|
Author
|
Topic: Photo: Apollo 11 flies past American flag
|
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 10-18-2014 10:20 AM
  
quote:
Originally posted by LM-12:
Note how the moon changes in these two Apollo 8 group and backup crew photos.
Found a third photo in the same series that shows just the prime crew. The moon in the prime and group photos looks the same. But the moon in the backup photo looks quite different. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 11-11-2014 05:10 AM
Here is a nice shot of Apollo 14 on the pad with the moon overhead on launch eve. Looks real to me. Photo is dated January 30, 1971. |
canyon42
Member Posts: 238
From: Ohio
Registered: Mar 2006
|
posted 11-15-2014 08:04 PM
I'm going to call that one "unlikely" as a single exposure. The phase is correct for the date, but the orientation of the moon is too perfectly horizontal for the latitude of Florida. The ecliptic makes a fairly steep angle at that time of year, but not *that* steep--the crescent should be angled at least somewhat. My guess is that it is a double-exposure (either in-camera or done in the studio), but probably with the moon taken at the correct time at least. |
Jonnyed
Member Posts: 408
From: Dumfries, VA, USA
Registered: Aug 2014
|
posted 11-16-2014 10:26 AM
Great discussion -- I've always wondered why the famous and celebrated shot of Buzz Aldrin on the moon didn't show his antenna. Now I know. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 12-01-2014 11:29 PM
There is a black and white version of the first photo. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 01-06-2015 09:31 AM
This Apollo 15 launch/flag photo is very similar to the Apollo 11 photo. |
dtemple
Member Posts: 730
From: Longview, Texas, USA
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 01-06-2015 09:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
I can understand why Sy made the comment he did — it is a reasonable conclusion — but it is not a composite. The photo was taken from a C-135 aircraft using the Airborne Lightweight Optical Tracking System at an altitude of 35,000 feet.
This photo just about has to be a composite or the photo must had been modified in some way. Look how large the VAB appears in the photo. I know a telephoto lens can zoom in like this but then look at the relative size of the Saturn IB. Also look on Google Earth to see the proximity of Pad 34 to the VAB. Apollo 7 would have needed to launch in a very northeasterly direction — closer to a path for a polar orbit. If "7" had launched from Pad 41 I can see how the photo would have been possible. Look at the area on Google Earth and explain how this photo is not unaltered. |
Skytrotter
Member Posts: 31
From: Indianapolis, IN USA
Registered: Sep 2013
|
posted 01-11-2015 09:31 AM
quote:
Originally posted by LM-12:
Here is a nice shot of Apollo 14 on the pad with the moon overhead on launch eve. Looks real to me. Photo is dated January 30, 1971.
I think you are correct that this is a non-composited photo.I decided to do a little math to see if this photo could be from a single shot. Using the latitude and longitude of KSC and entering the date of the photo into Stellarium, it shows not only the same phase of the Moon, but also the same orientation to the horizon as the Apollo 14 photo. It would have probably been taken between 9:30 and 9:45pm local time. Accord to Stellarium, the apparent angular diameter of the Moon the night of January 30, 1971 was 0° 32' 53". Here is a screen capture from Stellarium showing the Moon above the western horizon on that night as seen from KSC. Here is a zoomed in screen capture where I cut and pasted the image of the Moon from the original photo next to the Moon on the Stellarium screen. It also shows the azimuth of the Moon.
Also, here is a larger view of the original photo. Comparing the width of the S-IVB which appears a bit smaller than the apparent size of the Moon in that photo, let's assume it to be a little less than half of a degree wide. We know that the actual width of the S-IVB is 21.7 ft, so with the angular size and linear size we can calculate the distance the photo was taken from the Saturn V. That figure comes in at about 2600 to 3000 ft depending of what angular width value I give the S-IVB Since according to Stellarium the Moon was at an azimuth of about 272° right about the time the photo would have been taken, the location of the camera would be about 92° from 39A. Using Google Earth and that direction and distance information here is the approximate location of the camera. Considering the rough estimates I used in determining this, the camera could have been on Cape Road or the beach pretty much due east of the launch pad. — Mark Trotter |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 01-12-2015 02:49 AM
Thanks for sharing that detailed analysis with us. Good to separate the "real" photos from the montages and composites, I think. |
garymilgrom
Member Posts: 1966
From: Atlanta, GA
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 01-12-2015 08:36 AM
Science!!! |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 01-12-2015 10:22 AM
The only Apollo 11 pad/moon image I have seen is dated 14 July 1969. It appears to be a composite. That was not the moon phase two days before launch. |
mach3valkyrie
Member Posts: 719
From: Albany, Oregon
Registered: Jul 2006
|
posted 01-12-2015 01:33 PM
They would have landed in the dark. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 01-13-2015 08:44 AM
The moon was 2 days old (new moon + 2 days) when Apollo 11 launched. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 05-19-2015 08:46 AM
The LIFE Magazine photos of the Apollo 11 rollout include this shot of the moon and a photo of the crew with Michael Collins looking up -- at the moon, perhaps. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 03-01-2018 01:14 PM
In the launch footage, you can also see a small condensation cloud around the CSM at MACH 1. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 03-07-2019 09:37 PM
Compare the Apollo 11 launch photo with this Apollo 15 launch photo.
|
Jonnyed
Member Posts: 408
From: Dumfries, VA, USA
Registered: Aug 2014
|
posted 03-08-2019 04:42 PM
Hey that double vapor cone was cool. Thanks for sharing.I'm not an aeronautical engineer (I'm a nuke) but do the vapor cones only form in high humidity environments (where there is a lot of water already in the air) or do you get them fairly routinely in almost all types of atmospheric conditions when you go trans-sonic? |
Cozmosis22
Member Posts: 986
From: Texas * Earth
Registered: Apr 2011
|
posted 07-10-2019 09:34 AM
Here is a newspaper front page photo of Apollo 11 on the pad. This Houston Chronicle final edition dated July 15, 1969 shows the mighty Saturn with the objective moon beside it.Image is noted "AP Wirephoto" so not sure who actually snapped this picture. Could be a NASA release or a press pool photo. Caption implies that it was taken during the final days before launch on July 16th.  |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 07-10-2019 11:33 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Skytrotter:
I think you are correct that this is a non-composited photo.
Here is some nice film footage of Apollo 14 pre-launch activity at Pad 39A. The crescent moon can be seen in several shots starting at around the 9:30 mark. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 07-10-2019 12:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Cozmosis22:
Here is a newspaper front page photo of Apollo 11 on the pad.
That might be a CDDT photo. The moon was just a thin crescent on launch day. |
Ronpur
Member Posts: 1220
From: Brandon, Fl
Registered: May 2012
|
posted 07-10-2019 08:19 PM
Full moon was June 29. It could be close to a full moon by then. |
advertisement