Hi Everyone,
I figure I would create a new thread regarding other DAC footage where we won't get bogged down in arguments suggesting I have manufactured/tweaked images to suit my ends. To be clear, I only suggest you use a video editor to see things better. And with these two videos, there is no need to do anything but watch the videos.
The DAC videos for Apollo 11-12 showing the Lunar module rendezvous show some interesting things that are hard to reconcile. As I am sure many of you are aware, after lifting off from the moon, the lunar modules of A11-12 did one orbit of the moon approximately 12-14 miles below the CSM's orbit. The CSM was moving at approximately 4000 miles per hour and the LM's speed was comparable. After one revolution of the moon, the LM's altered course and started a slow climb of these last 12 miles to the CSM. According to docs, this climb took approximately 55 minutes.
This leads us to the two rendezvous videos. The first thing you should keep in mind is these videos were apparently shot using a mirror like many other DAC videos. Interestingly this was only admitted by NASA after some had pointed out many of the videos seemed backwards. To illustrate this point, even the original Apollo 11 Documentary Footprints on the Moon with Wernher Von Braun narrating shows many of the videos backwards. (Footprints deserves its own topic post
) Now the only documented mirror on these missions was a 1.5 inch right angle mirror that can be attached to the DAC. A right angle mirror is a curious thing. It is used mainly for photos and not video. And is rarely used for anything professional. It lacks clarity and your viewpoint is curtailed significantly. In fact, today it is mainly sold as a "gag" or "spy" lens for shooting girls on the beach etc, ie point the camera one way but really shooting at a 90 degree angle to that. Yet this apparently is the mirror they used to produce many of these video sequences according to the docs. (of course, a cynical person might point out that a mirror was used but that was because it was part of a front screen projection set up. And they didn't correct for footage orientation being shot into the two way mirror
)
In any event, lets start with the A12 rendezvous footage. It is rather simple and appears to have significantly different ascent characteristics than A11's ascent to the CM. It starts at 1:05:10 and ends at 1:07:30 of the video below
The first thing you should note is while the footage took approximately 2:30 minutes, in reality, because the frames per second have been changed the real period of time is approximately 8-10 minutes. So what you are seeing is the last 8-10 minutes of ascent of the LM towards the CSM. The next thing you should note is the LM is being filmed from a stationary camera using a mirror on the CSM which is travelling approximately 4000 mph. Now what is extraordinary about this footage is the movement of the moon surface and the position of the LM vis a vis the X/Y axis of the video frame. The footage starts out with the moon rotating significantly faster than the end of the footage at probably three or four times faster. This can be only because of one of two things. Either the moon is rotating faster or the Lunar Module is moving considerably faster than the CM's 4000 mph speed above it. Now we know the moon doesn't vary in speed so it can only be a mismatch in speed between the LM and CSM with the LM going significantly faster. Fair enough. But logic dictates otherwise. At this point in the rendezvous, there are less than 10 minutes left before the LM attains the same orbit as the CSM. That means horizontally (from the moon's surface) they shouldn't be more than 4-5 miles apart at most. So even if there was a mismatch in speed of 400 or 500 mph ONLY during (for instance) the first 30 seconds (2 minutes real time) it would mean the LM was over 25 miles behind the CSM when the film starts. Of course the film doesn't appear to show the LM 'catching up' but if we assume that is what is being shown, there are significant problems. For one, an object 10'x 12' twenty five miles away is virtually impossible to film even with today's technology. Are we to accept a small camera filming through a 1.5 inch mirror somehow captured these LM images 25 miles out completely in focus? And further and more importantly, if this film is really depicting the LM 'catching up' the camera should not have been in a stationary static position. And it was. It doesn't move, or re-adjust, or pan to account for the LM closing in on the CSM.
To me, it seems clear that the film has been made to create the illusion of speed and distance as the LM closes in on the CSM. It is almost as if they were trying to re-create the perception many people have that the rendezvous is somehow one speeding bullet catching another speeding bullet. (Of course, most here know the rendezvous was a slow gradual ascent between similarly moving crafts.) It was just a simple rudimentary use of front screen projection. The variation in the moon's rotation created the illusion of speed while the foreground object (the lunar module) remained on the same Y axis (camera seemed to be bumped slightly at 1:05:50 and then corrected a few seconds later) only growing larger to give the appearance of it moving closer to the CSM. Even the big flaw of front screen projection is clearly evident here. The foreground and background don't match up in clarity or light. Even the small LM profile at the beginning of the clip 'pops' out against the background. It looks very unnatural.
Take a very close look at the LM, it remained dead center in the video frame and its orientation/position profile remained identical for the entire film. That is mind boggling. Any braking, upward trajectory movements, etc, absolutely nothing altered the LM's profile orientation during the entire film. You can literally overlay the first frame of the film with the last frame of the film and the LM has not shifted its profile position at all. That is unbelievable. Even if the LM didn't shift its profile orientation because of braking, RCS thrusts etc (unlikely), as it ascended it should have caused a shift in its profile vis a vis the CSM's camera's angle of view. But it doesn't.
Now lets turn to the DAC footage of Apollo 11's LM rendezvous. It is somewhat different than A12's rendezvous but very similar in the techniques used. Below is the clip.
Again this rendezvous was shot using a mirror like Apollo 12. It is also longer than the A12 clip. It is approximately 4:30 minutes long or about 18-20 minutes in real time once the frames per second alteration has been taken into account.
The significant difference between these two rendezvous sequences is the seemingly different trajectories between the two LM's as they approach the CSM. A11's approach seems at odds with A12's. I am sure some are going to point out it is a perspective issue or you need to think in "3D". So I rather not even deal with this apparent inconsistency.
Rather I would like to highlight film similarities between the two rendezvous that are hard to ignore. In both films, the camera is stationary and doesn't pan. The A11 clip is rather extraordinary in that it captures approximately the final 18 minutes of the LM's trajectory from beneath and behind the CSM to being on the horizon in front of the CSM. Not once does the camera move or pan. Yet it captures the entire movement of the LM (in complete focus no less! ) Even more extraordinary is the fact the LM stays on the same y axis of the video frame for the entire 18 minutes of film. And like the A12 sequence, the LM's profile remains the same/static for the entire ascent to the CSM. Only when out front of the CSM does the LM show a change in profile as it begins to rotate (on the SAME y axis). The rotations don't look real and appear mechanical in nature as if they are being rotated on a stick from behind. Of course some will argue (and have) that these rotations look unnatural because the film speed has been changed from 6 -10 fps to 24 fps. They would have a point but this change in speed does not seem to have affected other movements in the films. Only these rotations seem to be jarring and mechanical in nature. When you see the LM moving laterally its movement appears smooth. And the moon's surface rotation seems smooth as butter. So why do these LM rotations appear mechanical while nothing else exhibits the same jarring movements?
Like the A12 rendezvous, I believe a simple rudimentary front screen projection technique is being used to create the illusion of speed and movement of a stationary LM. Further it has all the hallmarks of the mismatch background/foreground lighting problems associated with front screen projection. This video standouts in particular as seeming unnatural. The lunar module 'pops' out from the moon background the entire clip. Even when it is only a tiny speck at the beginning of the clip, its clarity and lighting makes it standout unnaturally from its background.
With regards to the illusion of speed and movement, if you watch the film carefully from the beginning, the LM inexplicably moves up a y axis and when it reaches the top of the video frame it reverses and drops down the same y axis creating an illusion of speed as the moon's rotation slows down in the background. At the same time, the LM grows in size to create the illusion the LM is getting closer to the CSM to the point the LM finds itself somehow on the horizon in front of the LM. That is one magical camera with a 1.5 inch mirror. With a 1.5 inch mirror, the camera literally captures (in focus) 18 minutes of the lunar module moving from below and behind the CSM to in front of it on the horizon without no movement, adjustment or so much as one pan. And to top it off, it is filmed in such a manner the lunar module stays on the same Y-axis in the video frame for the film's entirety. Unbelievable is the only way to describe all this.
That's all for now. Let me know your thoughts.
