Apollo 11 Launch at 500 Frames per Second

  • Michael Zhang · Apr 26, 2010
 

This amazing video by Spacecraft Films shows the July 16, 1969 launch of the Apollo 11 mission that landed the first humans on the moon. The camera was rolling at a whopping 500 frames per second, allowing the first 30 seconds of the launch to be slowed down into this 8-minute narrated video of pure awesomeness.

(via Boing Boing)

 

Related Posts

 
«
»
 
Newer Comments →

  • Pingback: Apollo 11 Launch at 500 Frames per Second | Klippt o klistrat

  • benkoshkin

    Utterly amazing.

    Ben Koshkin

  • Sam

    Just a shame they never made it to the moon.

  • http://twitter.com/rawrburger Kadija Hughes

    Amazing

  • bob

    This is for Sam's message above..saying that they never made it to the moon…well where did the moon rocks come from ??? What's more these moon rocks were loaned out to scientists in dozens of countries to be examined. Moon rocks are different then any found here on earth. To say we never went to the moon is hogwash.

  • jarofberts

    Apollo 11 did make it to the moon. Apollo 13 was the one that was supposed to and didn't.

  • jarofberts

    Apollo 11 did make it to the moon. Apollo 13 was the one that was supposed to and didn't.

  • Sam
  • rofl

    lol, Sam. Conspiracy theorists crack me up :)

    Great video.

  • Pingback: Deadly Computer Blog » Saturn V launch at 500fps

  • David

    i still can't believe how many of these these moon hoax conspiracy nuts there are – “THE MOON IS A HOAX, IT'S A PICTURE THAT NASA PUTS UP AT NIGHT AND MOVES ACROSS THE SKY”

    i'd be waaaaay more impressed with NASA if they managed to fake it and fool the tens of thousands of scientists and engineers who were actually building Apollo, testing it, and making sure it would actually work. much easier to just actually land on the moon.

  • loveloveloove

    so one peice of petrified wood that scientists found proves to you that we've not landed on the moon?!

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Haha. That's one I haven't heard before ;-)

  • Sam

    On the contrary. I think they have been to the moon. I just don't think they went when they said they did.

    There was a race for air superiority during the cold war and America lied to obtain that superiority.

    You should read up (or watch up) on Dr. Bob Bowman, former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the US Air Force and Senior Research Scientist at Lockhead Martin – His insights are fascinating and by his own admission – the technology wasn't there at the time.

  • snowbird2020

    I was not convinced at the time and still carry heavy doubts..why? Strangely odd to me that they've never, ever been able to make it back. Does this fact prove that they have indeed lost something in the translation or does it prove they are not as wise…or is it something we are not getting???? A miracle would convince me.

  • mr pooface

    david, cease communication with others immediately before you make us all dumber. Sam makes a good point with the timeline aspect- ur the one whose nuts if you think that politics and technological innovation are not intricately linked, and did you watch the video before becoming just another shit talker, and a drone for that matter?

  • John

    You bring up some interesting links that I had not seen before. I do not consider myself a conspiracy theorist; however, in science the burden of proof rests on those who make claims. That being said, it means the burden of proof rests on those who claim man went to the moon, not those who say we did not. It is quite a feat to travel to the moon, it is not a feat to stay on Earth.

    Therefore, I am curious. Is there any solidly undeniable proof of man traveling to the moon? I had always heard there were visible remnants left on the surface. Also of note, the mirrors left in order to judge the distance between Earth and the Moon. We still use these mirrors today, and they have been in place since the first landing. Would this not prove we had indeed reached the Moon? I'd like to see if there is a reasonable explanation for these things regarding the hypothesis that we did not reach the Moon with Apollo 11.

    Mirror range finders: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at…

    Visible Traces from Above: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/…

  • John

    You bring up some interesting links that I had not seen before. I do not consider myself a conspiracy theorist; however, in science the burden of proof rests on those who make claims. That being said, it means the burden of proof rests on those who claim man went to the moon, not those who say we did not. It is quite a feat to travel to the moon, it is not a feat to stay on Earth.

    Therefore, I am curious. Is there any solidly undeniable proof of man traveling to the moon? I had always heard there were visible remnants left on the surface. Also of note, the mirrors left in order to judge the distance between Earth and the Moon. We still use these mirrors today, and they have been in place since the first landing. Would this not prove we had indeed reached the Moon? I'd like to see if there is a reasonable explanation for these things regarding the hypothesis that we did not reach the Moon with Apollo 11.

    Mirror range finders: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at…

    Visible Traces from Above: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/…

  • SPP42

    Never made it back? What about the 5 other times man has landed on the moon?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing#Manne…

  • Pomroy

    How likely do any of you find it, that the Russians DID NOT CATCH ON to the Americans not landing on the moon? I'm sure they would've been keeping a very close eye on the Americans, and I find it very hard to believe they wouldn't have known that the American's claim was a lie.

  • Pomroy

    LOL

    owned.

  • Pomroy

    The Russians would've known if it was a hoax, they were directly competing, you don't think they were watching each others every move with regards to the moon race?

  • Pingback: Speechless « Last Chance for Internet

  • moonlander

  • Pingback: Stuff Guys Do – waka waka waka

  • Sam

    The mirrors are an interesting point, but they could have been left there at any time really.

    I think NASA, or possibly MIT, were conducting laser experiments as far back as 1963 which didn't require the use of mirrors – they were more a 'this is the proof of our predictions' experiment.

    It may be a conspiracy that 'they never went to the moon' or whatever due to hearsay and lack of evidence, etc, but NASA have played a big role in this conspiracy as they are very secretive about their space program.

    Ben Rich, CEO of Lockheed Martin said, “We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity….. anything you can imagine we already know how to do.”

    I would highly advise anyone to watch the Disclosure Project: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vyVe-6YdUk

  • Pingback: Let’s go back in time | Blue Pancakes

  • billy

    hahahaha, one thing the moon landing conspiracy theorists, well any conspiracy theory anyway, ceases to understand is that people will naturally desire fame even if they can't attach their name to it, a conspiracy to cover up LSD usage in Vietnam involved less than a hundred people and couldn't be kept a secret, you really think that a conspiracy that would have HAD to have taken thousands to pull off successfully could keep secret under international scrutiny? All it would take is one grip or cameraman to open his mouth and that would be that, instead you get people, once again as you do with every big conspiracy theory, who observe the data after the fact making claims about something they had no first hand experience with and trying their hardest to make a connection with the event when no real one exists. Its OK, Jesse Ventura knows that thermite paint was used to collapse the twin towers and a piece of petrified wood in a museum proves that was a hoax, and obviously since many of the paintings by the worlds best artists have been found to be forgeries proves that Rembrandt and Picasso never really existed doesn't it?

  • John

    We never went back after the Apollo program because of the enormous cost that a mission to the moon requires. It just wasn't worth it to NASA or the government to finance more Moon mission

  • innomen

    I'm leaning towards Sam, I find it far more likely we lied about it to offset the sputnik disaster. But really what does it matter? Obviously we've been since. And we all know the government will lie to us at the drop of a hat anyway. What more is there of significance to learn from this?

    And for the record the scoffing Ad Hominem from the party line supporters actually hurts your argument. If the best you can come up with is slander then your position is made to appear weak. Regardless of how strong it actually is.

    It doesn't make you look superior, or intelligent, it makes you look like a crass toadie.

  • PESully

    Sam, We went to the moon, we should go back to the moon. it is the only way the human race as a whole shall survive, to parapharse Carl Sagan.
    This country has become lost in conspiracy theories that know no end. They were interesting in high school, and make for amusing movies, i.e.; Speilberg's fantasy on Kennedy, but we need to be able to think for ourselves. Take a good serious look at the evidence, not what someone wants to feed you, Sam.
    Talk to any of us who were alive then, Sam, we went to the moon. It is a fact you can take to the bank.

  • PESully

    great film thanks as Americans we should bask in the glory of the accomplishment, rather than try to tear it down. So far we are the only folks to have set foot on the moon. Hopefully we will not be the last.

  • NishK

    @PESully I was about to mention how the russians did it right after us, when I went to check the facts, I found out they hadn't at all. *facepalm* And I went to space camp.

    The best solution to deal with the moon-landing disbelievers is to ignore them. Don't let them hijack the thread to discuss their insecurities. Let them do that on another forum.

  • lockheed_engr

    Ben Rich was not the CEO of Lockheed Martin, ever. His death preceded the formation of Lockheed Martin. Ben was the second director of the Skunk Works at the Burbank & Rye Canyon facilities. He retired about 1990. He gave remarkable talks about the U-2/SR-71 days after his retirement. Ben died in January 1995. Lockheed absorbed Martin later in 1995.

  • Gorbok

    The entire moon landing was photoshopped.

  • MJ

    Watch this if you do not believe we landed on the moon. The first minute is a compilation of cool footage. The information you likely do not know about starts from the 1 minute mark and beyond.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/submitmj#p/c/631552…

  • adsphotography

    We landed on the moon because if we hadn't it would have come out by now.

    Can you imagine how hard it would be to shush up everyone involved in such a massive hoax?

    Anyway, paranoia aside what a fantastic vid.

  • adsphotography

    We landed on the moon because if we hadn't it would have come out by now.

    Can you imagine how hard it would be to shush up everyone involved in such a massive hoax?

    Anyway, paranoia aside what a fantastic vid.

  • adapa

    First of all, Photoshop did not exist back then ( I was alive then).

    Also, considering the bitter rivalry between the USA and the USSR and the fact that they were watching closely, do you not think that they would have ratted us out if these landings were fake?

    The sad addendum to these conspiracy theories is that 10 years from now, people like you will claim that the Space Shuttle never flew or that the International Space Station never existed.

  • moejoe69

    Just proof there were trees on the moon.

  • bob

    Maybe this is a stupid ans. but when I first heard about this I thought about our astronaunts and how special these men are. I think very highly of these men and so find it hard to believe they would agree to take part in a fake landing.

    Have you seen “Capricorn One” ? It's a movie about a mission to mars, it's about a fake landing on mars. It's very good movie and I enjoyed watching it.

    Anyway I have an open mind about everything, even UFO's and aliens from other worlds.

  • Anri

    fuck you, conspirer

  • Anri

    proof against the conspiracy theory:
    http://mythbustersresults.com/episode-104-nasa-…

  • Pingback: Some spaceflight bits and bobs « Where the Sun hits the sky

  • bonnevillespeedster

    Wow, there are sure a lot of morons out there!! (still)

    How do you shut up thousands of the worlds best scientist on numerous continents who took part in the telemetry, communication, tracking and many other parts and participation in this event? You don’t, because it wasn’t a conspiracy, it was a major technical and scientific breakthrough and accomplishment. As noted, Russia has monitored every event we have done under a microscope of suspicion and surveillance. They would have blown us out of the water as a bunch of capitalist propaganda artists if this was a conspiracy. They didn't, it wasn't, get a life.

  • Pingback: Extreme Film Photography

  • charlieray

    That was Oliver Stone's fantasy, not Spielbergs

  • bo

    FYI everyone…here's something I found on the net..”Apollo moon rocks are peppered with tiny craters from meteoroid impacts,” this could only happen to rocks from a planet with little or no atmosphere… like the Moon.
    “An average person holding a Moon rock in his or her hand can plainly see that the specimen came from another world.”

  • stendmaster

    The site contains weight of materials interesting to the worker of advertising.

  • iHate12YearOlds

    You do know that they DID! You dumb 12 year old…

Newer Comments →