Nova C (IM-1) Lands on the Moon 

Yaaaay!

Fantastic

What soundstage is NASA using to set this landing up in?

@@merkridge8780 the moon. They built it back in the 60's

wow images.... meanwhile my iphone can transmit crystal clear video. they couldn't sacrifice 22 grams for a video device? what an absolute joke. im literally angry.,

I'd like to see the actual footage of the craft approaching and landing on the moon instead of all the cgi we get.

Agreed.

NASA Never A Straight Answer

I’ve read a camera was dropped to film this landing, but it does not stream. All video needs to be downloaded. Remember spacex streams are just a handful of miles above us. The moon is VERY far away.

This lander did the same. Hopefully we'll get photos from it soon. - Das

@@NASASpaceflight We have communications! Lander is upright and sending data!

SpaceX has never sent real time 4K video from the Moon. They have ships/cameras with tons of power either in the atmosphere or LEO. This is a whole different situation.

Why satelites will be put in moons orbits to send data from the moon it'll happen then maybe we'll get Live moon streams solar panels to run cams etc sunny side not the darkside Luke oh no

inedeed I'm so excited!

I concur. I'm surprised that I felt emotional with the successful announcement so I guess it takes us back hey? I wasn't expecting to feel anything being an unmanned mission. I was in grade 3 for Apollo 11 and still remember it. From a small town Rockhampton, Australia sometime after the launch looking up I excitedly said to my teacher I think I saw the rocket trail, likely a high jet vapour trail, hahaha. I got to see up close the Command Capsule later when it toured Australia. Ultimately became a Mechanical Engineer perhaps as a result of the USA Apollo program.

Wow! Big feet! 😳

Nah, we have moon skeptics because we have idiots. Also, because it is very expensive & all the Engineering knowledge largely retired/dead and has to be relearnt etc etc.

​@@iRosscoit's mostly the idiots.

This thing is four meters tall.

@@iRosscogreat story. Tell it again so the people who haven’t heard it think it’s true. 😂😂😂

There was no actual footage? I was skimming through trying to find the actual landing. Please tell me there is actual footage in this live stream.

@@oscarruiz-pr8rc there isnt, but they should have some footage of it landing which they'll release sometime soon (if everything worked out)

@@uflocblah blah blah. It’s fake

What a freakin eye you have. I'm not sure if that was the ISS though...👽

that shows up multiple times throughout the stream and the iss was not near where that was filmed, i have literally no idea what it could be lol edit: it also requires an insane amount of preparing to capture the iss transiting the moon, you gotta find the right spot and stuff (kinda easy with a website) and the chances of it happening during a 2 hour stream with no preparation is extremely low

The international space station is only approximately 250 miles out from the Earth surface. Low earth orbit is only between 900 and1200 miles.

You're probably right, it might just be a satellite... Still cool though...

@@billywayne902 LEO is anything up to 1200 miles. 250 certainly counts.

its fake, you cant land on moon, its plasma

dude, wake up, its all scripted, you cant land on moon

Landing a craft and “landing with people” are two complete different complex missions.

It is certainly Intuitive Machines' first time.

For intuitive machines,yes...are you aware that it's not NASA but it's a private company.

That's exactly what I was thinking

Or any other Apollo astronauts ?

@@kitt44kt i don't think there are too many other Apollo astronauts.

In one sense, that was easier than today's attempt. We've learned that the men were frantically jockeying the lander to find a safe spot before the fuel ran out. The automated system today was apparently less capable.

Bro,manned missions are easier to land compared to automated ones

​@@MLIOGJXNUYAT exactly..

OH YEEESSSS unfortunally without IA and computers and simulations russian lunakod landed more than 50 years ago. or we have to talk to viking missions or venera missions? everything ols school and with GOOD engineers. @@prakashm1468

in one senso lunakod landed safely more than 50 years ago. is a question of what are modern engineers and what quality job was done without IAb to decide for us. nowadays i see too many faliures, think about it@@MLIOGJXNUYAT

They are not. They only appreciated and gave their blessings.

We do now, yes. They have restored communications.

We need a Starlink network around the moon for high speed internet for all our devices there. Mars too!

Why do you think so? No such instrument is on board, but what do you think its value would have been?

@@odysseusrex5908 Gravity is based on size and expansion not mass and attraction. The moon’s surface gravity should be @1/4 the earth’s- size based- yet the near side is @1/6th, so to get the 1/4 average the far side surface gravity measurement would be 1/3rd earth ‘s “g”. With variations at all different locations. The Chinese far side lander/craft surface measurement would be very useful/ important. Someone might/ would know: beyond my ability to find out. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics and CAUSE of gravity.

it's as if NASA is working following this Bill Casey Quote from 1981: "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." gets kinda sus i'd say... 🤔

Try listening...South Pole

joking for water at the bottom of craters.

It has to be relayed through the lander. A tiny probe like that cannot carry a big enough antenna to send an intelligible signal all the way back to Earth. Even relaying through the lander would not have been instantaneous in nominal conditions, as it is, the lander is on its side and communications are compromised.

@@odysseusrex5908 Don't be silly mate! They did it live back in 1969, supposedly! We got to see more back then than we did 55 years later! Laughable really, isn't it!🤣🤣🤣🤣🙄

@@boltingskyline5234 You didn't even understand what I said, you haven't got any idea of the difference in the equipment this lander is using vs what Apollo used, and you also don't know that, ultimately, they decided not to deploy Eagle Cam for reasons related to the LIDAR failure.

India did stream a low frame rate video from their landing, so it is certainly doable, but not necessarily inexpensive. US companies that participate in this commercial moon lander program charge their customers in the neighborhood of $1M per kilogram of mass delivered to the Moon. And that is without any real-time data being sent to Earth. So if you want to add your own camera with your own transmitter, antenna and support systems, then with all the required permits and integration work it will cost at least in the multiple millions of dollars. Still worth it, I think, but unfortunately these companies operate on a very tight budget. NASA pays only half of their cost, and they have to get the rest from the investors and other customers.

Weird thing is my friend built one of the cameras on this thing. From what he was told, they were supposed to drop a cube sat (basically although it would land) prior to the lander. The cube sat had cameras on all its sides so it should have captured something. Although maybe they couldn't show it live. Hopefully that did happen and we'll get pics. Although I didn't hear it talked about at all

@@g-urts5518 Is that the Eagle camera they did talk about?

lol

At 1:23:16 it looks like someone is running towards the lander from top right. What is it? Try playing at .25x .... Only plays for about 3 seconds total and screen goes blank

​@@robertamann9066 the shadow?

@@robertamann9066 The computer simulation included a shadow of the lander.

I am thinking pile of rubble.

Чему вас в школе учили?! Хаббл может рассмотреть на Луне только объекты больше 60 метров (200 футов), да и то в виде отдельной точки!

Hubble's resolution of the moon's surface is about 50m. Anything smaller than that is impossible to see due to the size of the telescope's mirror.

No way to bright for a super scope

​@@markheller8646that's not the likely reason as could view during lunar night. Reason is above

So are you doing anything comparable to what they do? It's fine to criticize, but not in a condescending way. Do better

​@@The_1ntern3t he looks more sensible by inquiring about the wellbeing of that poor mouse than you, being all rude and condescending like an '80s proverbial bureaucrat. mice have the right to go into space but not in those conditions and not without space adapted mice PPE. 🙄

@@The_1ntern3t I invented the pan tilt zoom surveillance system Back in the eighties. Gov't stole the rights and gave to lucent tech pat. filed before theirs Forss 1.

@kittytrail Space adapted mice MPE (M for mouse, of course 😁) should be mandatory. Totally agree!

@@karlstruhs3530 Can't help you with that, sorry. However, "pan tilt zoom" is literally moving a camera around. I'm not sure you can patent that

Insufficient bandwidth for streaming from 250,000 miles away. The lander with the cameras wasn't transmitting those pics itself, they were relayed through the lander. The lander, as is now known, hit a rock and tipped over. It's antennas are not in an optimal configuration for data transmission. Transmission is going to be slow. Even if it had landed upright though, it was still not capable of giving instant imagery.

In a few years, in a few years.

@@odysseusrex5908it’s been over 50. Stop just stop

@@godswill2260 I just realized i misread the OP. I thought it said, "Put humans back on the Moon." Anyway, what do you mean stop? The next manned landing should be by 2028. Far, far too late, but that is politics for you, and better late than never.

It's the Parkes Radio telescope in my book. Aborigines had nothing to do with it.

@@aldunlop4622 Always have been, the new csiro administration is following the line of putting native lables on landmarks.

More Woke bullshit@@bils6434

@@aldunlop4622 Yeah, but I love the scene in *The Right Stuff* where the Aborigines are sitting around their campfire outside the dish while John Glenn flies overhead.

Yeah, cos that's how we talked to people on the Moon, using secret mumbo jumbo.@@odysseusrex5908

Nonsense, it is literally impossible to get Live feed from Mars.

Keep your shirt on, they'll come.

They haven’t created them yet.

@@godswill2260 +1

They have to edit them to remove the aliens.

@@daveanderson4778 lol funny but wouldn’t be surprised. Lots of editing on google earth too! ✝️

it's the inflation. thanks to Putin of course. _of course._ 🤡🌝

Because it's a total NASA scam

Unless the payload comes out,I doubt it's possible. The lander is tilted. That is almost 70% problematic.

I think the technology was better in the sixties

This is not a NASA mission but a private company.

Well Artemis 1 streamed the whole mission...

Where you land in terms of being visible to earth and your position on the landing site make a difference to how your antennas work, and an uncrewed lander has fewer onboard troubleshooting options than when some can poke at things in person.

No

No, you do not understand the limited budget this project is operating on. Aside from the fact tat there was some kind of comm interruption just after landing, apparently fixed now, this lander has very low bandwidth.

@@odysseusrex590850 years later and we have cheaper and more unreliable tech. I smell bs

10.

12 men in total. No women yet. Maybe one day soon. The first was 1969, the last was in 1972.

@@ChristLink-Channeland yet no other country has gone despite major advancements. I call bs

Umm.. they did have live TV feed from the Apollo moon landing. I watched it, libe on TV when I was a kid. Not months later: live. Also, Apollo 1 never went to the moon: it never even left Earth! It burned on the launch pad, killing three astronauts.

Apollo 1 was a typo. Wrong, they did NOT have live feed of the landing. They deployed the television camera AFTER landing and sent live feed of Armstrong walking down the ladder. The landing footage was on film and processed back on Earth.@@ChristLink-Channel

@@ChristLink-Channelyou watched a show on tv. Proves nothing other than you believed it happened. And yet 50 years later , advanced tech and nobody has repeated it. C’mon man. People are so gullible

You seem to be missing the point. The original claim here was that there was no live transmission, only film that was processed and shown months latet. That is not correct, as I pointed out. The live transmission did, in fact, happen, in real time, not months later. The film cameras used by the astronauts were not movie cameras either: they were only still cameras. The film was brought back and the still images were widely published at the time, but the cameras theselves were left on the moon, to save weight.

No, you're missing the point. My comment was about people saying "we had live feed of the Apollo 11 landing in real time, so why not now", and as I have said repeatedly, there was no live feed of the landing. There WAS live feed of Armstrong coming down the LEM, after the landing, when the tv camera was deployed. There are images most us have seen of the landing, dust coming up etc, but that was NOT live, it was filmed and developed after the crew returned to Earth. Dunno why that's so hard to understand.@@ChristLink-Channel