay.
The "BBQ roll ", as seen rather abruptly during the second A11 TV transmission: seems to have been occurring - at least on this occasion - rather quickly...

... and therefore , perhaps the entire revolution in, say, 90 degree stages?


I wonder whether this was typical or not of the Apollo "1 hour 360 degree rotations " you speak of.

[JayUtah]

That's probably a piloted spacecraft manuever, not the PTC roll. Apollo 8 had to manhandle the spacecraft during the telecast too in order to provide suitable viewing angles.

[PhantomWolf]

emcsq said:

Jay.
The "BBQ roll ", as seen rather abruptly during the second A11 TV transmission: seems to have been occurring - at least on this occasion - rather quickly...

... and therefore , perhaps the entire revolution in, say, 90 degree stages?


I wonder whether this was typical or not of the Apollo "1 hour 360 degree rotations " you speak of.

If you're talking about the segment where they switched windows, while Jay might correct me here, I think they simply had two windows that the Earth could be seen through at the same time rather than rolling the craft to get the Earth into the second window. Remember that the windows do allowed for a angle of vision, you don't have to just look directly out of them.

ETA: In fact looking at the image Jay provided, there seem to be two windows right there that are close enough to both have a view of the Earth out them at the same time.

[JayUtah]

The side cockpit windows (1 and 5) and the docking windows (2 and 4) are near each other, but the panes face in different directions. And the view out the docking windows is pretty much obscured by the docked LM. If you pointed the CM such that the Earth was at 10' clock or 2 o'clock high from the pilot's point of view, it's conceivable you might be able to get the Earth visible in two windows (1 and 2 or 4 and 5).

[PhantomWolf]

Sounds like something worth asking Buzz if I can ever afford to get him in a room for 30 mins