Apollo 11 mission reconstruction - a teamwork

[ANDREA]

Chris... I found the above image:...

Andrea, are you kidding? it's the same! When I talk about cross checking it's with a different source! Can be shots during assembly of a mission, during take off, etc... do you see what I mean?...

No Chris, I'm not , I was only adding a very closer and detailed image to the previous one, to show the notable detail and shape variations along the rim, that make me sure it's not a spurios "enhancement", just to embellish it.
However, I agree with you and Spaceman Spiff, i.e. that during the development there could have been variations in details, so that we cannot know (up to now, at least) if the Apollo 11 Saturn V had or not the IU shaped in such a way.
Sorry.
Bye

Andrea

[ElChristou]

So for now I keep this detail from a side, if we find it elsewhere I'll add it without problem.

[ANDREA]

So for now I keep this detail from a side, if we find it elsewhere I'll add it without problem.

Chris, I'll try to persuade you.
Sorry for the many images, but we need all of them.
After another long search for images that could solve our doubts, this is the situation:

1- in this Apollo 10 image, taken during its mounting:



those details don't show up clearly, but please note the arrow: you see that the white panel is not flush with the black painted IU ring.

2- in this Apollo 10 image during launch:



those details aren't shown, but now the white panel is flush with the black painted IU ring.

Let's go on.

3- in the Apollo 11 image during launch:



those details don't show up.
But please note the arrow: you see that the white panel is flush with the black painted IU.

Let's go on.

4- in the Apollo 13 image during the mounting,



those details are there, and as you see they are OUT of the white panel.
5- but in the Apollo 13 image before launch:



the details disappeared, and the white panel is once again flush with the black painted IU.
Let's go on.
6- in the Apollo 15 mounting image:



the details are there, and obviously OUT of the white panel.

At this point IMHO we can be 99.9% sure of two things:

A- the overall appearance of IU didn't change among the various Apollo Saturn V launches.
B- the detail goes embedded internally after mating the SC to the IU, like a cap (SC) over a toothpaste tube (IU).
What do you think of this?
Bye

Andrea

[ElChristou]

A- the overall appearance of IU didn't change among the various Apollo Saturn V launches.
B- the detail goes embedded internally after mating the SC to the IU, like a cap (SC) over a toothpaste tube (IU).

Ok, Tx! Indeed the Apollo 11 shot was what we were looking for, here we see clearly the right configuration of the IU...
Today and tomorrow, no modeling , but this week end I'll continue the inner top part of the 3rd stage, with a few tubes/wires and a few more details...

[ANDREA]

A- the overall appearance of IU didn't change among the various Apollo Saturn V launches.
B- the detail goes embedded internally after mating the SC to the IU, like a cap (SC) over a toothpaste tube (IU).

Ok, Tx! Indeed the Apollo 11 shot was what we were looking for, here we see clearly the right configuration of the IU...
Today and tomorrow, no modeling , but this week end I'll continue the inner top part of the 3rd stage, with a few tubes/wires and a few more details...

Happy you like my work, Chris.
BTW, searching these images I found 3 very nice ones, of Apollo 11 and 12.
You find them here:
http://ftp.tiscali.it/andrea_celestia/launch.rar
Bye.

Andrea

[ElChristou]

Guys, I came over this video, where Aldrin talk about an unknown object not far from the CSM/LEM...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlkV1ybBnHI

On the voice transcription (pdf found by Andrea (see a few pages ago)), we can find the exact moment (02 12 49 02), but there is not much after the response of the Cap Comm...

Someone knows a bit more about this event? a piece of junk floating around?

I think it would be cool to have this kind of details in the reconstitution...

BTW, it was the first time I was looking at the transcription... If we do that in real time, are you ready guys to follow 6 day 12 hours 22 minutes 57 seconds of mission?

[rthorvald]

Guys, I came over this video, where Aldrin talk about an unknown object not far from the CSM/LEM...

Here??s a note about it:

I just talked to Buzz Aldrin on the phone, and he notes that the quotations were taken out of context and did not convey the intended meaning. After the Apollo 11 crew verified that the object they were seeing was not the SIVB upper stage, which was about 6000 miles away at that time, they concluded that they were probably seeing one of the panels from the separation of the spacecraft from the upper stage.

Source: David Morrison at: http://nai.arc.nasa.gov/astrobio/astrob ... fm?ID=1568

... Most people seem to think it WAS from S-IVB, though. No way to know for sure.

(On the other hand, you have all these UFO nuts that insists it was a little green man... In which case you can just model my avatar )

- rthorvald

[ANDREA]

Guys, I came over this video, where Aldrin talk about an unknown object not far from the CSM/LEM... On the voice transcription (pdf found by Andrea (see a few pages ago)), we can find the exact moment (02 12 49 02), but there is not much after the response of the Cap Comm...Someone knows a bit more about this event? a piece of junk floating around?

Surely, no green men out there, alas!

I think it would be cool to have this kind of details in the reconstitution...BTW, it was the first time I was looking at the transcription... If we do that in real time, are you ready guys to follow 6 day 12 hours 22 minutes 57 seconds of mission?

My God, no, please!
Be merciful with linuxm@n, think how big should be the ssc, xyz, cel or celx scripts.
Brrrrrrr!
Bye

Andrea

[glcanon]

Hmm, a very interesting project. I'd suggest you try Ron Monsen's Eagle Lander 3D as an inspiring distraction when you get tired. It's a great simulator.

You're looking for very minute detail, yet I'm not sure if that much detail is really necessary? At the same time, you miss obvious things, like there's only 3 landing probes. There was no landing probe on the leg with the ladder, because it might interfere with the astronaut's climb.

As for the flame color and shape, firstly there would be no color. Second, if you could see the shape, it would form that classic shape of thrust in vacuum, which I cannot describe here. When the rocket is first fired there would be some residuals which would be visible, but it would quickly turn invisible to the naked eye, but not infrared. Personally, I think a shade of blue & white looks cool, but of course is unrealistic.

Here's a rough approximation of a thrust flame in vacuum, artists take some liberty:

[glcanon]

I believe they used this type flame in ORBIT

[glcanon]

Here is a detailed Apollo 11 groundtrack from 4200 Ft altitude down to landing. It was compiled by looking at overheap photos of the landing area and the video filmed from Buzz Aldrin's window. I matched up the craters I saw out the window with the same craters on the maps. It's about as close as you will get.

The image on the right is a small yellow box on the left blown up to size. The LEM is at 400 Ft altitude, descending at 9 feet per second, with a forward velocity of 58 feet per second when it first enters the image on the right.

The "calls" from the landing video are also posted as references. Sorry the image lost some detail when I converted it to .jpeg.

[ElChristou]

Hi glcanon, Tx for your comments.

Hmm, a very interesting project. I'd suggest you try Ron Monsen's Eagle Lander 3D as an inspiring distraction when you get tired. It's a great simulator.

Don't know that soft; is it multiplatform?

You're looking for very minute detail, yet I'm not sure if that much detail is really necessary? At the same time, you miss obvious things, like there's only 3 landing probes. There was no landing probe on the leg with the ladder, because it might interfere with the astronaut's climb.

Do you really think I'll pass this kind of detail?
The LEM is still in progress, so for now it has no probes at all!
Now for you info, the LEM of some missions had 4 probes. If you really doubt about this I can post a shot for you.

As for the flame color and shape, firstly there would be no color. Second, if you could see the shape, it would form that classic shape of thrust in vacuum, which I cannot describe here. When the rocket is first fired there would be some residuals which would be visible, but it would quickly turn invisible to the naked eye, but not infrared. Personally, I think a shade of blue & white looks cool, but of course is unrealistic.

Here's a rough approximation of a thrust flame in vacuum...

This flame looks a bit too similar of a atmospheric one, no?

Here is a detailed Apollo 11 groundtrack from 4200 Ft altitude down to landing.

Many Tx, this will be for sure quite useful!

[ANDREA]

Hmm, a very interesting project. You're looking for very minute detail, yet I'm not sure if that much detail is really necessary?
At the same time, you miss obvious things, like there's only 3 landing probes. There was no landing probe on the leg with the ladder, because it might interfere with the astronaut's climb.

Hello glcanon, thanks a lot for the landing site images.
Regarding the three landing probes, it looks like you didn?€™t read all the posts.
In the last post in this page:
http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic ... sc&start=0
we have already obtained by Terrier the right information and related link about the three landing probes in Apollo 11 mission.
So at least we are not missing this obvious thing.
Bye

Andrea

[bh]

To be honest I think the level of detailing is over the top... notwithstanding the fantastic job you're doing here Chris... AA isn't to sweet on my mini and it makes looking at these great models a bit frustrating.

[ANDREA]

Hmm, a very interesting project... As for the flame color and shape, firstly there would be no color. Second, if you could see the shape, it would form that classic shape of thrust in vacuum, which I cannot describe here. When the rocket is first fired there would be some residuals which would be visible, but it would quickly turn invisible to the naked eye, but not infrared. Personally, I think a shade of blue & white looks cool, but of course is unrealistic.

Glcanon, regarding the flame color and shape, in this page we have a colour sequence of Apollo 17 LM take-off from the Moon:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/a17ascent.jpg
And here is a small sequence from those images and a movie,








and here is the movie itself:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/a17v.launch.mov
With the only exception of the initial DM and LM debris spread all around (but at engine start only, with LM still on DM), there is almost no evidence of flames by the engines during take-off and initial flight.
I think that this solves any doubt on the matter.
Bye

Andrea

[ElChristou]

To be honest I think the level of detailing is over the top... notwithstanding the fantastic job you're doing here Chris... AA isn't to sweet on my mini and it makes looking at these great models a bit frustrating.

Tx!
Bah, then we are on the same boat, I cannot use AA on my config since 1.5, a big bug makes half screen black... (but seems to be a driver issue...)

[ElChristou]

...
And here is a small sequence from those images and a movie...

Yep, the very take off in loop, there is only a very bright flash at ignition, then nothing... at first I thought the acceleration during the first few seconds were enough to give enough speed to take altitude...

I'm still thinking on how to do the debris visible in your first frame here...
Perhaps Runar will have some ideas?

[Cham]

I can understand your frustration. FSAA is an ABSOLUTE MUST, with Celestia. Hardware antialiasing should be a standard feature on ALL computers anyway, with options clearly defined in the preferences panel. Personaly, I changed my video card two years ago (and paid a lot for it), mostly because of that. Now, there's no way I can use a computer without FSAA.

[glcanon]

Don't get me wrong, I'm seeing some brilliant work, very nice detail. But I'd hate for someone to get so bogged down in detail that they get tired of this project and don't finish (which I've done myself when I got too bogged down on detail & accuracy).

Remember that saying, "Perfect is the enemy of the good."

Apollo 11 thru 17 did not have probes on the leg with the ladder. Yes, prior to Apollo 11 some LMs had 4 probes, but I thought this was Apollo 11 mission.

I lived in Clear Lake next to Mission Control for years. Been there many times, used to do seminars on the NASA campus. I've met 3 Moonwalkers and corresponded with Neil Armstrong thru his personal assistant. I ran into Dr. Maxine Faget at a bookstore once and asked for his autograph -- does anyone other than myself even know who he was?

So I know a little about the Apollo program, did some cockpit screens for EL3D when it was in Beta. I have quite a bit of ref material.

I even found the font used on the interior LEM panels. And developed an accurate digital font for the DSKY computer inside the LM. THAT's DETAIL, my friends. Please don't let yourself get too bogged down though. Keep up the good work.

Finish project first, then add increasing level of detail with updates.

Thank you Andrea for making my point. You only see the plume when the rocket first fires, as in the Apollo 17 sequence (I knew someone would post it).

EL3D is Windows specific, I think. I don't run Linux or anything else so I don't really know. But it is a fabulous sim.

http://eaglelander3d.com/

Here's a screen image from EL3D:

[ElChristou]

Don't get me wrong, I'm seeing some brilliant work, very nice detail. But I'd hate for someone to get so bogged down in detail that they get tired of this project and don't finish (which I've done myself when I got too bogged down on detail & accuracy).

Remember that saying, "Perfect is the enemy of the good."

Apollo 11 thru 17 did not have probes on the leg with the ladder. Yes, prior to Apollo 11 some LMs had 4 probes, but I thought this was Apollo 11 mission.

I lived in Clear Lake next to Mission Control for years. Been there many times, used to do seminars on the NASA campus. I've met 3 Moonwalkers and corresponded with Neil Armstrong thru his personal assistant. I ran into Dr. Maxine Faget at a bookstore once and asked for his autograph -- does anyone other than myself even know who he was?

So I know a little about the Apollo program, did some cockpit screens for EL3D when it was in Beta. I have quite a bit of ref material.

...

Finish project first, then add increasing level of detail with updates.

...

Well, all of us do what they can, so in the present case, Andrea is the documentarist (BTW, seems you know the topic, so any help is welcome!), I do the models, Linuxm@n and his friend Gilles the files necessary to reconstruct the mission.
From the models point of view, no doubt I will end the work, I mean it can take some time, but I do that on my spare time so...

Now two case:
- We achieve successfully the plan,
- The ssc and xyz files are two complex, failure in animating the models.

First case it would be really cool, second case, well we will still have some cool models, nice diorama on the moon etc...

In both case we still increase the quality of actual addons, so finally there is nothing to lose...