Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Homan34

NASA Astronaut Confirms Apollo UFO Incident 2

1,027 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

psyche101

I have a question.

Would the SLA panels slow down due to Keplers second law? As the spacecraft left the point nearest the earth's center in the orbit of the moon and headed for the point in the orbit of the moon most distant from the earth's centre, it would slow down due to Earth's gravity wouldn't it?

Keplers Laws

This might be of some help, in any case, although realting to Apollo 9 directly, it seems to indicate that the SLA trajecctory was common to all Apollo flights.

If t h e j e t t i s o n AV i s i n c r e a s e d [ f i g . 6 ( a ) ] or i f a n a b o r t i s i n i - t i a t e d l a t e r i n t h e mode I11 r e g i o n [ f i g s . 5 ( b ) , 5 ( c ) , 6 ( a ) t h r o u g h 6 ( c ) ] , g r e a t e r s e p a r a t i o n d i s p l a c e m e n t below t h e s p a c e c r a f t w i l l r e s u l t f o r p a n e l 2 . The r e l a t i v e mo t i o n of p a n e l 1 i n d i c a t e s t h a t , f o r t h e s i m u l a t e d c o n d i t i o n s , p a n e l 1 w i l l always pass above t h e CSM, w i t h a minimum c l e a r a n c e o f 1800 f t . [ f i g . 5 ( a ) ] . o u t o f p l a n e w i t h a d e q u a t e c r o s s - r a n g e and v e r t i c a l d i s p l a c e m e n t f o r a l l c a s e s [ f i g s . 5 ( d ) t h r o u g h 5 ( f ) and 6 ( d ) t h r o u g h 6 ( f ) l .

P a n e l s 3 and 4 a r e yawed a n d j e t t i s o n e d

The p r i m a r y c o n c l u s i o n s which c a n b e drawn from t h e mode I11 a b o r t SLA p a n e l a n a l y s i s a r e t h a t (1) a r e t r o g r a d e SPS d e o r b i t b u r n p e r f o r m e d a t 2 m i n u t e s 5 s e c o n d s a f t e r a b o r t i n i t i a t i o n w i l l r e s u l t i n a p o t e n t i a l r e c o n t a c t problem o f t h e CSM w i t h p a n e l 2, and ( 2 ) o f a r e c o n t a c t w i t h a SLA p a n e l d e c r e a s e s as t h e ground e l a p s e d t i m e of t h e mode I11 a b o r t i n i t i a t i o n i n c r e a s e s or as t h e p a n e l j e t t i s o n AV i n c r e a s e s .

LINK - APOLLO 9 SLA PANEL JETTISON SEPARATION A N D RECONTACT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

Again - Why would they be slowing down?

The CSM-LM and panels were decelerating due to Earth's Gravity. This would have been about the same rate until the midcourse correction when the CSM-LM accelerated leaving the Panels behind, then the deceleration due to Earth's Gravity would be at different rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

The CSM-LM and panels were decelerating due to Earth's Gravity. This would have been about the same rate until the midcourse correction when the CSM-LM accelerated leaving the Panels behind, then the deceleration due to Earth's Gravity would be at different rates.

Because of Kepler - right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

Because of Kepler - right?

Definitely psyche. Once in different orbits the deceleration due to Earth's Gravity and subsequent acceleration due to the Moons Gravity would occur at different rate for the Spacecraft and the panels.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mcrom901

Definitely psyche. Once in different orbits the deceleration due to Earth's Gravity and subsequent acceleration due to the Moons Gravity would occur at different rate for the Spacecraft and the panels.

but the sighting occurred whilst they were still under the influence of earth's gravity?

Neutral_Point_Gravity.gif

Edited by mcrom901
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

but the sighting occurred whilst they were still under the influence of earth's gravity?

Neutral_Point_Gravity.gif

That is where the course correction comes into play isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

but the sighting occurred whilst they were still under the influence of earth's gravity?

Yes. The Spacecraft began accelerating due to the Moon's Gravity at 61:41 hours or so, everything we are talking about took place before that while decelerating in Earth's Gravity.

Edited by lost_shaman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mcrom901

That is where the course correction comes into play isn't it?

the midcourse correction occurred @ day-2, lunar orbit entry @ day-4; i thought there was one mcc, but just noticed the discussions about 'midcourse correction burn number 4' in the transcripts of day 4... :wacko:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

the midcourse correction occurred @ day-2, lunar orbit entry @ day-4; i thought there was one mcc, but just noticed the discussions about 'midcourse correction burn number 4' in the transcripts of day 4... :wacko:

They had four oppertunities to make midcourse corrections(MCC). They made one, which was the MCC 2. MCC 1, 3, and 4 were not needed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mcrom901

Yes. The Spacecraft began accelerating due to the Moon's Gravity at 61:41 hours or so, everything we are talking about took place before that while decelerating in Earth's Gravity.

thanks.. :tu:

PAO: This is Apollo Control at 60 hours, 37 minutes. We said goodbye - goodnight to the crew about 10 minutes ago. We expect that they will be settling down for their rest period shortly. At the present time, Apollo 11 is 184,600 nautical miles [341,800 km] from Earth. The spacecraft velocity is presently 3,023 feet per second [921 m/s].

060:45:38 Armstrong: Houston, Apollo 11.

060:45:41 Duke: Go ahead, 11. Over.

060:45:46 Armstrong: Do you have any idea where the S-IVB is with respect to us?

[The crew have noticed an unexplained flashing object out of the window, which appears to be catching the sunlight as it tumbles. Neil is wondering whether it is the abandoned third stage of the Saturn launch vehicle.]

http://history.nasa.gov/ap11fj/10day3-flight-plan-update.htm

They had four oppertunities to make midcourse corrections(MCC). They made one, which was the MCC 2. MCC 1, 3, and 4 were not needed.

:nw:

Edited by mcrom901
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

Getting back to this:

What I was trying to get you to do was show me 700 miles. You can't do that. There's not enough data on the panels, as they weren't trackable. We only know they flew out after jettison between 10 and 15 FPS lateral velocity relative to the spacecraft. That's around 350-400 miles distant at sighting time. Maybe 430-450 if there was any outward velocity difference of 20 FPS. Can't tell that either.

This seems to be where the debate ended, and it seems that it is not resolved. This places the panels at 350-450 miles distant from the vessel, yet this is too far away for the human eye to resolve.

Can the magnitude of an iridium flare compensate for this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

This seems to be where the debate ended, and it seems that it is not resolved. This places the panels at 350-450 miles distant from the vessel, yet this is too far away for the human eye to resolve.

Can the magnitude of an iridium flare compensate for this?

Hey psyche,

Angular size is what determines whether you can resolve an object or not. Below the ~60 arcsecond threshold objects are seen as points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

Hey psyche,

Angular size is what determines whether you can resolve an object or not. Below the ~60 arcsecond threshold objects are seen as points.

Indeed, but didn't Buzz say it was not resolvable without the telescope?

"Aldrin: The first unusual thing that we saw I guess was one day out or something pretty close to the moon. It had a sizable dimension to it, so we put the monocular on it.

And then he saw an L shaped object, which he changed his version of later. As such, is it possible that he saw a flash of sunlight, put the monocular on the flash, and only then saw an L shaped object?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

Indeed, but didn't Buzz say it was not resolvable without the telescope?

No. They saw it with the naked eye first, later they used the optics. What they were saying is that when they saw it, it was seen from out of the windows. It was near the limit of resolution, they could see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DONTEATUS

So this matters in what way to what the Astronauts actually saw? No one will ever know what it was since no actual photos of the event were taken,as we know of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheMcGuffin

Getting back to this:

What I was trying to get you to do was show me 700 miles. You can't do that. There's not enough data on the panels, as they weren't trackable. We only know they flew out after jettison between 10 and 15 FPS lateral velocity relative to the spacecraft. That's around 350-400 miles distant at sighting time. Maybe 430-450 if there was any outward velocity difference of 20 FPS. Can't tell that either.

This seems to be where the debate ended, and it seems that it is not resolved. This places the panels at 350-450 miles distant from the vessel, yet this is too far away for the human eye to resolve.

Can the magnitude of an iridium flare compensate for this?

From what I've read, the actual distance and location of these panels remains unknown, although we do have some pictures of them being jettisoned--always several days before they got to the moon.

Nor did all the other Apollo missions report seeing them near the moon, as Apollo 11 supposedly did. For that reason, what they saw remains unknown, although it's perfectly plausible that the panels were quite a long distance away from them at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheMcGuffin

So this matters in what way to what the Astronauts actually saw? No one will ever know what it was since no actual photos of the event were taken,as we know of.

I do wonder if there were ever any telescopic pictures of unknowns in the vicinity of Apollo spacecraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

No. They saw it with the naked eye first, later they used the optics. What they were saying is that when they saw it, it was seen from out of the windows. It was near the limit of resolution, they could see it.

Could they have seen an iridium flare with the naked eye, and then resolved the "L" shape through the monocular? I find Buzz's description a bit loose in that:

It had a sizable dimension to it,

But no further description until the monocular comes into play.

I feel could be simply a flare? If it was particularly intense, could it not have caught his attention this way? A star like apparition, perhaps moving (which would be roughly the same direction, offering the illusion of being followed) or twinkling? And could he not resolve an iridium flare at that distance depending upon the magnitude of the flare itself? Would this not solve the problem with resolution and the human eye?

In short we see something shiny, could be pretty big, break out monocular, it has an L shape to it

As we see flares from earth from satellites that the eye cannot resolve, is this not a possible? Would not 400 miles be within resolution reach for a flare?

Sorry to be harping on mate, just trying to quell the questions in my head. You are pretty top notch on this stuff, from hardware through to maths, so I much appreciate your insights and patience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

From what I've read, the actual distance and location of these panels remains unknown, although we do have some pictures of them being jettisoned--always several days before they got to the moon.

Between MID and Lost Shaman, we have agreeance with Kepler's laws, so it seems to me quite plausible that a 450 mile distance (approx) seems reasonable. Yet this is still not resolvable for the human eye with relation to the the panel size.

Nor did all the other Apollo missions report seeing them near the moon, as Apollo 11 supposedly did. For that reason, what they saw remains unknown, although it's perfectly plausible that the panels were quite a long distance away from them at that point.

No, I do not know of any others reporting such, but the NASA paper I posted last page indicates that the trajectory is common to all Apollo flights, still there seems to be the question of what the eye can see, and if those panels were within that range, which it would seem not. For me at least, more questions abound currently than I had a page or two ago.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I do wonder if there were ever any telescopic pictures of unknowns in the vicinity of Apollo spacecraft.

The transcripts do not seem to indicate that happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheMcGuffin

I'm surprised that rdunk never found this video. Pretty cool, and many scientists have speculated about moons being artificial and all that, including our perfect and unique moon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDilRLCp2Pk&feature=related

Or this one:

One of my favorite astronaut quotes of all time was "I see we've had visitors again....Hardly worth mentioning." Has anyone ever wondered who'd be visiting them on the moon? Were they just dropping in to share some Tang--or something?

Edited by TheMcGuffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DONTEATUS

You gotta Love the music part It adds so much to the fact`s of non-Facts ! Even a bad Violin makes kool erie music seem so erie !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I'm surprised that rdunk never found this video. Pretty cool, and many scientists have speculated about moons being artificial and all that, including our perfect and unique moon.

Or this one:

Perhaps even too much piffle for rdunk? The claims of mile high towers and cities are too easy to dispel, Just ask for co-ordinates and get out a telescope. The moon is unique, and quite possibly older than earth being the result of a massive collision, which is suspected to have been common in the early Universe, the Earth and Moon have near-identical isotopic compositions. The oldest zircons from the moon are about 10 million years older than the oldest yet discovered on Earth. The ages of lunar zircons identified in other studies hint that small amounts of the moon’s crust remained molten for another 200 million to 400 million years. Giant impact hypothesis puts round pegs in round holes. It is unique, but so are many of the 166 moons in the solar system.

Mercury and Venus-0.

Earth-1.

Mars-2.

Jupiter-63.

Saturn-60.

Uranus-27.

Neptune-13.

One of my favorite astronaut quotes of all time was "I see we've had visitors again....Hardly worth mentioning." Has anyone ever wondered who'd be visiting them on the moon? Were they just dropping in to share some Tang--or something?

Early in EVA-1, Al and Ed are setting up the MET.

115:03:07 Shepard: Okay. Put it down. (Pause) Let's get the...(Pause) Deploy it while it's still up here. There we go.

[After unfolding the wheels, they have to lock the front legs and handle into place.]

115:03:24 Mitchell: Well, let's see...We've had visitors again.

115:03:28 Shepard: Yeah. Hardly worth mentioning.

115:03:33 Mitchell: Agree. (Pause)

[Jones - "I had heard that the backup crew had put notes in lots of places on the spacecraft. Did you just find one on the MET?"]

[Mitchell - "I think what we're talking about there is one of their patches, because they put the goddamn things all over the spacecraft and, whenever we opened up something, there would be one of them. It had a Roadrunner on it and was a parody of our patch."]

[The exchange 'Visitors...hardly worth mentioning,' is, of course, a very dry, joking dismissal of the backup crew.]

LINK

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

Could they have seen an iridium flare with the naked eye, and then resolved the "L" shape through the monocular? I find Buzz's description a bit loose in that:

It had a sizable dimension to it,

But no further description until the monocular comes into play.

The Iridium Sats. were not launched until '97.

Here is what Armstrong said also. "We should say that it was right at the limit of the resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell the size without knowing the range or the range without knowing the size."

I feel could be simply a flare? If it was particularly intense, could it not have caught his attention this way? A star like apparition, perhaps moving (which would be roughly the same direction, offering the illusion of being followed) or twinkling? And could he not resolve an iridium flare at that distance depending upon the magnitude of the flare itself? Would this not solve the problem with resolution and the human eye?

No, you can see things that are too small to resolve. Stars would be a common example, the appear as point sources. The resolution limit of the eye that Armstrong is talking about is the ability to see an object as opposed to simply seeing a point source. For example when Venus crosses this threshold of ~60 arcseconds people with 20/20 vision can see that it is a crescent shape like the Moon during certain phases at other times below the ~ 60 arcsecond threshold Venus appears as a bright point source.

In short we see something shiny, could be pretty big, break out monocular, it has an L shape to it

As we see flares from earth from satellites that the eye cannot resolve, is this not a possible? Would not 400 miles be within resolution reach for a flare?

Sorry to be harping on mate, just trying to quell the questions in my head. You are pretty top notch on this stuff, from hardware through to maths, so I much appreciate your insights and patience.

See above. And no problem mate, I appreciate the compliment as well. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

The Iridium Sats. were not launched until '97.

Here is what Armstrong said also. "We should say that it was right at the limit of the resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell the size without knowing the range or the range without knowing the size."

No, you can see things that are too small to resolve. Stars would be a common example, the appear as point sources. The resolution limit of the eye that Armstrong is talking about is the ability to see an object as opposed to simply seeing a point source. For example when Venus crosses this threshold of ~60 arcseconds people with 20/20 vision can see that it is a crescent shape like the Moon during certain phases at other times below the ~ 60 arcsecond threshold Venus appears as a bright point source.

See above. And no problem mate, I appreciate the compliment as well. Thanks.

OK, plain satellite flare, but is there any confirmation that the object was resolvable? Where Buzz says:

"We should say that it was right at the limit of the resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell the size without knowing the range or the range without knowing the size."

Right at the resolution of the eye seems fairly wide open, it seems that it might have been resolvable, it might not, do you feel he would have said "it looks like a star" or similar?

Where Aldrin says:

Aldrin: Of course, we were seeing all sorts of little objects going by at the various dumps and then we happened to see this one brighter object going by.

Could that not be indicating a more star like apparition, as would be expected?

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.