ApolloHoax.net
Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: benparry on November 02, 2024, 08:18:45 AM
-
Afternoon All.
One of the all time great hoax arguments is the telematry data. Yawn i know.
However, i'm sure i'm correct in saying that it was only the backup telematry data was overwritten and i'm not sure if it was only for Apollo 11.
With this in mind where is the other original telematry data. I assume some is still stored somewhere.
The usual hoax argument is it's all be deleted which i'm sure isn't true
-
I think there's some confusion between what is considered original and what is considered backup. The Memorex telemetry tapes that were overwritten with new data were those from Apollo 11 and a bunch of other missions. These were the tapes running through the telemetry recorders during the Apollo missions and, as such, constitute the first recording of the data. That is the sense in which they could be considered originals. For Apollo 11, this also constituted the embedded television signal. Intuitively we would think of these as "originals" and therefore worthy of special protection. But the facts are slightly more complicated.
None of the data were directly usable from the tapes. To access the data on them, you needed telemetry tape machines, which were comparatively expensive and uncommon and most in demand for recording new data. You needed a technician to configure the heads and channel processors. This was especially true for the embedded video signal, which was a complete one-off used only on Apollo 11. You needed custom decoding hardware and technicians to operate it.
Therefore the first thing that was done with the telemetry was to read out the different data channels onto standard 9-track, 6250 bytes-per-inch computer tape or on paper strip charts. The charts can be read directly and photographically copied, and the standard computer tape could be run through any of the computers at NASA. For Apollo 11, the video signal was decoded and converted to a standard NTSC signal and recorded on standard reel-to-reel video tape. This tape could be played on any video tape machine.
These secondary recordings were considered the best sources available because they could be easily copied and accessed. Strip charts and computer tapes are reasonably faithful reproductions of the "original" data. If some spacecraft sensor reads 42 and this is preserved on the Memorex tape as a PCM-encoded number 42, then it will read out on the 9-track tape as 42 and on the strip chart somewhere accurately between 40 and 50 on the pre-printed grid. There's no loss of precision. The spacecraft told you 42 and you have 42 in your data stream. This was a well-developed, well-tested method because it was used on previous missions and would be used for subsequent missions. It was the general case.
But the process of reading out the video signal was entirely different. There was no magic way of electronically converting the embedded slow-scan signal to a standard video signal. You had a slow-scan monitor that could display the video, and then they just pointed a standard video camera at the screen. This is a fairly ingenious and reliable method, but it obviously accepts some degradation in the picture. It was deemed acceptable because of the one-off nature of Apollo 11's television solution. Previous missions had the benefit of the CSM's high-gain antenna and wider bandwidth. Subsequent lunar surface missions would rely on the erectable S-band antenna. (Apollo 11 carried one, but would have set it up only in an emergency.)
The usable form was considered the primary video record, even though it was technical a secondary format. If you wanted to re-read the video portion of the telemetry signal, you would have needed to reassemble all that one-off equipment: the slow-scan decoder and monitor and a camera. At no time did NASA contemplate a less lossy method of obtaining the picture from Apollo 11 television. And this was not considered irresponsible back then. Kinescopes and telecines were standard methods of converting between picture formats—film and videotape. These were all lossy methods and considered acceptable and common at the time. NASA considered the primary visual records of the mission to be the film photography, not the live television.
NASA did retain the original tapes for as long as possible. The decision to reuse them for a later mission, however, was not irresponsible. It was the proper decision in the lurch they had been put in by the supplier of new (faulty) tapes. Viewing this decision in light of late and improbable data recovery techniques is unfair. The situation is unfortunate, but utterly unrelated to any sort of credible claim of a hoax.
But to summarize all this in an answer to your question, the Memorex tapes were both original and backup. They are the earliest and best recordings of the video signal, but they were never meant to be used as a primary source. The primary source was the slow-scan-to-NTSC conversion, and the (relatively unusable) telemetry tape played the role of backup.
-
I think there's some confusion between what is considered original and what is considered backup. The Memorex telemetry tapes that were overwritten with new data were those from Apollo 11 and a bunch of other missions. These were the tapes running through the telemetry recorders during the Apollo missions and, as such, constitute the first recording of the data. That is the sense in which they could be considered originals. For Apollo 11, this also constituted the embedded television signal. Intuitively we would think of these as "originals" and therefore worthy of special protection. But the facts are slightly more complicated.
None of the data were directly usable from the tapes. To access the data on them, you needed telemetry tape machines, which were comparatively expensive and uncommon and most in demand for recording new data. You needed a technician to configure the heads and channel processors. This was especially true for the embedded video signal, which was a complete one-off used only on Apollo 11. You needed custom decoding hardware and technicians to operate it.
Therefore the first thing that was done with the telemetry was to read out the different data channels onto standard 9-track, 6250 bytes-per-inch computer tape or on paper strip charts. The charts can be read directly and photographically copied, and the standard computer tape could be run through any of the computers at NASA. For Apollo 11, the video signal was decoded and converted to a standard NTSC signal and recorded on standard reel-to-reel video tape. This tape could be played on any video tape machine.
These secondary recordings were considered the best sources available because they could be easily copied and accessed. Strip charts and computer tapes are reasonably faithful reproductions of the "original" data. If some spacecraft sensor reads 42 and this is preserved on the Memorex tape as a PCM-encoded number 42, then it will read out on the 9-track tape as 42 and on the strip chart somewhere accurately between 40 and 50 on the pre-printed grid. There's no loss of precision. The spacecraft told you 42 and you have 42 in your data stream. This was a well-developed, well-tested method because it was used on previous missions and would be used for subsequent missions. It was the general case.
But the process of reading out the video signal was entirely different. There was no magic way of electronically converting the embedded slow-scan signal to a standard video signal. You had a slow-scan monitor that could display the video, and then they just pointed a standard video camera at the screen. This is a fairly ingenious and reliable method, but it obviously accepts some degradation in the picture. It was deemed acceptable because of the one-off nature of Apollo 11's television solution. Previous missions had the benefit of the CSM's high-gain antenna and wider bandwidth. Subsequent lunar surface missions would rely on the erectable S-band antenna. (Apollo 11 carried one, but would have set it up only in an emergency.)
The usable form was considered the primary video record, even though it was technical a secondary format. If you wanted to re-read the video portion of the telemetry signal, you would have needed to reassemble all that one-off equipment: the slow-scan decoder and monitor and a camera. At no time did NASA contemplate a less lossy method of obtaining the picture from Apollo 11 television. And this was not considered irresponsible back then. Kinescopes and telecines were standard methods of converting between picture formats—film and videotape. These were all lossy methods and considered acceptable and common at the time. NASA considered the primary visual records of the mission to be the film photography, not the live television.
NASA did retain the original tapes for as long as possible. The decision to reuse them for a later mission, however, was not irresponsible. It was the proper decision in the lurch they had been put in by the supplier of new (faulty) tapes. Viewing this decision in light of late and improbable data recovery techniques is unfair. The situation is unfortunate, but utterly unrelated to any sort of credible claim of a hoax.
But to summarize all this in an answer to your question, the Memorex tapes were both original and backup. They are the earliest and best recordings of the video signal, but they were never meant to be used as a primary source. The primary source was the slow-scan-to-NTSC conversion, and the (relatively unusable) telemetry tape played the role of backup.
Thanks Jay. Most of it over my head of course but i appreciate your time. As with most hoax topics i wonder why this information isn't given out by people when they debate this kind of stuff.
-
That kind of information is usually hand waved away by hoax proponents.
-
As with most hoax topics i wonder why this information isn't given out by people when they debate this kind of stuff.
It is though. What generally happens is excuses are made or the information is simply ignored. One of the things I like to do in discussion threads about the 'missing' telemetry data is to drop random bits of telemetry detail/data/graphs/reports in the comments, which is usually around then when you realise that most HB's aren't actually aware of what telemetry is.
-
That kind of information is usually hand waved away by hoax proponents.
Exactly which is why i wanted to get the facts. As usual Jay is the master haha
-
As with most hoax topics i wonder why this information isn't given out by people when they debate this kind of stuff.
It is though. What generally happens is excuses are made or the information is simply ignored. One of the things I like to do in discussion threads about the 'missing' telemetry data is to drop random bits of telemetry detail/data/graphs/reports in the comments, which is usually around then when you realise that most HB's aren't actually aware of what telemetry is.
Interesting. Do you have this data stored locally or is there an online resource
-
That kind of information is usually hand waved away by hoax proponents.
Of course. They want simple(r) answers that appeal to their intuition. I say "simpler" because conspiracism is all about believing you're smarter than the sheeple without making the full effort to become genuinely smart. Conspiracy theories are a shortcut to the illusion of erudition, the shady side of "true crime" and armchair detectives. The scenario in their minds is, "NASA tried really hard to put one over on me, but I figured it out when they admitted they don't have the originals: if they did, it would reveal the hoax." And so forth. They can pretend they're smarter or more clever than the average Joe who just accepts what NASA tells them. But then when faced with the full, non-simple set of facts for any given situation, they don't want to hear it. It's all about creating a world in which they're the hero, not about finding what's actually true according to the facts—the often very non-simple facts.
There are scientific facts like the radiation environment in space. The conspiracy theories talk about the "searing radiation hell" of cislunar space. That harks to the fears of Chernobyl and atomic warfare. But the physical facts of the Van Allen belts take a lot of effort to understand properly. They are extremely non-simple, but they are true. And yes, if you know them, you can chart a safe orbital course through the safer regions. Conspiracy theorists don't want to hear about that, first because it means they're wrong and second because it means they're not the smartest people in the room for "understanding" radiation better than the sheeple. You can't get around scientific facts. You either understand how the universe works or you don't. The universe doesn't respect ignorance.
And there are historical facts like having to cobble together something for only one mission to record a jury-rigged video signal in a way that would fit the mission profile and not compromise more important objectives. Intuition notwithstanding, there were those who didn't want to bother with lunar surface television broadcasts at all. It would complicate an already iffy mission for very little additional data-gathering value. Obviously more humanistic heads prevailed, but that still left a problem for which the best solution was a one-off technical compromise.
Historical facts are still facts; something factually happened. But unlike the manifest state of the universe, historical occurrence is governed by people making decisions—often not wisely and often under pressing or untidy circumstances. There is no objective observation against which to measure their propriety. Hence history is full of compromises, and serious historians make it their job to understand such impurities without judgment or suspicion. Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, interpret every departure from simplistic armchair expectations as evidence of wrongdoing or deception. They presume (wrongly) that anything that actually happened should have happened the obvious and logical way their intuition and hindsight dictate. These arguments land better with an unsophisticated audience precisely because intuition is powerful and history is messier than we often care to admit.
-
NASA Goddard is the typical repository for NASA's space data. But I don't know what Apollo telemetry records they might have, or in what form they're in, or how easy it is to access it.
Telemetry is really boring. Except for historically significant cases like Apollo 13, there is almost no historical value after the mission or program is complete. Yes, incurable nerds like me like to have it. But it means almost nothing to anyone else. Telemetry is literally just streams of numbers divided into different logical channels. When you graph those numbers, you have a picture of one parameter of spacecraft operation over time—say, oxygen tank pressure. It's absolutely vital if you're trying to diagnose a failure in the spacecraft. But after the mission is over, the crew is home safely, and the spacecraft has either burned up or been gutted and sent off to the Smithsonian, those paper strip charts or computer tapes have very limited appeal. After the program ends and you don't fly that spaceship model anymore, there's not even really any technical need for raw telemetry.
What makes Apollo 11 special for telemetry is that one of those streams of numbers was the raw video signal from the jury-rigged television system. That wasn't part of the original telemetry design. Nowadays we're accustomed to live 4K digital video from ascending launch vehicles. But in 1969, video embedded in a telemetry stream wasn't really standard thinking. They had a long-term plan for live television from the lunar surface, but it went entirely differently and needed either the big erectable antenna or the high-gain antenna on the rover. Beginning with Apollo 12, the telemetry stream went back to simply reporting cabin temperature, fuel cell power output, spacecraft attitude, and so forth. Just boring streams of numbers representing engineering measurements. The TV signal came in over a different carrier.
-
NASA Goddard is the typical repository for NASA's space data. But I don't know what Apollo telemetry records they might have, or in what form they're in, or how easy it is to access it.
Telemetry is really boring. Except for historically significant cases like Apollo 13, there is almost no historical value after the mission or program is complete. Yes, incurable nerds like me like to have it. But it means almost nothing to anyone else. Telemetry is literally just streams of numbers divided into different logical channels. When you graph those numbers, you have a picture of one parameter of spacecraft operation over time—say, oxygen tank pressure. It's absolutely vital if you're trying to diagnose a failure in the spacecraft. But after the mission is over, the crew is home safely, and the spacecraft has either burned up or been gutted and sent off to the Smithsonian, those paper strip charts or computer tapes have very limited appeal. After the program ends and you don't fly that spaceship model anymore, there's not even really any technical need for raw telemetry.
What makes Apollo 11 special for telemetry is that one of those streams of numbers was the raw video signal from the jury-rigged television system. That wasn't part of the original telemetry design. Nowadays we're accustomed to live 4K digital video from ascending launch vehicles. But in 1969, video embedded in a telemetry stream wasn't really standard thinking. They had a long-term plan for live television from the lunar surface, but it went entirely differently and needed either the big erectable antenna or the high-gain antenna on the rover. Beginning with Apollo 12, the telemetry stream went back to simply reporting cabin temperature, fuel cell power output, spacecraft attitude, and so forth. Just boring streams of numbers representing engineering measurements. The TV signal came in over a different carrier.
Ah ok cool thanks again Jay. Once again your the font of all haha
-
NASA Goddard is the typical repository for NASA's space data. But I don't know what Apollo telemetry records they might have, or in what form they're in, or how easy it is to access it.
Telemetry is really boring. Except for historically significant cases like Apollo 13, there is almost no historical value after the mission or program is complete. Yes, incurable nerds like me like to have it. But it means almost nothing to anyone else. Telemetry is literally just streams of numbers divided into different logical channels. When you graph those numbers, you have a picture of one parameter of spacecraft operation over time—say, oxygen tank pressure. It's absolutely vital if you're trying to diagnose a failure in the spacecraft.
This makes me think of the TV series "Air Crash Investigations" (I think it may be "Mayday" in other countries) as crash investigators pore over the data from the Flight Data Recorder to determine why this episode's plane crashed.
But after the mission is over, the crew is home safely, and the spacecraft has either burned up or been gutted and sent off to the Smithsonian, those paper strip charts or computer tapes have very limited appeal. After the program ends and you don't fly that spaceship model anymore, there's not even really any technical need for raw telemetry.
Which I suppose raises the question, did this aspect of Apollo influence the airline industry to be a bit more serious about tracking flight data? Or was the airline industry already on its way down that path already?
-
This makes me think of the TV series "Air Crash Investigations" (I think it may be "Mayday" in other countries) as crash investigators pore over the data from the Flight Data Recorder to determine why this episode's plane crashed.
Which I suppose raises the question, did this aspect of Apollo influence the airline industry to be a bit more serious about tracking flight data? Or was the airline industry already on its way down that path already?
Already. Telemetry is as old as humankind's ability to connect two things. When Lord Grantham yanks on the ribbon to which a bell is attached downstairs, that's telemetry. Tension in a rope, varying fluid pressure through tubes, and later crude electrical signals have been a part of both engineering and daily life for hundreds of years.
Similarly data recording is as old as humankind's ability to scratch marks on paper, smoked glass, or wax. The Edison phonograph is the precursor of many airliner recording methods that recorded changing values by a stylus leaving a trace in metal foil. These various methods solved the same problem: preserve or convey a signal in order to reveal what is happening in an otherwise inscrutable system.
Whether one records or transmits the signal is a matter of capability and circumstance. Airplanes travel, making it difficult to reliably send complex signals over radio to a ground station. Recording them in a way that survives a crash has been until recently a slightly more tractable problem. But now ACARS is satellite-capable, so airliners can transmit basic engineering data to a satellite network and obviate the need to find black orange boxes amid horrible wreckage. Still, onboard data recorders are more capable. I make a general-purpose recorder that's capable of recording 512 channels of 16-bit data at 30 kHz. It's the size of a brick and can operate autonomously for 24 hours. That's still more that we can do in telemetry for thousands of flights aloft at any given time.
Similarly the Apollo command module carried a 14-channel flight data recorder to be used when in lunar orbit. Telemetry is impossible around the far side of the Moon. So the command module pilot could record vital engineering data and play it back at high speed during periods of radio contact. Keep in mind the people who build the Apollo spacecraft largely also build commercial or military aircraft. That's really the essence of the influence: it's the same people solving the same problems. The need to obtain measurements of operational parameters leading up to a failure simply runs deeper than any one project. It's a fundamental principle of engineering.
-
Interesting. Do you have this data stored locally or is there an online resource
Most of what I have or links to are from random searching, finding something that seems cool, and even accidental discoveries. Then there is the data in the various reports or even what was reported during the missions themselves (such as dosimeter readings).
Like Apollo 15 PLSS telemtry;
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160014527/downloads/20160014527.pdf
Restoration of data (Apollo 12 dust detector.... how exciting!!);
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20120009885/downloads/20120009885.pdf
And things like heart rates for Apollo 11
-
For the most part, the telemetry 'debate' is one where the conspiracy lovers are just demanding something they know doesn't exist.
It is, in itself, of no use to anyone now. It had a use at the time to give the state of a given element of the missions while it was ongoing. Once those missions were over it was of no use: the data became of purely esoteric interest, so why would anyone need to keep it?
If it did exist, you can bet they would be jumping through all kinds of hoops to try and discredit it and handwave it away. Goalposts would be moved faster than a right hook at Sibrel's nose.
Here's a folder containing all kinds of raw data from Apollo experiments.
https://cdaweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/data/apollo/
-
Like Apollo 15 PLSS telemtry;
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160014527/downloads/20160014527.pdf
These are exactly the same values I collect from similar equipment. Because I have an interest in the technical history of Apollo, I'm mildly curious about the supply pressure and partial pressure fluctuations near the end, but this is not anything that would ever be more than a footnote in an engineering textbook.
Incidentally, PLSS telemetry was handled slightly differently than the spacecraft telemetry.
-
For the most part, the telemetry 'debate' is one where the conspiracy lovers are just demanding something they know doesn't exist.
The goal of conspiracism is to perpetuate the debate and amplify the perceived importance of the conspiracy theorists, not to actually study history. "They didn't keep every scrap of information," is just one of the disingenuous ways this happens where Apollo is concerned.
It is, in itself, of no use to anyone now. It had a use at the time to give the state of a given element of the missions while it was ongoing. Once those missions were over it was of no use: the data became of purely esoteric interest, so why would anyone need to keep it?
The unspoken premise is that telemetry has general, ongoing historical value. In general, it doesn't. Sure, you preserve a few strips so that people can see how telemetry worked in general fifty years ago. But that doesn't mean you keep the telemetry tapes forever. These are half-inch wide ten-inch spools that come in a square cardboard box that you can label. You need several running at any given time, because each tape can record only a few channels of data. The tape speed is prodigious, much faster than the 3-1/4 or 7-1/2 inches per second of quarter-inch audio tape. The outcome is a jillion tapes for any given mission, which requires an inconveniently large building to carry them around in. Hence you preserve the tapes until the program ends, and the data are in a more stable, convenient format. You preserve one spool so that people fifty years hence can see what they looked like. And you reuse them in a pinch, if new ones won't work in your machines.
TimberWolfAu's PDFs are a much more convenient format for today's audience, and doesn't depend on expensive, unreadable tapes or degradable paper or archival storage buildings and their ongoing expense. But there's simply little or no technical value and no historical value to preserving all these finely measured variables in any form, much less the most unwieldy form.
The sticky wicket is the singular case of Apollo 11. For that mission, you can argue that a portion of the telemetry does have general, ongoing historical value: pristine video images of the lunar surface EVA. Now that premise is also debatable, but it offers support for the simplistic notion that NASA should have cared better for its telemetry. It's one thing to say, "How could NASA have failed to preserve the original telemetry tapes showing Aldrin's PLSS battery current output at 37 minutes into the EVA?" We have the number—it's right there on the photographically preserved strip chart. Therefore it's patently absurd to say the missions can only considered valid if the original (nominally unusable) record has been preserved—one that can only be read by an old, expensive, temperamental, and rare machine, only one working example of which has survived.
But it's another thing to say, "How could NASA have failed to preserve the best picture from Apollo 11 surface television?" That sounds somewhat less absurd. But that answer is that the Apollo 11 video signal was non-telemetry data that was reluctantly convolved with telemetry and therefore (perhaps unwisely) treated the same as telemetry: copy it off the tape as soon as possible and therefore render it into a usable form.
But for non-historian conspiracy theorists, these answers don't suffice. Such "messy" details as design and operational constraints, human error, and unforeseen circumstances don't factor in. The inclusion of historically interesting information in one mission's telemetry sets up the naïve expectation that telemetry per se is historically important. This then forms a simplistic basis for judging the behavior of people who were acting correctly according to the general case, but in the misguided lay judgment have acted "suspiciously." Such is real history.
If it did exist, you can bet they would be jumping through all kinds of hoops to try and discredit it and handwave it away.
Quite likely, as they do for all the records we do have. In conspiracy thinking, evidence is either suspiciously missing, evidence of a hoax, or faked. This is not a credible approach to historical evidence, and, of course, why serious historians ignore them ("evidence" that they must be onto something).
-
Interesting. Do you have this data stored locally or is there an online resource
Most of what I have or links to are from random searching, finding something that seems cool, and even accidental discoveries. Then there is the data in the various reports or even what was reported during the missions themselves (such as dosimeter readings).
Like Apollo 15 PLSS telemtry;
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160014527/downloads/20160014527.pdf
Restoration of data (Apollo 12 dust detector.... how exciting!!);
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20120009885/downloads/20120009885.pdf
And things like heart rates for Apollo 11
Thats fantastic. Just what i was looking for. The telematry is now, probably, the most often commented hoax topic. Its certainly the most popular amongst HB's on FB.
-
For the most part, the telemetry 'debate' is one where the conspiracy lovers are just demanding something they know doesn't exist.
It is, in itself, of no use to anyone now. It had a use at the time to give the state of a given element of the missions while it was ongoing. Once those missions were over it was of no use: the data became of purely esoteric interest, so why would anyone need to keep it?
If it did exist, you can bet they would be jumping through all kinds of hoops to try and discredit it and handwave it away. Goalposts would be moved faster than a right hook at Sibrel's nose.
Here's a folder containing all kinds of raw data from Apollo experiments.
https://cdaweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/data/apollo/
Fantastic OBM. Again just the ticket
-
One aspect about the missing telemetry tapes is that not one hoax proponent, prior to the announcement of the tapes in 2009, ever thought to consider the TV data stored on those recordings. I was loosely involved in the tape search, and I know first hand that it was only our core group who were hoping to retrieve these tapes for the TV signal stored within.
-
One aspect about the missing telemetry tapes is that not one hoax proponent, prior to the announcement of the tapes in 2009, ever thought to consider the TV data stored on those recordings. I was loosely involved in the tape search, and I know first hand that it was only our core group who were hoping to retrieve these tapes for the TV signal stored within.
I'm a rookie, but my interest was for the Video footage that was never released to TV. As of now, the only SSTV video footage we still have was the footage broadcast publicly. Where is all of the private footage? Gone.
Telemetry data, IMO, was less of a concern for me, because they were REQUIRED to produce loads and loads of full mission simulated Telemetry data to use for the Mission Simulations, all the way to the control room. Simulating #'s was easier than faking a ton more video.
Were they constantly feeding in data from inside the CSM during the entire mission? What about footage from inside the LM? I have never heard anyone say just how much SSTV footage was lost along with all of these tapes.
-
There has been NO "private" SSTV footage lost - meaning what was televised in 1969 has always been available. There was no SSTV from inside the LM, nor the CSM for Apollo 11. The scan-converted video of the Lunar EVA has been stored on videotape and kinescope since 1969. All TV color downlinks from the missions is accounted for, with the expection of LOS during brief points in the timeline, the most notable being the crew statements. CBS holds the complete recording in which you see the signal lost, and where you hear Capcom instruct the crew that TV has been lost. The CBS tapes have color bars at this point of the feed but retain continuous audio. Bart Sibrel has attempted to claim he has footage never intended for the public, yet this material was televised live on CBS.
-
Bart Sibrel has attempted to claim he has footage never intended for the public, yet this material was televised live on CBS.
IIRC, Sibrel also claims he has footage of two separate points during the mission, yet they are actually from the same broadcast, with the start of the second around 2 minutes after the end of the first.
-
There has been NO "private" SSTV footage lost - meaning what was televised in 1969 has always been available. There was no SSTV from inside the LM, nor the CSM for Apollo 11. The scan-converted video of the Lunar EVA has been stored on videotape and kinescope since 1969. All TV color downlinks from the missions is accounted for, with the expection of LOS during brief points in the timeline, the most notable being the crew statements. CBS holds the complete recording in which you see the signal lost, and where you hear Capcom instruct the crew that TV has been lost. The CBS tapes have color bars at this point of the feed but retain continuous audio. Bart Sibrel has attempted to claim he has footage never intended for the public, yet this material was televised live on CBS.
"for A11" -- are you under the impression that only the A11 tapes were lost? Where are the ones for A12 to A17?
IIRC, Sibrel did have one that starts with "Not for public..." -- I'm STILL looking for this one online. For a time it was on "Vintage TV" via YouTube, but it's been yanked. I want to see the ORIGINAL tape footage start to finish with the date/stamped plates.
Does anyone know where to find this footage again? I spent 30 minutes looking, and the link I first found from October has been purged.
-
Where is all of the private footage? Gone.
Or, as Dwight says, there never was any to begin with. On what are you basing your suggestion that such footage ever existed in the first place?
-
The tapes for Apollo 12 through 17 are held at JSC. The kinescopes are held at NARA. Apollo 12 through 17 did not use SSTV.
-
"for A11" -- are you under the impression that only the A11 tapes were lost? Where are the ones for A12 to A17?
Do you have any basis to claim any other tapes are lost?
IIRC, Sibrel did have one that starts with "Not for public..."
Yes, but it included material that had been broadcast live. The 'not for public' doesn't mean what he thinks it means.
-
1. Do you have any basis to claim any other tapes are lost?
2. Yes, but it included material that had been broadcast live. The 'not for public' doesn't mean what he thinks it means.
1. NASA is presenting that only the A11 tapes were lost, right? Has anyone looked for the other mission tapes?
2. I believe it was "never seen before on live TV" until AFTER he received these, around 2000 time frame.
Although I think Sibrel's interpretation is junkish, IMO, there is some suspicious activity going on here. If we can find the source footage (again, it being scrubbed seems suspicious) - we could have a better discussion on it. "A Funny thing" snips it together in deceptive manner... I want the original footage which indicates mission time.
-
Are you sure you have done your research into the TV recordings? How can you claim there is suspicious activity when you havent even seen the original telecasts?
-
1. The tapes for Apollo 12 through 17 are held at JSC. The kinescopes are held at NARA.
2. Apollo 12 through 17 did not use SSTV.
1. The NASA report seems to indicate otherwise:
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/static/history/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf (https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/static/history/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf)
"Aside from a few canisters of Apollo 9 telemetry tapes still stored at the WNRC, the Apollo-era telemetry tapes no longer exist-anywhere."
If this is true, I consider this report itself to be another link in "NASA deception" intentionally trying to make it seem like ONLY A11 tapes were missing, when in truth they are ALL Missing except for a few canisters from A9.
==
2. SSTV? -- Google AI seems to think it was SSTV. If not SSTV, then what was it?
-
1. What makes you think the full resolution post-Apollo 11 video is on the telemetry tapes?
2. It was not SSTV, it was sequential color full resolution NTSC (29.97fps) television. Recorded onto 2" tape at JSC.
-
1. NASA is presenting that only the A11 tapes were lost, right? Has anyone looked for the other mission tapes?
The whereabouts of the other tapes are known, as Dwight has said.
2. I believe it was "never seen before on live TV" until AFTER he received these, around 2000 time frame.
Then you believe incorrectly.
Although I think Sibrel's interpretation is junkish, IMO, there is some suspicious activity going on here. If we can find the source footage (again, it being scrubbed seems suspicious) - we could have a better discussion on it.
The footage in Sibrel's video was never 'scrubbed'. It is not the same material as on the lost tapes. Those contained only the lunar surface television, which was a different thing altogether from the television from the command module during the mission.
-
Are you sure you have done your research into the TV recordings? How can you claim there is suspicious activity when you havent even seen the original telecasts?
I studied it back in October, near the start of my quest-for-truth. I found it on YouTube... but not being aware, yet, of the "scrubbing nature" that has been happening with evidence against Apollo, I didn't screen capture it... I assumed I could return and see it again.
Went to go find the link and show you it missing.... but what do you know it's back again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrFFbyuQqt4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrFFbyuQqt4)
OK - we can have some discussion on this soon... It's been 3 months, so need to rewatch and reassess some things.
-
1. The NASA report seems to indicate otherwise:
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/static/history/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf (https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/static/history/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf)
"Aside from a few canisters of Apollo 9 telemetry tapes still stored at the WNRC, the Apollo-era telemetry tapes no longer exist-anywhere."
If this is true, I consider this report itself to be another link in "NASA deception" intentionally trying to make it seem like ONLY A11 tapes were missing, when in truth they are ALL Missing except for a few canisters from A9.
But the Apollo 11 tapes are unique in the situation with regard to the television transmissions.
As Dwight has said, nothing of the television broadcasts from any Apollo missions is missing.
-
1. What makes you think the full resolution post-Apollo 11 video is on the telemetry tapes?
2. It was not SSTV, it was sequential color full resolution NTSC (29.97fps) television. Recorded onto 2" tape at JSC.
1. I don't. I only know that the A11 Report says "all tapes missing except a few from A9".... and if this is true, I find the whole presentation to be deliberately deceptive, as experience has repeatedly indicated that MOST TD's think it was only A11. What is the truth about these other tapes?
2. Thanks for the clarification. I believe the tech from LM was still classified SSTV though, but converted to NTSC, correct? This seems to be what Wikipedia indicates.
-
But the Apollo 11 tapes are unique in the situation with regard to the television transmissions.
As Dwight has said, nothing of the television broadcasts from any Apollo missions is missing.
I'll note your understanding. If it is WRONG -- will you note that you were most likely "deliberately deceived"? Because it should be EASY TO KNOW THE TRUTH, unless NASA is practicing some deception... but they'd never do this.
I haven't finished research into this topic, other than the current believe that the A11 report itself appears to be notably deceptive... in not saying "ALL Mission Tapes were lost" (except A9's a few).
-
The truth about the videotapes is that they reside at JSC and their corresponding kinescopes at NARA.
What is decpetive about stating the TELEMETRY tapes are missing? You do know the difference between a telemetry recording and a videotape recording, right?
-
But the Apollo 11 tapes are unique in the situation with regard to the television transmissions.
As Dwight has said, nothing of the television broadcasts from any Apollo missions is missing.
I'll note your understanding. If it is WRONG -- will you note that you were most likely "deliberately deceived"? Because it should be EASY TO KNOW THE TRUTH, unless NASA is practicing some deception... but they'd never do this.
I haven't finished research into this topic, other than the current believe that the A11 report itself appears to be notably deceptive... in not saying "ALL Mission Tapes were lost" (except A9's a few).
It is you who is behaving deceptably from the report
By all accounts, the epic-like search has not ended as anyone had expected. The
searchers never found what they set out to uncover. Aside from a few canisters of
Apollo 9 telemetry tapes still stored at the WNRC, the Apollo-era telemetry tapes no
longer exist-anywhere. However, this disappointing discovery does not mean the
Herculean effort that spanned more than eight years ended in vain. The team
uncovered the best television-formatted recordings of the Apollo 11 moon landing and
has secured NASA funding to apply modern-day digital technology to dramatically
enhance the quality of these tapes
All telemetry tapes with the exception of A9 are lost. Telemetry tapes were discussed by Jay in another thread are for the just data bits from various recording devices in the spacecraft, IIRC.
-
1. NASA is presenting that only the A11 tapes were lost, right? Has anyone looked for the other mission tapes?
Troll.
2. I believe it was "never seen before on live TV" until AFTER he received these, around 2000 time frame.
Your ignorance on this is as bad as anyone previous. There were three TV transmissions (on route to the Moon). Two of them were tests and on the freely available DVD/VHS boxsets were labelled as such. The fact that you suddenly entertain Sibrel, the biggest horse's arse imaginable is astounding. This liar took the transmissions and deliberately implied he had suddenly obtained "secret footage".
Although I think Sibrel's interpretation is junkish, IMO, there is some suspicious activity going on here. If we can find the source footage (again, it being scrubbed seems suspicious) - we could have a better discussion on it. "A Funny thing" snips it together in deceptive manner... I want the original footage which indicates mission time.
"You want"!? Do you? Your Apollo knowledge is useless. Even entry level enthusiasts know about these. Those of us who have the original VHS and geekily, the same DVD boxset, have seen every single minute of Apollo 11.
If you so much as hint at any more crap about Sibrel, totally debunked in every single thing he has ever uttered, the final semblance of credibility you cling to is gone completely.
-
I'll note your understanding. If it is WRONG -- will you note that you were most likely "deliberately deceived"?
No, because there is nothing deceptive. It is, as usual, your lack of understanding of the significance of those specific telemetry tapes that is the stumbling block here.
-
I'll note your understanding. If it is WRONG -- will you note that you were most likely "deliberately deceived"?
No, because there is nothing deceptive. It is, as usual, your lack of understanding of the significance of those specific telemetry tapes that is the stumbling block here.
Your position is noted. I haven't done the added research. For now, will take your word for it... nothing significant on all of those A12-A17 tapes that were lost. That is your stance, right?
-
I haven't done the added research.
Everyone knows this.
nothing significant on all of those A12-A17 tapes that were lost. That is your stance, right?
There were no tapes "Lost"! The data was recorded in various other formats.
-
The truth about the videotapes is that they reside at JSC and their corresponding kinescopes at NARA.
What is decpetive about stating the TELEMETRY tapes are missing? You do know the difference between a telemetry recording and a videotape recording, right?
Yes. But was under the impression that they were also interleafed together. Currently, my understanding is that most of the video recordings we have is AFTER conversion... the pre-conversion tapes used to exist -- now they don't.
A12-A17 sent SSTV signals, which were converted to NTSC... original tapes lost?
One reason I'm here is to be "set straight" on certain things. Echo Chambers do not provide accurate understandings.
So I'm hear to learn, and it seems to me you have considerable knowledge, and a willingness to teach. Thanks in advance.
-
Your position is noted. I haven't done the added research. For now, will take your word for it... nothing significant on all of those A12-A17 tapes that were lost. That is your stance, right?
My 'stance' is that there is no 'missing' television footage on those tapes, as Dwight has said. And as has also been explained, there is no missing TV footage on the Apollo 11 tapes either, only the raw signal from the unique TV system used for the lunar surface transmissions.
-
My 'stance' is that there is no 'missing' television footage on those tapes, as Dwight has said. And as has also been explained, there is no missing TV footage on the Apollo 11 tapes either, only the raw signal from the unique TV system used for the lunar surface transmissions.
But the source signal tapes are missing? (before conversion to NTSC)
Was there any footage on the tapes that was lost, in a format that we no longer have?
And how do you know there wasn't footage that simply wasn't converted to NTSC? (meaning that the source formatted tapes have footage no one has seen)
-
Apollo 12 through 17 (and Skylab, ASTP and Shuttle up to 1987) all used sequential color full resolution 29.97 frames per second cameras. This signal was not needed to be scan converted in order to be viewable on a standard SD TV set - note: given the RGB filtering, the image luminance flickers (in conjunction with the differences in the seperate color channels). So, in order to have a full gamut color image, the sequential material was matrixed in a custom built color converter.
As evidence to the existance of these tapes, for example, recent color conversions were made of the Apollo 16 TV feeds (known for a fact, as I hold reference copies). These were made from the original recordings. The ASTP press conference exists as the monochrome pre-color converted recording. The separate Red Blue Green recordings for color TV from the missions exist as well.
-
Apollo 12 through 17 (and Skylab, ASTP and Shuttle up to 1987) all used sequential color full resolution 29.97 frames per second cameras. This signal was not needed to be scan converted in order to be viewable on a standard SD TV set - note given the RGB filtering, the image luminance flickers in conjunction with the differences in the seperate color channels). However, in order to have a full gamut color image, the sequential material was matrixed in a custom built color converter.
As evidence to the existance of these tapes, for example, recent color conversions were made of the Apollo 16 TV feeds (known for a fact, as I hold reference copies). These were made from the original recordings. The ASTP press conference exists as the monochrome pre-color converted recording. The separate Red Blue Green recordings exist as well.
Thank you! Do you have any links that substantiate your claims? If I'm going to accept something as fact, it helps to have more sourcing other than "Dwight from ApolloHoax.net". :)
-
"Live TV From the Moon" would be a good place to start.
-
But the source signal tapes are missing? (before conversion to NTSC)
No such conversion was needed for the Apollo 12-17 TV transmissions.
Was there any footage on the tapes that was lost, in a format that we no longer have?
No.
And how do you know there wasn't footage that simply wasn't converted to NTSC? (meaning that the source formatted tapes have footage no one has seen)
Because no such conversion was needed, and because there is continuous audio and transcription for all missions, and the TV transmissions were called out in there and match up to the video material. Why do you feel the need to invent this possible missing footage? The reports about the Apollo 11 tapes are very clear about what they contained that was of interest. I fail to see where your basis is for concluding thre might be additional TV footage we never saw.
-
But the source signal tapes are missing? (before conversion to NTSC)
For Apollo 11 SSTV! The recordings would have improved the TV footage to a certain degree, but not massively better than the enhanced digital version.
Was there any footage on the tapes that was lost, in a format that we no longer have?
The same question as before, same answer. Jayutah gave a great explanation on this and how it would be ultra difficult to even read today.
-
Thank you! Do you have any links that substantiate your claims? If I'm going to accept something as fact, it helps to have more sourcing other than "Dwight from ApolloHoax.net". :)
Links maybe not. A book or two, most likely....
-
Apollo 12 through 17 (and Skylab, ASTP and Shuttle up to 1987) all used sequential color full resolution 29.97 frames per second cameras. This signal was not needed to be scan converted in order to be viewable on a standard SD TV set - note given the RGB filtering, the image luminance flickers in conjunction with the differences in the seperate color channels). However, in order to have a full gamut color image, the sequential material was matrixed in a custom built color converter.
As evidence to the existance of these tapes, for example, recent color conversions were made of the Apollo 16 TV feeds (known for a fact, as I hold reference copies). These were made from the original recordings. The ASTP press conference exists as the monochrome pre-color converted recording. The separate Red Blue Green recordings exist as well.
Thank you! Do you have any links that substantiate your claims? If I'm going to accept something as fact, it helps to have more sourcing other than "Dwight from ApolloHoax.net". :)
Dwight, published author and expert on the TV cameras used by NASA.
-
Apollo 12 through 17 (and Skylab, ASTP and Shuttle up to 1987) all used sequential color full resolution 29.97 frames per second cameras. This signal was not needed to be scan converted in order to be viewable on a standard SD TV set - note given the RGB filtering, the image luminance flickers in conjunction with the differences in the seperate color channels). However, in order to have a full gamut color image, the sequential material was matrixed in a custom built color converter.
As evidence to the existance of these tapes, for example, recent color conversions were made of the Apollo 16 TV feeds (known for a fact, as I hold reference copies). These were made from the original recordings. The ASTP press conference exists as the monochrome pre-color converted recording. The separate Red Blue Green recordings exist as well.
Thank you! Do you have any links that substantiate your claims? If I'm going to accept something as fact, it helps to have more sourcing other than "Dwight from ApolloHoax.net". :)
Dwight, published author and expert on the TV cameras used by NASA.
https://www.nasa.gov/history/alsj/dwightSB.html
-
These days, also acclaimed film-maker and Skylab A/V expert.
-
These days, also acclaimed film-maker and Skylab A/V expert.
Which raises the question, where's the best place to get 'Live from the moon' from? That benefits you the most and not the corps?
-
LO, I hope this is allowable, if not let me know and Ill remove it. Directly from www.apogeebooks.com
-
Thank you! Do you have any links that substantiate your claims? If I'm going to accept something as fact, it helps to have more sourcing other than "Dwight from ApolloHoax.net". :)
If only you were so discerning when it comes to claims made by your fellow hoax-believers!
-
"Live TV From the Moon" would be a good place to start.
OK Mr. Boniecki, thanks for this suggestion. Do you release this as an E-Book, like Kindle?
-
If only you were so discerning when it comes to claims made by your fellow hoax-believers!
THIS is why I'm HERE. I realize my bias due in large part to the company I've kept. I'm still sitting on a heap of bias, based upon "facts" for which I cannot find refutation. So I came here. If I'm going to find refutations, then here is best place to find them.
Likewise, people here, don't seem to think they have any bias -- they are "TD's". While within the MLH community, it's the same but reversed.
This is why we need neutral grounds for discussion. We are One. We're on the same side, in the end. Bad treatment of MLH guys, makes things worse.
-
This is why we need neutral grounds for discussion. We are One. We're on the same side, in the end. Bad treatment of MLH guys, makes things worse.
I see your lips moving and I've read the words BUT I do not for one minute believe a word of it. You have consistently paraded yourself as the smartest guy in the room, demonstrated that you are an incredibly slow learner. Indeed, in my view, you have demonstrated many of the characteristics of the fundamentalist you have admitted to being- one that denies everything and anything that is in opposition to your embedded world view.
You are also a sore loser who cannot be gracious in defeat.
-
This is why we need neutral grounds for discussion. We are One. We're on the same side, in the end. Bad treatment of MLH guys, makes things worse.
I see your lips moving and I've read the words BUT I do not for one minute believe a word of it. You have consistently paraded yourself as the smartest guy in the room, demonstrated that you are an incredibly slow learner. Indeed, in my view, you have demonstrated many of the characteristics of the fundamentalist you have admitted to being- one that denies everything and anything that is in opposition to your embedded world view.
You are also a sore loser who cannot be gracious in defeat.
It is starting to sound an awful lot like AWE130 "we are the whisper" ; who believe it or not seems to be back online too :)
-
It is starting to sound an awful lot like AWE130 "we are the whisper" ; who believe it or not seems to be back online too :)
And in typical style, blocked me after one post. 😂🤣
-
All my books are soft cover printed only. No ebooks.
-
All my books are soft cover printed only. No ebooks.
And my is autographed!
-
And my is autographed!
He wrote in mine too..
-
And my is autographed!
He wrote in mine too..
But I bet you can't post what he wrote as it might violate obscenity laws.....
-
He sounds like a pretty awesome guy…