posted 06-08-2008 10:26 PM               

watching "When We Left Earth: NASA Missions" on Discovery channel. Sometimes I wish I'd chosen to be an astronaut!

---

loving Discovery's "When We Left Earth"

---

Just finished watching "When We Left Earth" on Discovery - SIMPLY AMAZING! Catch one of the reruns this week if you can!

---

When We Left Earth is some of the most amazing TV I've ever seen.

---

Discovery's NASA: When we Left Earth is AMAZING. Can't wait for the next parts to air.

---

When We Left Earth is amazing. Well done! I'll be watching next weekend too.

posted 06-08-2008 10:35 PM               

However, I WAS glad to see and hear Neil's comments.

And I will watch it next week, too.

posted 06-08-2008 11:39 PM               

My own opinions on the first two episodes are mixed. On one hand, the footage is beautiful and there are many clips of footage here that I haven't personally seen before...including some clips from the New Nine including some vomit comet shots I haven't seen. As has already been discussed, it's not likely any of this footage is truly "never before seen," but there are bits and pieces that are rarely seen.

My biggest complaints so far are:

1. The editing seems very manic. They don't stick with any one shot or clip for more than a few seconds. The interview segments are kept very short... taking only a sentence or two from each person at most (and often much less). There doesn't seem to be much effort to tell the story, but instead hit the viewers with lots of sounds and images instead.

2. As Robert pointed out in his review, the emphasis in this program appears to be on the dangerous aspects of spaceflight. However, I think they go overboard here and try to make everything into a "cliff-hanger" before every commercial break. While spaceflight is a very risky business, I think they don't do well with differentiating between the routinely hazardous and the truly dangerous moments. Instead, they try to turn every moment into an edge-of-your-seat moment of suspense... often criminally downplaying the engineering genius that went into making these missions so successful. The producers seem to want to give the impression that we simply got lucky. (Perhaps a film company that titles itself "Dangerous Films" is an indication of what style they go for.)

3. The old argument about using incorrect footage at incorrect moments crops up here again. They used Gemini re-entry footage twice in incorrect places... once for the Gemini 3 launch and once during Gene Cernan's Gemini 9 EVA (!!!). Also, they used odd clips of audio in wrong places. As Shepard walks out to his Redstone rocket, the editor obviously felt they needed to overlay some mission control audio for added effect. Did anyone else notice the brief audio clip said "inboard cutoff," which most likely was taken from the launch phase of a Saturn rocket. While it's a nitpicky complaint, little things like this point to yet another lazy effort that just inserts whatever looks or sounds good to fill out the program... instead of sticking to accuracy.

posted 06-09-2008 09:19 AM               

I think it has done a great job of reminding people where we have been. I spend some of my retirement time substitute teaching and the kids of today are NOT getting any space history in school. I subbed an American History class a few weeks ago and looked through the book to find the Space history stuff. It was briefly mention ind in the Cold Was era and there was more info in a few photo captions than anything.

Yeah the editing was off a little, or they left cliffhangers for commercial breaks, but overall, it tells the story and might drum up interest in our Space Programs or Engineering.

posted 06-09-2008 10:34 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mercsim:
It sure is easy for us to sit at out computers and trash talk someone else's work.

---

I don't think any of my criticisms of the program were unfair...let alone constitute "trash talk." Plus, I was expressing a personal viewpoint.

There have been other programs for mass audiences that have done better with retaining accuracy while being both inspirational and breath-taking. The recent "In the Shadow of the Moon" is a great example. Even though that program also took some liberties with the footage as well, they managed to get the overall tone right, mixing in a healthy respect for the dangers of spaceflight while not overlooking the brilliant achievement that resulted from the hard work of many people.

One moment that particularly bothered me was in the Gemini episode where they talk about the failure rate of the Titan rockets (showing a Titan I explode on the pad...not even the same rocket the astronauts would later ride). The narrator says:

"Finally, NASA launches two rockets that don't explode. Gus Grissom and John Young will ride the next Titan rocket into space."

That make it seem like NASA was randomly launching Titans until they could get a couple to work right. To me, it demonstrates that the script writer of the program lacked some fundamental knowledge about how NASA operated.

posted 06-09-2008 12:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mjanovec:
But maybe producers of programs like these would be wise to run rough edits by a few space "geeks" first...

---

posted 06-09-2008 02:48 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Spacecraft Films' DVDs were not involved, but it is a testament to the good work Mark Gray and his team have done on what I am sure was a smaller budget than Discovery's.

---

posted 06-09-2008 02:51 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mjanovec:
The old argument about using incorrect footage at incorrect moments crops up here again. They used Gemini re-entry footage twice in incorrect places...once for the Gemini 3 launch and once during Gene Cernan's Gemini 9 EVA (!!!).

---

posted 06-09-2008 05:02 PM               

• How primitive mission control looked in the early Mercury flights, with a young Gene Kranz.

• How important the Gemini flights were to Apollo, especially testing EVAs, rendezvous/docking and long-duration missions. The clear, crisp footage of Ed White during his EVA really took my breath away, even on my 16-inch TV. McDivitt's fond recollections of his good friend White was especially poignant.

• Any interview with Armstrong, McDivitt and Young, especially since the first two did not participate in the recent 'In the Shadow of the Moon' and 'The Wonder of it All' documentaries.

posted 06-09-2008 06:17 PM               

To see it thru her eyes and hear her comments was refreshing.

While us old hands sometimes forget- for new people coming into space exploration, these shows open the doors to the stars for them.

That said - I HATED the way that Discovery never went into the Gemini 5, 9, 10 and 11 missions and accomplishments. What happened to the Angry Alligator? Was the only thing accomplished on GT-9 Gene's spacewalk?

I will SETTLE for these 'Why We Left Earth' - but will purchase the DVDs when they come out - for the other hours of stuff!

posted 06-09-2008 09:50 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by onesmallstep:
Although all of the comments/reviews so far are valid (especially about the length - if they can devote twelve hours of docudrama for 'From the Earth to the Moon', think of the footage they can air in that period of time!)

---

posted 06-10-2008 12:16 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by E2M Lem Man:
That said - I HATED the way that Discovery never went into the Gemini 5, 9, 10 and 11 missions and accomplishments.

---

What's worse is that they not only implied that the Gemini IX EVA was a failure (admittedly using Cernan's own words), they implied that the EVAs on Gemini X and XI were also failures...essentially dismissing the value of these missions. While these EVAs were often fraught with difficulties, they were FAR from being failures.

posted 06-12-2008 06:36 PM               

This Saturday, June 14, the Discovery Channel will be hosting a special live online Q&A with Bill Howard, executive producer of "When We Left Earth: The NASA Missions." Howard worked closely with NASA in selecting the footage and stories to create the six part HD series.

The live chat will take place Saturday, June 14th at 9:00 p.m. CDT.

In addition to participating in the live Q&A, readers can submit their questions at any time prior to the chat on Saturday evening. There is no registration necessary to participate.

posted 06-16-2008 08:38 PM               

Was the difference in the shape of the CO2 scrubbers a design flaw? Not sure but I doubt it.

What happened to Apollo 15; barely a mention.

They included Neil's "a" in his fisrt step comment (subtitle) and didn't make a big deal out of it; didn't even mention it.

Frank Borman saying that he saw volcanoes on his A8 mission. Not according to A11-17 (minus 13)

You gotta like Joe Kerwin's enthusiasm!

Was that Gene Kranz during the Skylab flight with long hair?

posted 06-17-2008 03:40 PM               

We got home last night and saw the tivoed show. I had trouble sleeping afterward, thinking of all the ways the hour devoted to Mercury could have been improved. Rob is right: Project Mercury required two hours. But I salute the editors for astutely leaving my own interview footage on the cutting room floor. The Dangerous Films people were the best. I was not.

My one strong criticism was the producers' overreliance on Barbaree and Kraft and Kranz to narrate what was essentially, in the case of Barbaree, only received (and often-wrong) opinion, and in the case of the two flight controllers, an overbearing POV. And why was Kranz describing Mercury flights he didn't even work on? Yes, astronauts managed to get their licks in, and they often accomplished this in skillful fashion that some spaceniks may have appreciated. But neophytes would have been left with an inaccurate impression, and inaccurate is bad. Which is why there are books, I suppose.

Other reaction: Rene Carpenter loved the Gemini material. "Gee, Gemini was exciting," she enthused, "how did I miss all the fun?" I reminded her she probably had carpool. But she regretted the compression of time and events, particularly for Mercury, observing that one got absolutely no sense of the terrible waiting for the first suborbital and the orbital flights, the mood of the country.

"I went to the kitchen to get a glass of water," she said, "and missed two flights!" OK, yes, she does walk slowly. Anyway, her sense was that the producers are rushing headlong to get to the Saturn footage and the moon landings and edited to a fare-thee-well. She deplored the excision of Schirra and Cooper flights.

Oh, and one other thing. Last night, watching Kraft, I was reminded of one of Max Faget's early Mercury designs. Not too many people know about this: Max Faget and Paul Purser and Tibby Thibodaux had gotten back from the Round Three conference in Mountain View. So this was, like, October 1957. Ran into Kraft in NACA cafeteria. "Holy cow! Those ears!" Max later exclaimed to his PARD buddies. Using Harvey Allen's brilliantly intuitive blunt-end reentry design, Max just knew something like Chris's ears would be perfect for slowing the capsule down upon reentry.

Unfortunately, the techs weren't able to manage a prototype. So after plying Kraft with several of his favorite cocktails, which Kraft later enumerated lovingly in his memoir, Max actually subjected Chris Kraft himself (and his ears) to wind tunnel testing.

posted 06-17-2008 04:15 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by KC Stoever:
And why was Kranz describing Mercury flights he didn't even work on?

---

Do you mean that he didn't work on them as flight director...or that he didn't work on them at all?

If I'm not mistaken, I believe he worked on all manned Mercury flights...albeit not as the lead flight director.

posted 06-17-2008 05:16 PM               

I very much liked seeing Frank and Sue Borman, and interviews with Jim McDivitt, as well as so many survivors of the missions. Having Neil Armstrong prominently available was a great part of the documentary, but where was Mike Collins?

posted 06-17-2008 05:27 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by KC Stoever:
Good question. It's my recollection from the Kranz memoir that he came on as asst. flight director for MA-7, some time in the winter of 61-62. But I could be wrong. I seem to remember Kranz describing himself in his memoir as a newbie at NASA in 1962.

---

posted 06-18-2008 10:44 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mjanovec:
I checked Kranz's oral history and he says he started at NASA in 1960 as a Procedures officer, right before the launch of MR-1. He continued in that role until MA-7, when he became Assistant Flight Director.

---

posted 06-18-2008 12:09 PM               

And where was Kranz stationed, where did he work, when he watched the Grissom recovery operation?

posted 06-18-2008 01:27 PM               

I think part of the problem with WWLE has to do with whom they got interviews from in regards to certain missions being covered and others not being covered. Wally is passed on now (although I have to wonder if they approached him when he was still around) and Stafford doesn't seem to give interviews much. I don't even recall him saying anything for "Moon Shot" from 10 years ago. Dave Scott seems like he can be a tough person to reach unless he really throws himself behind a project, hence no A15 coverage (would have been nice to get both his and Neil's comments for Gemini 8).

Granted they still had interviews from Al Worden and Walt Cunningham for A7 and A15, but they seemed just a bit too brief.

posted 06-22-2008 01:50 AM               

I find it interesting that a lot of people have noticed the "never before seen footage" part that is in all of the commercials. It is all "never before seen"? I did see some things that I had never seen before (film of the GT-7 second stage after separation) but most of it was stuff I had seen before.

The interviews were very interesting. I thought that Neil Armstrong's parts were some of the most interesting, it was like he was telling an amazing story (which he was) and it made you wanting more. Also unique was having Bruce McCandless' comments, which showed another side of the story. Also the interview with Susan Borman was interesting as well, for we rarely hear from the astronauts wives during shows like this.

The footage was sometimes in error, as stated earlier. But as before this was for the masses, and the average person would not know that re-entry footage was used during launch sequences.

The most disappointing fact of the series is the fact that while they covered every Mercury launch, they missed Gemini 5,9,10 and 11. Also, they never explained why Gemini 6 was launching after Gemini 7, and made the Gemini 9-11 spacewalks look like failures. None of them were, and it was a shame that they did that kind of disservice.

In the Apollo side, too little time was spent on Apollo 1 and 7, and no time was given to why Apollo 8 went to the moon. I think that the behind the scenes story on Apollo 8 is interesting in itself. Worst of all, however, was the fact that Apollo 15, Skylab 3&4 and ASTP were completely snubbed. It is as if they said "well, I guess well have to throw some out". I find it a disservice to the men who flew those missions that their moment to shine has been removed due to time constraints.

posted 06-22-2008 10:54 PM               

One thing that did disturb me a little though was the use of the SRB camera footage for the missions prior to STS-114 and especially their use on STS-107. Except for one camera set in the fronts of the SRBs, the rest of those cameras to my knowledge weren't added until after Columbia. But the footage to me implied they were on Columbia, so I have this concern that some wenie will claim a conspiracy and NASA coverup of the foam strike damage which would have been visible on the SRB cameras at the angles they were placed at (hence the reason why they were used after Columbia). Even if one doesn't hear that, I can sense some confusion on the part of some viewers.

They could have done that better IMHO as they could have said that one of the changes made after Columbia was more cameras to get footage of ascent to watch for foam strikes. Then they could go into showing some of beautiful SRB shots, the ascent of Discovery from 114 (which they snuck into the Hubble launch footage BTW, carefully edited so as not to show the tail section of the orbiter with the big NASA meatballs and white flipper doors) along with ones from the WB-57 Canberra chase planes and the ET ascent camera as well (and the backflip).

posted 06-23-2008 10:27 AM               

Of special note was when Gene Kranz starting talking about EVA now versus Ed White's flight and the early EVA's. We take things for granted today.

posted 06-23-2008 08:43 PM               

However, watching the three episodes through my wife's and teenage daughter's eyes, and in hearing their comments, I think the series succeeded in bringing an informative sampling of missions that represented each program (M-G-A-S), along with a nice combination of narration and astronaut comments, plus some great footage (albeit not 100% accurately used at times).

If the goal of this series was to relate these stories, in some chronology, with a sense of wonderment and pride, and to convey the human curiosity and need to explore space, I would have to say mission accomplished. Of course, the extra footage offered on the DVD's is what most of us are waiting for now!

posted 06-23-2008 10:40 PM               

Each producer/director had their own approach to the subject and how to present it, making each effort unique and entertaining. Rather than dwell on the oversights, I find it absolutely amazing that the likes of Dave Scott, John Young, and Neil Armstrong were at long last amenable to sitting down in front of a camera and, particularly in Neil's case, quite eloquently discuss the events of their missions.

I find it interesting that while some of the astronauts have polished their "space talk" into a well-rehearsed, yet compelling yarn, others like Charlie Duke never seem to stop finding new ways to explain things.

These three films together will probably stand as the greatest collection of recorded interview material from these astronauts and controllers. Taken in context with the compelling memoirs that have been marketed in recent years, a clearer picture of the program emerges for enthusiasts like us and serves as inspiration for future explorers-to-be.

And yet, there is more to come. No one ever thought we would see an Armstrong authorized bio, and now it is to be followed by a memoir by John Young. The "Outward Odyssey" series continues in production with some of the most exciting material yet offered. "Dangerous Films" has two big programs coming next year, and we continue to await a possible Armstrong movie. Mark Gray works tirelessly to provide us with the raw material we all crave, while virtually making history himself.