DAC, Alignment Sight and other A11 gear found in Armstrong's closet

[beedarko]

" After Neil Armstrong's death, his widow, Carol, discovered a white cloth bag in a closet, containing what were obviously either flight or space related artifacts. She contacted Allan Needell, curator of the Apollo collection at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum, and provided photographs of the items. Needell, who immediately realized that the bag—known to the astronauts as the Purse - and its contents could be hardware from the Apollo 11 mission, asked the authors for support in identifying and documenting the flight history and purpose of these artifacts. After some research it became apparent that the purse and its contents were lunar surface equipment carried in the Lunar Module Eagle during the epic journey of Apollo 11. "

more... http://sploid.gizmodo.com/secret-stash-of-moon-artifacts-found-hidden-in-neil-arm-1684449533

Every piece of this gear looks like it could have practical value as hardware for use during an actual moon landing.  Odd that NASA would equip Buzz, Michael and Neil with so much stuff that actually worked, when mockups would've been cheaper and easier.

[Chief]

Ah,

But the fact he didn't use it is proof they didn't go. The word around the CT traps is that they were props that Armstrong smuggled out from the movie set .

[JayUtah]

But the fact he didn't use it is proof they didn't go.

Who said he didn't use it?  The astronauts routinely kept souvenirs from their missions, often in the form of bits of equipment yanked from the spacecraft.  Lovell has the AOT eyepiece from Aquarius.

Conversely, much more equipment was manufactured according to spec than was actually flown.  Something like 50 computer DSKYs were made, and are now lost or in private hands if they weren't flown.  Something like 100 Apollo-spec Hasselblad cameras were manufactured.  A spare flight-spec Maurer DAC wouldn't be out of the question according to well-established (if not officially authorized) practice.

The word around the CT traps is that they were props that Armstrong smuggled out from the movie set .

The problem with that theory is that all that junk is stuff that's part of the alleged cover story.  Smugging out something from a set, to prove it was a set, would be equipment that would only have been used on a set, not on a real mission.  I have somewhere one of the "storage devices" used in Mission to Mars.  It's not a real storage device; it's a kluged-up bit of metal and plastic.  That would be proof that Mission to Mars was a staged story.

It would be nice of people actually thought through what constitutes proof.

[raven]

Yeah, movie props tend to be only as good as they need to be. If cardboard and some airbrushing do the job, then that is what is used.

[JayUtah]

Yeah, movie props tend to be only as good as they need to be. If cardboard and some airbrushing do the job, then that is what is used.

Some of the shuttlecraft in Enterprise's shuttle bay in TNG were literally flat plywood cutouts painted in trompe l'oeil.

I'm still struggling to figure out how the presence of these items on Earth somehow proves they weren't used on a real space mission.

[frenat]

Yeah, movie props tend to be only as good as they need to be. If cardboard and some airbrushing do the job, then that is what is used.

Some of the shuttlecraft in Enterprise's shuttle bay in TNG were literally flat plywood cutouts painted in trompe l'oeil.

I'm still struggling to figure out how the presence of these items on Earth somehow proves they weren't used on a real space mission.

Those making that claim confuse this camera which was known to make the return trip with the one (or more?) that were left.  They also make the incredulous claim that they can't figure out how he got the camera away from NASA.  They imagine NASA to be simultaneously in complete control of all parts of the "hoax" and yet still making mistakes in the footage and photos that random people on the internet can find.

[JayUtah]

Those making that claim confuse this camera which was known to make the return trip with the one (or more?) that were left.

How do they think the LM ascents were filmed?  Yes, the Hasselblad camera bodies were routinely hurled out the LM door, but not the DACs.

They also make the incredulous claim that they can't figure out how he got the camera away from NASA.

Maybe because he was a prominent NASA employee?

[frenat]

Those making that claim confuse this camera which was known to make the return trip with the one (or more?) that were left.

How do they think the LM ascents were filmed?  Yes, the Hasselblad camera bodies were routinely hurled out the LM door, but not the DACs.

They also make the incredulous claim that they can't figure out how he got the camera away from NASA.

Maybe because he was a prominent NASA employee?

What I posted is typical of the responses on GLP.  It is typical on that site for someone to post at least once a week a video of the LM ascent and ask "who filmed it" and "how did they get the tape" as if it is new groundbreaking info and they've "cracked the case" on the Moon-hoax.  These are the type of people IDW hangs out with.

[JayUtah]

All reasons why I long ago quit paying attention to GLP.

[smartcooky]

It is typical on that site for someone to post at least once a week a video of the LM ascent and ask "who filmed it" and "how did they get the tape" as if it is new groundbreaking info and they've "cracked the case" on the Moon-hoax.  These are the type of people IDW hangs out with.

I clearly remember my Dad asking me if I could figure out how they did that when we I first saw that on the news back in 1972 (I was 17). It took me mere moments to figure out how they must have done it.

[Sus_pilot]

Yeah, movie props tend to be only as good as they need to be. If cardboard and some airbrushing do the job, then that is what is used.

Some of the shuttlecraft in Enterprise's shuttle bay in TNG were literally flat plywood cutouts painted in trompe l'oeil.

I'm still struggling to figure out how the presence of these items on Earth somehow proves they weren't used on a real space mission.

Well, they don't induce radiation burns after traveling through the Searing Radiation Hell(TM) of outer space, so they couldn't have been on a real mission...

[onebigmonkey]

Hoax lovers are all over it as proof of...um...something, like DIckehead Tom Bombadil:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1062404844&postcount=38

as individuals we keep all sorts of shit that mean lots to us. In this instance, Neil would have kept the camera to remind him of the lies that he must profess forever more. You see he never went to the moon.

OR.. It is the camera that filmed the most historic event in human history. And then filmed another one...and another one....

[JayUtah]

Hoax lovers are all over it as proof of...um...something, like DIckehead Tom Bombadil

Someday he must teach us all his mind-reading tricks.