How the Apollo Spacecraft works: Part 2 

I will try my best to do it

Jared, hi! Can i use max 10-20 Sec of your Animation for my Moon-Video?I will credit your name and link to this original Video? Please.

I love this

@Bilal Khalid Derp

@Bilal Khalid Make that Dank DERP

That's what happened...

Read Michael Collins book "Carring the Fire" Or Al Wordens book "Falling to Earth " Both were CSM pilots who orbited the moon alone.

And the two astronauts died so you are stuck....... Alone

@@BlueflagAlphaI can assure you the CM could pilot the spacecraft's return for a successful splashdown. And he would not be alone. He would have the entire world's rapt attention and prayers as he embarked on his journey into the loving embrace of family, friends and colleagues.

@@BlueflagAlpha Dont forget that most of the Astronauts were battle hardened hero Air force and Navy pilots!Cool as Cucumbers in any Situation. They were not more alone in space than sitting in a Sabre Jet shot at by MIG 15s and SAM missiles over North Korea . Better, in the worst case, die alone in space than falling into Chinese or North Korean enemy hands, i would say .

Thank you!

lmao yea i learn more of this than i learn from school

Can’t put it better myself... with all those negativity about internet, lost in words when seeing such a video in my feed. also can’t imagine the amount of work the creator has put in - rocket science + animation skills + story telling (in random order)..

And its very sad that these channels dont have as many subs as these crappy channels like 5 min craft

@@MarcoMa210 yes

Hi Gibran - thanks so much for your comment! These videos bring back such good memories and I'm glad you like them. I am planning more space animations for later this year😁

Thanks for sharing John! I was born in 1989 so I missed all the fun😌 but now I get to learn about it.

​@@JaredOwen atleast you lived with the Space Shuttle :)

Thanks Adrian!

nicely done animation but totally bogus in reality (sadly)

shillslayer f

Adrian Stone ---- The History Channel is now the f--king Pawn Stars channel. Lovely.

What annoys me about most current documentaries is they always seem to artificially pump up the drama. Apollo 11 had plenty of drama by itself, but one doc I saw kept hinting that Armstrong and Aldrin were in danger of running out of fuel and crashing on the moon. They weren't. They were running up against the abort limit, which included a way to return to orbit. It was an extremely risky maneuver, yes, but not in the recklessly dangerous way suggested by the documentary

@Oiled Up And Ready ! Everybody works. Go on laughing and eating popcorn. The computer you use to spread your shit is based on mathematics. Have a good sleep after eating popcorn.

@Oiled Up And Ready ! GTFO you dumb moon landing conspiracist

@A Stunning Estate And D!ck Pills ! You said outside of the US and UK no one believes it, but China, ESA, Russia etc all have sent spacecraft and know the truth. One day soon there will be more moon orbits and landings and all these conspiracists will be proven wrong.

A Stunning Estate And D!ck Pills ! Proof?

@A Stunning Estate And D!ck Pills ! What's never made sense to me about all these conspiracies is, I can understand why they'd make all this up during the cold war to beat their enemies, pretty easy motive, but why would they then make up them failing at it. Like with Apollo 13 , challenger, Columbia. Why would you want to make up you failing. I just got done watching 4 hours of unedited audio from the Apollo 13 incident. You're telling me, a bunch of people for no particular reason were over radios talking to each other for over 50 or so hours trying to fix an airsystem in a non-existent space craft, for no reason despite those recordings not being released for ages, so the public wouldn't have been able to hear this faking anyway until long after it was done? Even for a hoax, that sounds extremely unnecessary and pointless, especially if people already believe you've been to the moon. Moreover alot of people watched those rockets taking off and going into space, I watched as Columbia broke up when it came back into the atmosphere. What's more if you have the money and you want too, reflective mirrors from the Apollo Missions have been placed on the moon, you can bounce a HPL off of it and get the reading back so you can literally do the math yourself and determine the distance.

@Texasforever So, do you support the Flat Earth Society? I feel like you do

@Texasforever seems you got foolded real hard

It's completely unbelievable.

But not possible today 😀😀😀😀😀😭😭😭???

It never happened. It's all fantasy.

Thanks Alex

I like your comment. James.👍 Just one thing though,the technology used was the "cutting edge" at the time. The absolute zenith in fact. 😊

@shillslayer your incredibly stupid

@shillslayer proof that its cgi? no

@shillslayer its not cgi

@shillslayer I beg to differ. Realistic CGI didn't exist until 1973 with the release of the movie "Westworld." CGI didn't go 3D until 3 years later in 1976, with the movie's sequel "Futureworld." The first moon landing happened at 3:17 P.M. EST on July 20th, 1969. I'd argue that you're the incredibly stupid one.

Well that assumes they really did go to the Moon.

@@TheMrSuge which they did, if you're gonna deny the moon landing why the hell are you watching a video about it?

@@TheMrSuge Your tin foil hat is on too tight. 🙄

​@@TheMrSugeThey did.

Parking ticket

*You then realise your spacecraft is starting to get towed down back to earth by an unseen force*

Well portal 2s space core warned us "here comes the space cops"

Get out.

@@shingojira6612 Dancing coffin: Ok, get in

John Edwards but we went to the moon you 1 year old

@@earth7440 Nah he a fetus.

@John Edwards Please get off the internet.

@Dashing Johnny hi, Chinese here.

@Dashing Johnny your stupidity is painful

Thanks Erik! Greetings from the United States

Jared Owen I LOVE APOLLO I HAVE A AMAZING TOY OF THE SATURN V

That's a great book.

Thank you!

Your welcome!

@@JaredOwen 400,000 people worked on getting a man to the moon,Thanks to John F Kennedy My uncle was one of them,helpede design the LEM Today his name is on the moon along with other engineers

Never too late! Thanks for watching Jarrod

I expected flattards replying

@@commiedoggo2439 same

Thank you!

Yes, well said. Even more important is that it would have been impossible to fake everything involved with the Apollo landings never mind keeping a hoax of that magnitude quiet.

Its impossible to fake project that enormous, people from all countries(not 3rd world) worked on it, someone would already talk about it

@@WTRMLN-zu6ob it's not impossible to fake worldwide lies. The few people that own the world and a few well paid actors are the only ones who have to know. They also own the media and thats where you get your info. You probably believe we landed on Mars from watching a self admitted cgi.

@@davidsandall lmao nigga go touch some grass

ikr the ykeepd enying it frogetting the engineering the math the science that went inot this the months of planning the bulding and the aboslute work that went intot his was INSANE ye tpeople deny it ever happened cus of their big egos

Originally it was referred to as the LEM, but in the early 1960s, NASA officially changed it to LM and it was never referred to as LEM again. However, you are correct that's where "lem" comes from and much to NASA's chagrin, LEM is still around.

Yeah.. but some dropped the excursion part of the name because it sounded like a school trip.

Yes just like "Jeep" from GP (General Purpose) military vehicle at 2nd WW.

As @@Woody615 said first it was *named* LEM, later renamed LM but still pronounced "lem"

Kinda like the VAB, was originally called the Vertical Assembly Building but changed to Vehicle Assembly Building when it was foretasted to be used for other spacecraft too.

I too like a well-crafted piece of science fiction.

@@gbzorro ignorant idiot

Thank you very much! I love this kind of stuff - in the future I might make more videos on the Apollo Spacecraft. It's a lot of fun to learn about.

You are awed by a fake nonsense moon landing?

I guess..you just don't get it, Scahoni. I'm sorry about that. Maybe there's a future for you in...janitorial work, or something....

The moon is almost a quarter of a million miles away .. just really think about that for a minute .. try to comprehend.

@@bizzjoe That's why it took a 1 billion dollar rocket to launch one mission, and nearly a decade of development & testing.

Thanks Mike!

Alchemica Blackwood Thats big words for someone who is fooled by a Mark sargeant

@Alchemica Blackwood you have no brain. The reason you don't believe we went to the Moon is because you don't do any research, the fact that it happened 49 years ago, in 1969, which is long ago for most people. Many people can recall watching the Moon landings live on NBC, CBS, and ABC. This wasn't a Hollywood hoax, many have tried to copy the Moon landing, yet they failed.

Yes, very neat, concise and clean. My only quibble is the J2 exhaust. You only get that color with alkane fuels, in the first stage (kerosene). LH2 burns blue or clear, with white condensation trail in the upper atmosphere. See Apollo 11 staging separation for comparison at time: 3;00 on ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-p8fLjC3gNTk.html

tubeist- dan while I do know the missions weren’t faked, you are literally the smartest conspiracy theorist here with the most “convincing” evidence. Props to you!

@@ismaellopez3963 nasa is unable to provide clarification to russian scientists regarding moon landing ,fake landing

It's too short with lots of unanswered questions for an old timer like me. The module is too small to hold everything they supposedly took.

@@robertkimberley3736 What do you think they "supposedly" took that wouldn't fit with them?

you are a good lap dog

@Noelle Leger you said that on comment another

@@joshuaomer9644 fuel, a buggy, cameras, rocks, food, batteries, flags, oxygen, wireless radios that wasn't out yet, big heavy suits that withstand -250f to 250f. And something for sea sickness since they barrell rolled for 3 days covering 220,000 miles with less fuel that a Ford fiesta.

Excepto como pasan del modulo de mando al LEM y viceversa. Conectando su mochila de vida de uno a otro por dos veces. Es tan increible que nunca lo vemos ni en dibujo animado.

Ed

To Part 3!

notionSunday boogpojlhbjlgv

you are a good lap dog

Best time to crack 1 off without being heard tho....

The CM pilot kept busy doing his own tasks, like running systems checks, mapping the moon’s surface, prepping the CM for docking procedures, keeping in contact with mission control, and anything else to keep from boredom.

Thank you!

Science-fiction.. not pure science....

Dan Clark if only I could see it, it would be amazing

I hope I will experience the same when SpaceX go to moon, or mars

Me too....the pitty now I have some doubts about that Show. I hate it. Before the world was more comfortable fore me.

😁

My uncle worked on the Lunar excursion module Bethpage Long Island All this talk of moon landing being a hoax is bullshit.He worked on it for years

@Oiled Up And Ready ! Your an asshole The moon landing was not a hoax.How do you explain all the technology we got from it?

Ya amazing how stupid people are that believe such nonsense!!

Dedicated to spreading lies about a fake moon landing

@@iranoutofusernameideas7438do you have ANY proof whatsoever?

@@TheKaiser-pf8fr Look at close ups of the LM. It looks like a childs science project

​@@iranoutofusernameideas7438It really doesn't though.

@@msidc1238 Literally duck tape and aluminum

Yeah, too many idiots in the world with flat-Earth thinking... "It MUST be fake, because I can't possibly understand it or comprehend it or how it worked... " Just like the "must've been aliens that built the pyramids" crowd... Oh well... history repeats itself. I guess Dark Age idiots who tore blocks off ancient Rome's structures to build goat pens for their animals thought the same way... Later! OL J R :)

@Oiled Up And Ready ! You still have the burden of proof lying on your head

It really is. I've had it for YEARS.

#notspon

Remeber king kong

The CGI in 1960 was even worse, when Apollo happened.

@@israelpartisan9927 they don’t say it’s cgi. They say it was just a sound stage. Idiots.I literally can’t believe how people think this way?! Like...what?!

@@israelpartisan9927 cgi in 1969 was so bat it didn’t exist yet

To believe this all happened with zero practice is foolish. That tweaker rei tent never went anywhere.

Dan Severns it’s not to scale, he animated it out of scale for easy seeing.

Koolgame22 That is exactly why I made the comment.

@Oiled Up And Ready ! He later showed it being to scale. P.S.: The fact that you need to look up a video explaining the Apollo program to hate on everyone about how it's all lies is pathetic. Say, have you ever been to Huntsville, where three Saturn Vs are out in the open for the world to see? Or to Houston, where there's a fourth? How about all the literal rocks from the moon in museums around the globe? I've been to the exact spot in the New Mexico desert where an Apollo capsule first tested in 1964. I can see why you would think the Apollo missions were fakery since nobody's been there in _your teensy little lifetime,_ but we'll be going back there in 5 years time, and this time you'll be able to see your precious stars on the "backdrop", since we've invented dual-exposure cameras since. Also keep in mind that CGI was in its infancy when Apollo missions were going to the moon, and cameras weren't high enough FPS that they could be slowed down just yet... The fact that you think it is necessary to deny the existence of the greatest technological acheivement in human history, which caused the deaths of three people and contributed to the collapse of the largest nation in the world, is simply despicable. PPS: Here are my sources, none are government- or NASA-sourced before you claim so. Care to list yours? Early CGI: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-SPMFhcC4SvQ.html Apollo 11 footage for cross-reference, here you can also see how a filter is applied to the camera so that the flare of the white and reflective powdery ground doesn't drown out everything else, illustrating firsthand why the stars aren't visible, also how Neil Armstrong's first statement was misheard: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-gg5Ncc9GODY.html White Sands, New Mexico, where the first Apollo tests took place: www.google.com/maps/place/NASA+-+White+Sands+Test+Facility/@32.5056285,-106.6126188,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x8cb0a9a72d4fc733!8m2!3d32.5056285!4d-106.6126188 Saturn rockets in Huntsville, AL at the USSRC: www.rocketcenter.com/museum Apollo 1 disaster: airandspace.si.edu/explore-and-learn/topics/apollo/apollo-program/orbital-missions/apollo1.cfm

Good question! To be honest I haven't dug that deep. I might do another video on the internals of the Apollo spacecraft.

A collapsible docking probe. www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/CSM11_Docking_Subsystem_pp87-92.pdf

The docking probe and drogue setup was some brilliant engineering. It consisted of a pointed "probe" that was attached to the front of the Command Module inside the docking tunnel, just above the inside hatch at the top of the CM below the instrument panel. This probe stuck out the front and contained a cone at its tip with three spring-loaded latches that engaged with the passive "drogue", which was basically a metal cone with a hole in the center, much like a "cone of shame" the vet puts on your dog to keep them from licking themselves after a medical procedure. The drogue was installed in the top of the LM's airlock tunnel with three tongue-n-groove latches in a "twist-lock" arrangement sorta like a gas cap on a car. When the probe entered the drogue, it would slide down the length of the interior of the cone until it hit the bottom, at which point the tip of the probe was inside the hole of the cone, and the spring loaded latches would snap out and lock above the lip of the cone's hole, creating the "soft dock" of the two spacecraft. Then the probe would be hydraulically retracted by a switch, pulling the two spacecraft together until the mating surfaces of the docking tunnel on the two spacecraft touched, at which point a series of spring-loaded latches around the interior of the tunnel would snap into place, locking the two spacecraft together in what was called "hard dock". Then the two docked spacecraft would have the tunnel filled with air via controls inside the CM, until the pressure equalized between the tunnel and the CM cabin, which meant equal air pressure on both sides of the CM upper hatch into the tunnel. The hatch would then be opened from inside the CM, exposing the base of the probe mechanism, which was attached to the walls of the tunnel with three clamps. The probe was unlatched and retracted, and then folded up and stowed with the hatch inside the CM storage bay under the seats. The tunnel was now partially open with the docking probe out of the way, and the astronauts would enter the tunnel, release the locks, give the drogue a twist, and remove the drogue cone from the docking tunnel, which exposed the LM's top hatch. A pressure equalization valve on the hatch would be opened to equalize the air pressure between the CM, the tunnel, and the LM cabin, and allow the LM top hatch to be opened from the tunnel side. This completed the docking procedures and allowed access from the CM to the LM. Before the LM undocked to go down to the Moon, the same procedure was reversed-- the LM astronauts transferred over to the LM, and they installed the drogue in their side of the tunnel at the top of the LM. The CM pilot installed the probe in the tunnel on the Command Module side of the tunnel, and locked it in place. The LM had its hatch closed, and the CMP installed the hatch on the CM, the tunnel was depressurized (air bled out into space) and checked for leaks of the CM and LM hatches, once they were verified to have good seals, the hard dock latches would retract and the two vehicles would separate. When they docked again after the lunar landing, the same procedure would occur to achieve soft dock, hard dock, tunnel pressurization, seal verification between the two spacecraft, then open the hatches on both the LM and CSM, and remove the probe and drogue to clear the tunnel, transfer cargo and crew from the LM for the final time, then close up the hatches for the last time, depressurize the tunnel to remove the load (compressed air in the tunnel pushing against the hatches and walls, pulling against the hard dock latches) from the hard dock latches, then the hard dock latches were retracted, separating the LM for the last time. The CM and LM would then maneuver apart, with the LM later commanded to crash into the Moon or left in a decaying orbit (though the Apollo 10 LM is still drifting along Earth's orbit behind Earth in a permanent (we think) solar orbit, where it's been since early '69...) The CSM then returned to Earth, with its probe stowed in the lower equipment bay, since it was no longer needed with nothing left to dock to, and where it would be safely out of the way of the parachute risers when the chutes deployed after reentry... On Apollo 14, (IIRC) they nearly had to scrub the mission because for whatever reason, the three spring-loaded latches on the tip of the probe would NOT latch into the hole of the drogue in the LM to create the capture and soft dock, which is of course necessary to be able to lock the two spacecraft together for the probe to "retract" and pull them together in the proper alignment for the tunnel latches to be locked in to create "hard dock". They attempted several times and were running low on docking fuel, Mission Control finally told them to "ram it in" more or less and hit the LM drogue more forcefully, which dislodged whatever bit of dirt of whatever that was keeping the latches from snapping out into the hole of the drogue, which allowed them to snap out and lock the two spacecraft together so they could retract and "hard dock" the two vehicles. Had this NOT worked, the CSM would have eventually used up all allocated docking propellant, and would have had to abort the LM docking and extraction from the S-IVB, and simply either conducted a lunar-orbit only mission, or abort the mission entirely and return to Earth... either through the free-return trajectory or by direct abort. Once docked, the crew removed the probe and inspected it closely, and found only a bit of dirt or something that they thought was keeping the latches from working properly... of course it worked properly for their return from the Moon, as they figured it would. Had it failed a second time, the crew COULD have transferred back to the CSM in their suits via EVA between the two spacecraft flying in close formation... which is how the Soviets planned to retrieve their single moonwalker from their lunar lander after his mission-- they couldn't spare the weight of a pressurized or reusable docking tunnel system and probe-n-drogue, so they basically topped their LM with a "dart board" and the top of their lunar Soyuz would have had essentially a spear or harpoon sticking out the top, which when the two spacecraft were brought together would spear through the "dartboard" on the LK lunar lander, "locking" the two vehicles together in close proximity-- the cosmonaut would then open his side hatch of the LK lander, climb out into open space with his box of rocks, film, and cameras, and then spacewalk over to the awaiting "lunar Soyuz" using handholds, meet his fellow cosmonaut from the Soyuz at its open hatch, transfer the payload inside, and then enter the lunar Soyuz and close the hatch. The LK lander would then be discarded with explosive bolts on the spear or harpoon that would jettison it and the LK lander so they could depart lunar orbit for Earth. Their lunar spacecraft would remain attached to the rocket stage for the trip to the Moon until it was in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO) and then one of the two cosmonauts aboard would transfer via spacewalk down the length of the "lunar Soyuz" into the LK lander, opening its single side hatch from outside. He would then descend alone to the lunar surface, while his crewmate remained in lunar orbit in the spacecraft "mother ship". Later! OL J R :)

@Mr Sunshines hahaha you clearly don't know how complicated spacecraft is.

Your welcome! Thank you for your kind words

I can't imagine what it would be like, to be so gullable that I'd believe such total hogwash, the way 98% of the world does. There are at least 100 provable facts that no human has ever set foot on the moon. It's the biggest lie ever told, and most people have no idea. What a sad reality. Just look into it, even a slight look shows the evidence is everywhere, that it never happened.

Jeez. That video has been debunked to death. It's full of outright lies. Siebrel edited actual footage to try to make his claims seem true.

@Oiled Up And Ready ! give it up. You guys have had 50 years to come up with evidence, and to this day, that ridiculous siebrel video is the thing I hear about most from hoaxers. It takes just a little research to prove he made up his claims. It just goes to show how easily duped you guys are. I dont even really care about NASA. I just like watching conspiracy nuts make fools of themselves. I bet the moon landing isnt the only conspiracy you believe in. Paid mass shills? Ha. You are sad.

@Oiled Up And Ready ! if theres so much evidence against the moon landings, then why are you defending an obvious fraud video. Shouldn't you be against people like siebrel for making up false claims.

@Oiled Up And Ready ! no its not. That footage was available to the public. Siebrel just found it and edited it to fit his claims. Theres no insert in the window. He just stopped the footage before they turned the lights back on. And he used audio from different footage. It didn't even look like the earth would look from low earth orbit anyway. So it was already a stupid claim.

ziki ardani “One big step for mankind”

@@Chuked "one giant leap for mankind"*

@@Chuked damn you got it so wrong

HUSTON TRANQUILIZER HIRE THE EAGLE HAS LANDED

@@foreverbooked2964 "That's one small step for a man... one giant leap for mankind." Anyone who says otherwise doesn't quite know their stuff. Not to mention before he said that he was talking about "how the moon dust adheres to the sides and soles of my boot like powdered charcoal," so One Small Step is obviously not even the first thing he said.

Thank you!

@Oiled Up And Ready ! So you are one of those morons... All your data is based on guys without any real knowledge of rocket engineering, but you believe them. Funny.

Oiled Up And Ready ! They used magnetic tapes hence how it survived

@Oiled Up And Ready ! Haha... Rocket engineering is one career that you can study. Let us know when the teacher say "we have something to tell you that you can't share with anybody".

@Oiled Up And Ready ! Poor little boy! You need to deny the entire reality to feel yourself special. Have you ever try by getting into an university? Perhaps you'll find a nice way to train your brain, instead believing scummers.

@Oiled Up And Ready ! So, where did you got your knowledge?

Thank you! More animations coming soon

They were all very happy to do that job, in fact most of them asked for the job. Not only was in an important part of the whole mission, requiring very skilled pilots (they had to be able to work alone, including potentially flying down to "collect" the LM if it could take off but not get into a high enough orbit, or back to earth on their own if there was a problem with the LM that stranded them on the moon), but it also put them on rotation to command a later mission. As it was though, the Apollo program was cancelled before any of the CMs from the moon landing missions got a command (Collins could have, most likely on Apollo 17 but chose not to). Jim Lovel (Apollo 8 CMP), Dave Scott (Apollo 9 CMP) and John Young (Apollo 10 CMP) all did command later missions and walk on the moon. Ken Mattingly (Apollo 13 CMP, put back to 16 due to German Measles risk) went on to command two Space Shuttle missions.

😁

How do you like 1.5

Its nice

I know the reference but i wouldnt tell the game

@@aawqaq620 XD

@@Raiii.. when you can't stop the fast timer so you miss it

Nothing a trusty slide rule can't handle!

Lots, and big ground based mainframes.

If you are interested in the Apollo guidance computer watch this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xx7Lfh5SKUQ.html

@@ruthlesslyuninfluencedbyin2525 If you are interested in the Apollo guidance computer watch this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xx7Lfh5SKUQ.html

Which was it's advantage. A cell phone computer is vastly superior to the Apollo, but the Apollo computer was built for one task which rendered it almost crash proof.

John-Del and the lack of complexity also made it less prone to radiation damage. That’s why spacecraft guidance computers today still use computers from at least 20 years ago.

Yes, it certainly was pretty complicated. It really is quite amazing how much was accomplished in such a short period of time. In a few short years the USA went from relatively small and simple rockets that had launch failure rates as high as 40% to the Saturn V with a 100% successful launch rate. Pretty amazing considering it was the most complicated machine at the time to be successfully launched. Even the Saturn 1’s & 1B’s had 100% successful launches even though the people involved with designing them expected half to fail. Gives you some idea about the caliber of the people involved with the whole program.

@@mako88sb I don't need your comment