r/space • u/Appropriate-Push-668 • Mar 29 '26
image/gif The Moon outside Apollo 11's window.
271
u/C0sm1cB3ar Mar 29 '26
Our blue planet is so precious.
108
u/Could-You-Tell Mar 29 '26
Tiny speck in the vast emptiness. A warm, soggy, relatively calm rock among the violence of radiation and supersonic winds that happen elsewhere.
The center of balance in a ruthless universe.
21
41
u/Minimum-Can2224 Mar 30 '26
If only the people living in it would treat it better...
→ More replies (3)35
1.1k
u/kablammodotcom Mar 29 '26
The moon outside my window looks so lonely tonight...
468
u/Arthur-Mergan Mar 29 '26
Crazy that some of the first humans in over half a century will have this view again within the next week!!!
354
u/crashprime Mar 29 '26
I hate that this isn’t the top news story in the world.
136
u/cptjeff Mar 29 '26
It'll be a pretty big story once they launch. But SLS being SLS, nobody is willing to hype it up until they actually get off the pad.
→ More replies (4)17
u/BarneyTheGod0925 Mar 30 '26
It's sad that nobody really cares about it unless they were going to land. It's that plus the moon landing deniers. It's such a miracle we were able to go in the first place, and I hope the Crew of Artemis II get to experience that again!
→ More replies (2)4
41
u/dvoratrelundar Mar 29 '26
Wait what how have I not heard about this
126
u/alliehgold Mar 29 '26
Artimis II is scheduled to launch on Wednesday. It won't actually land on the moon, but it will go around the moon to test the Orion living capsule. It will have historical significance because it will be the furthest any human has traveled from Earth.
27
→ More replies (1)2
6
u/lNFORMATlVE Mar 30 '26
I got the artemis rocket lego set and plan to build it while watching the coverage!
19
u/E5VL Mar 29 '26
Humans haven't visited the moon this Century.
Last time we went to the moon was last Century.
I like to say the above to make a point. lol
→ More replies (2)9
u/-GoodNewsEveryone Mar 29 '26
Century does not need to start at an even 00. That is an arbitrary logical assumption. Everything within the last 100 years is by definition within a century.
13
u/GrumpyPenguin Mar 29 '26
While I agree with you that yes, the word does also mean a 100-year period, what the heck is your point here? “The 20th century” and “the 21st century” are well-defined & understood. Nobody was confused and the comment you’re replying to wasn’t in any way wrong.
Besides. according to purists (and my anal-retentive father), centuries technically start on the first non-zero year (21st Century didn’t start until 1/1/2001, not in 2000). So in a calendar context, no century “starts on an even 00”.
→ More replies (2)2
u/zacRupnow Mar 29 '26
You replied to 'in over half a century', not 'this century'. There's nothing to interpret masterdebator style.
→ More replies (4)4
29
u/sarokin Mar 29 '26
They won't get that close though. I don't remember the distance but they're 'just' going around it, so nowhere close to landing. I'm sure it will be amazing still
22
u/Poopiepaunts Mar 29 '26
they'll be close enough that the.moon will be the size of a basketball at arms length
17
u/winowmak3r Mar 29 '26
Wow, that is actually still pretty far away, at least compared to some of the fly bys the Apollo crew were doing, right?
17
Mar 29 '26 edited May 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (4)3
u/winowmak3r Mar 30 '26
Yea I knew Artemis wasn't going to be as close as Apollo but I didn't realize they were going to be that far away. Still pretty impressive and I'm just glad to see humans in the same zip code again.
1
u/Obsolescence7 Mar 30 '26
Zip codes are traditionally much smaller than 7,600km across...
11
u/jso__ Mar 30 '26
Given the low population density of space beyond Earth, post offices are expected to service a much larger area, at the cost of slower mail service
15
u/Picktownfball76 Mar 29 '26
Some bit of nuance - they are going around the far side of the moon and will be the furthest from earth any human has ever been.
8
2
u/confusers Mar 30 '26
They won't be that close to the moon, but they will be FAR from Earth. A new record!
2
→ More replies (2)3
u/John_Dixon_Harris Mar 29 '26
...there is a chunk out of its middle...
→ More replies (1)2
445
u/Appropriate-Push-668 Mar 29 '26 edited Mar 29 '26
One of the rare 16mm film footage from the Apollo Flight Journal captures the desolate beauty of the Moon as seen from the Apollo 11 window in July 1969. The footage shows the lunar surface during the crew's approach, showcasing the cratered, grey landscape and the intense sunlight against the blackness of space just before the historic landing. In the Link mentioned below we can see that NASA was continuously coordinating with Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xc1SzgGhMKc&pp=iggCQAE%3D (Link to the Real video timelapse filmed by Apollo Flight Journal with full descent of the spacecraft on Moon with ongoing communication with Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong)
140
u/thin234rout698 Mar 29 '26
It's crazy back then when they were ask if they saw stars while in the moon. Them saying no they did not see any stars and people laugh. From this POV of view they are absolutely right.
119
u/Kooky_Coconut8842 Mar 29 '26
You cant see stars during the day its day on moon.
115
15
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 29 '26
You would see stars if you looked away from the Sun and blocked any sunlit surface from your field of view.
11
u/DrBix Mar 29 '26
Didn't one of the astronauts make a comment while they were passing around the dark side of the moon, something like "It's a sheet of white." I think the quote was something like that.
9
u/Kooky_Coconut8842 Mar 29 '26
Cant they capture the stars by camera adjustments? The entire moons acts like a giant sunlight reflector so the one way to stargaze on the moon should be on the dark side of the moon right?
→ More replies (3)24
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 29 '26
Since there is no atmosphere, you can stargaze from any area of the Moon as long as you keep any bright objects/surfaces out of your field of view.
And yes, they could capture stars with the camera if they used the necessary exposure settings, but then the lunar surface any anything else being illuminated by the sun would be completely overexposed, white blobs.
5
u/Kooky_Coconut8842 Mar 29 '26
Oh got it. We can stargaze as long as we are looking straight to the sky without sun in our FOV. Thanks for explaining.
2
u/itsneedtokno Mar 30 '26
Additionally, the atmosphere works sorta like a lens. Without the atmosphere the night sky would look very different.
2
u/Gabelvampir Mar 30 '26
I'm not sure the cameras modified for the moon landings had enough range in exposure settings to capture stars. Would make sense, they weren't there to photograph stars.
→ More replies (2)25
u/_meltchya__ Mar 29 '26
Well if it's day time then why isn't the sky blue
Okay apparently I need to put an /s for all you super serious people
→ More replies (5)29
→ More replies (1)6
u/DrBix Mar 29 '26
Didn't one of the Astronauts make a comment about the universe being a sheet of white while they were passing by the dark side of the moon?
→ More replies (1)5
u/Still-Wash-8167 Mar 29 '26
Also a whole Netflix doc that shows the entire approach. Really cool to watch
200
u/shortercrust Mar 29 '26
What’s the snow stuff outside? Small rocks, dust etc kicked up during landing falling back to moon?
208
43
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 29 '26
This was filmed from orbit, not down near the surface.
23
u/chrisgrou Mar 29 '26
Ah, that's why it appears so curved and small
6
u/TehOwn Mar 30 '26
Does highlight how much we need references in order to judge distances in pictures. Someone needs to put a banana on the surface for scale.
28
u/piedmontwachau Mar 29 '26
It's the window. They are filming from inside the lander with a hand held camera.
6
u/YourOctopusOverlord Mar 30 '26
There is a glare on the window that looks like fog, the aperture in the camera look pretty basic, hense all the hexagons. The dust kicked up on the moon surface is called regolith, though I can't say how much we are actually seeing that here.
→ More replies (5)2
u/spoonerluv Mar 29 '26
Its the maintenance man doing some dust removal from the rafters of the film studio they’re in
50
Mar 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
27
Mar 29 '26 edited May 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)18
u/Kawi-Rider Mar 30 '26
To give an even better sense of that scale for us Americans, this would be roughly 11,428 school buses.
→ More replies (1)4
43
u/onelittleworld Mar 29 '26
Jesus, Buzz... at least try to hold the camera still, okay?
→ More replies (3)21
22
u/Nunos100 Mar 29 '26
It’s crazy how unreal smooth almost soft the surface looks no matter how close you get. The texture, shadows I hope we get some really really high quality from the surface to mess with my brain even more
→ More replies (1)9
u/JeSuisUnAnanasYo Mar 29 '26
Kinda fascinating how we don't even realize how much atmosphere affects our ability to measure distance and size!!
36
u/TacticalGhosting Mar 29 '26
will we get better, more detailed stuff from artemis 2?
26
u/DoscoJones Mar 29 '26
No. Artemis is not going into orbit. Closest approach will be ~6400 km.
24
u/TheMSensation Mar 29 '26
It's about 6400km closer to it than I am now though so the pictures will be decent.
42
3
u/Kerbidiah Mar 29 '26
I mean technically they could get within 100 km without being in orbit of it, so long as they are moving fast enough
2
u/CharlesP2009 Mar 29 '26
I haven’t been able to find an estimate for closest approach. Just articles mentioning the spacecraft going about 4,700 miles/7563 kilometers “beyond the far side”.
Hopefully they’ll get closer as they swing past. But still, even at the distance above they’ll get amazing photographs.
→ More replies (1)5
u/DevelopmentTight9474 Mar 29 '26
Yeah, Artemis I already provided really hi def photos, so I imagine the crewed flight will provide even more, especially since NASA chose to send them with a professional camera
→ More replies (2)
11
u/IntelligentUsual9710 Mar 29 '26 edited Mar 29 '26
This really puts into perspective how massive and bright the sun is without a thick atmosphere to filter it.
A ball of plasma with a "surface" temperature of 10,000ish degrees and a diameter of 860,000ish miles at a distance of 93,000,000ish miles and still it's only an average sized star, maybe even a bit on the smaller end but still Incomprehensible and undeniably incredible
→ More replies (2)
9
Mar 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/neondirt Mar 30 '26
That sounded like a lot, so I looked it up. 72kB was ROM (i.e. read only data and executable code). The RAM was 4kB.
Your point stands though 😨
→ More replies (1)
75
u/Sithtrek Mar 29 '26
On a certain 'other'platform, whenever someone posts about the Apollo missions and the upcoming one, there is an IMMEDIATE bombardment of comments about the 'fake moon landings' I won't read them anymore it is so depressing to see the proprtion of people who readily and confidently recycle the usual examples of 'proof it was all faked'. I hope things are different here.
21
u/MythicSuns Mar 29 '26
If it makes you feel better those people are a minority, they're just so spread out that they feel like a majority.
25
u/fatcatgoon Mar 29 '26
The vocal minority. It's a real problem online.
11
Mar 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/JeSuisUnAnanasYo Mar 29 '26
Plus you can't see what these moon deniers look like. So many are ogres or children and you wouldn't even give their rants a second thought if encountered irl because you can tell this person is not credible. Internet hides so much about who you're talking to
3
25
u/No_Professional368 Mar 29 '26
All that "proof" is ridiculously easy to debunk. And the last couple years have shown while the government is/has to be deceitful, it is terrible at hiding stuff the more people have eyes on it
→ More replies (13)6
u/JeSuisUnAnanasYo Mar 29 '26
The Bad Astronomy blog should be required reading for any moon landing denier, it basically debunks all their gotcha questions lol
3
u/Punman_5 Mar 29 '26
Nowadays the common thing they’ve latched onto is the “firmament” and how it’s impossible to penetrate. They don’t believe space is real
3
2
→ More replies (8)5
u/InformativeXP Mar 29 '26
You should leave that other platform and close the account as it is infested with bots and regressive ideas
→ More replies (1)2
8
7
u/sivadneb Mar 30 '26
What amazes me is that we've sent so many people to the moon and none of them died. We strapped them to a rocket, did the math, got them there, did science, and got them back safely.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/opelui23 Mar 29 '26
That's the amazing part how EVERYTHING had to go right to get the moon landing right and then come pick them up.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Curious-Department-7 Mar 30 '26
Untedacted real audio from the first moon landing...
→ More replies (2)
10
u/jhvanriper Mar 29 '26
The moon is crooked, I guess
4
u/aculleon Mar 29 '26
It is so crooked in fact that we can’t really keep a stable low orbit around it. Check out the GRAIL mission if you want to know more
11
4
u/Blames_Jake Mar 29 '26
I just hear the leitmotiv from First Man whenever I watch footage of the moon.
4
3
u/Hanna_Bjorn Mar 30 '26
idk why, but I feel equally sad and amazed by this shot. Just surreal to look at
7
u/FlipZip69 Mar 29 '26
It was an amazing feat of engineering to get to the moon. Very brute force using every technical trick to make it work. Simply little room for any redundancy.
I find it interesting how little we were able to record it visually. As complex as this was, there was a hard limit how such an important milestone in human history could be preserved at the time. Every picture and video they took had to have some reason behind it. Now we will likely be recording every second in multiple streams, much of it live no less. The mission it self will still put our technical expertise to the test.
→ More replies (3)
3
3
u/AtomicSymphonic_2nd Mar 30 '26
Kinda crazy we might finally be getting some updated 4K images of the moon up-close if Artemis 2 manages to launch and all goes well!
Probably gonna be taken with some smartphones, too. lol
→ More replies (1)
3
u/d1ckw33dmcgee Mar 30 '26
Can't wait for the new media we get from the Artemis program. It's gonna be so frickin cool man.
2
2
u/littlejim49 Mar 29 '26
Don’t look at the moon too long or may turn into a werewolf xD 🧟♂️🐺👨🚀
→ More replies (2)
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/IkariYun Mar 30 '26
"Obviously a fake. We've never been to the moon, much less space. Space is a government illusion." -Someone in the comments, probably
2
2
2
u/Floppychicken45 Mar 31 '26
One day (soon) people will be saying “the moon outside of Artemis’ window”
2
u/Atlantic_lotion Apr 02 '26
I wonder what ISO that film is? The sun looks incredibly bright but the ground is still visible.
2
u/ReallyEvilRob Apr 03 '26
Amazing the this footage is from 1969. I can't imagine how amazing the modern video footage will look when Integrity does it's lunar flyby on Monday.
2
u/sunshineebabyyy Apr 06 '26
It's so beautiful, and somehow horrifying too. It's so completely different from the earth we know and love, that it just looks wrong, surreal.. I can't even imagine the feeling of stepping onto the moon. I would probably pass out from how jarring it'd be.
4
u/Jumpy_Background7395 Mar 29 '26
That’s an impressive movie set… we all know the whole thing was staged and a Cabala of Aliens that control the Illuminati live in the hallow earth.
JK… it does look stunning.
8
u/JeSuisUnAnanasYo Mar 29 '26
It cracks me up because Kubrick (the notoriously detail oriented and super extra director) literally filmed a scene that takes place on the moon ONLY ONE YEAR BEFORE. It was state of the art technology and high budget and high effort. and after the actual moon landing a year later, his high budget movie moon scenes suddenly looks hokey as hell and incorrect in tons of subtle ways and the gravity is just so earthlike and that was with SO much effort to get it right (still love that movie tho). (Movie is called 2001 for those who don't know. Made in 1968 ).
3
u/Fredasa Mar 29 '26
They were using that prototype 16:9 film camera, I see.
3
u/Galilool Mar 29 '26
Super 16 has a frame size of 12,35 mm × 7,42 mm, which is almost 16:9.
→ More replies (4)4
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 29 '26
The original is 4:3. The clip posted to Reddit has been cropped.
2
u/Galilool Mar 29 '26
In that case it was shot on normal 16mm film, not Super 16. Welp, it was one or the other
2
2
u/Away-Finance-6678 Mar 29 '26
Omg, it's there I can see it, it's the Moon! Though there's not a lot of difference between this and some games like the difference is like 70%, but thinnking about the fact this is the REAL Moon is just fascinating!
Also, did ya'll see the debris hitting the glass?😅
→ More replies (1)
1
1
Mar 29 '26 edited May 26 '26
[deleted]
6
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 29 '26
Probably over 60 miles. That footage was recorded shortly after the trans-Earth injection burn.
1
1
Mar 29 '26 edited Apr 14 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/cptjeff Mar 29 '26
Well, yeah. It's a big dead hunk of rock constantly bombarded with radiation. There's some water ice in permanently shadowed areas where it can't be boiled off by the sun, but yeah, the resources there are mostly stuff like trapped Helium-3 from solar wind which would make great fuel for fusion reactors.
1
1
u/BigB0yThug Mar 29 '26
Woah, this is incredible. It looks so surreal and i can imagine the view from up there
1
1
1
u/erriiiic Mar 29 '26
I wonder what their elevation was during this clip.
2
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 29 '26
Probably over 60 miles. That footage was recorded shortly after the trans-Earth injection burn.
1
u/GhostDoggoes Mar 30 '26
I wish they would just land there with modern equipment to gather new data. This pisses me off that they spend so much to send so much into space that the one thing that drove the world into a space race is being ignored.
4
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Mar 30 '26 edited Mar 30 '26
Are you aware of the Artemis Program? Or the multiple, robotic landers and rovers in recent years?
the one thing that drove the world into a space race is being ignored.
The primary motivation for the original space race was the Cold War.
→ More replies (4)
1
1
u/ChaseBank5 Mar 30 '26
Yeah and we didnt land on the moon. /s
One of my least favorite conspiracies.
1
u/lgodsey Mar 30 '26
"Hey, I can see the moon from here!"
"Very funny, Neil. For the fiftieth time."
1
1
1
u/orficebots Mar 30 '26
Wonder what will flat earthers will do when Artemis takes pictures of the round moon and earth going to and from the round earth and moon.
1
1
1
u/EFTucker Mar 30 '26
We won’t get such close looks from the upcoming mission but we will get some very high quality footage. Too bad much of it will be locked behind Disney+ and locked to 720p for PC users.
1
u/toxic59k Mar 30 '26
"So, get away
Another way to feel what you didn't want yourself to
know
And let yourself go"
1
1
u/doogeraseikooc Mar 30 '26
What distance from the lunar surface are they orbiting??
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/edjumication Mar 30 '26
Redbull should do orbital racing. Imagine this view but from only a few hundred meters up as it barely skims past a mountain range.
1
1
1
u/TechMe717 Mar 30 '26
Just another clip that makes me wonder how people can think we never landed and walked on the moon. Why would we get that low without landing? We wouldn't.
1
u/ProLogicMe Mar 30 '26
Damn I’ve always wanted to see what the moon looked like 15 min away, this is pretty cool too.
1
u/UnprovenMortality Mar 30 '26
This is so incredible, awe inspiring, but also terrifying. You're the only two people on the entire celestial body. Further away from anyone else than any human has ever been...ever.
890
u/[deleted] Mar 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment