Which apollo mission obtained the fastest speed

This is quite possibly the most sought for question by non believers. It is easily solved for and Avg. rate of speed. the moon is an avg of 238,855 miles from earth...mind you I typed "avg." Now if you take the time from when they stopped their exploration on the moon at 12:14 am on July 21, 1969 to the time they splashed into the pacific at 11:50 am on July 24, 1969 that is roughly 84 hours. Some say that the actual lift off time is later and I would agree that the astronauts would not just hop in the lander and leave. So some say 59 hours. either way its easy math. Just take the distance 238,855 and divide it by either 84 or 59 whichever you like. The speed comes out to some where between 1500-2000mph. This is the travel back of course the shuttle was going much faster when leaving to compensate for the gravity of Earth. So there you have it. It only took a couple of days to come back.

• Share to Facebook • Share to Twitter • Share to Linkedin The story of Apollo 13, the aborted mission to the moon, is well known through the book, originally titled, “Lost Moon,” (Now called “Apollo 13”) co-written by Apollo 13 Flight Commander James A Lovell and author Jeffrey Kluger, followed by the blockbuster movie, “Apollo 13,” and by the millions of people around the world in 1970 who followed the exploits of the astronauts who successfully returned to earth in their crippled spacecraft. Outside of those deeply involved in watches, what isn’t widely known is the role the Omega Speedmaster chronograph played in helping to bring the astronauts home safely. The watch was used to time a 14-second maneuver that proved critical in returning the crew back to earth. The Critical Maneuver The very short story is that two days into the planned moon landing, an oxygen tank exploded crippling the Service Module, which provided vital function to the Command Module occupied by the crew. After overcoming a number of hardships never experienced before in a space mission, Mission Control in Houston told the flight crew they were off course by roughly 60 to 80 nautical miles. In this case it meant they would be entering the earth’s atmosphere at an angle that would have bounced the spacecraft back into space with no chance of recovery. It should be noted that the “spacecraft” they were using to return to earth was the Lunar Module, which was designed to do nothing more than land on t...

The fastest speed at which humans have travelled is 39,937.7 km/h (24,816.1 mph). The command module of Apollo 10, carrying Col. (later Lieut Gen.) Thomas Patten Stafford, USAF (b. 17 Sep 1930), Cdr (later Capt.) Eugene Andrew Cernan (1934–2017) and Cdr (later Capt.) John Watts Young, USN (1930–2018), reached this maximum value at the 121.9-km (75.7-mile) altitude interface on its trans-Earth return flight on 26 May 1969, when travelling at 36,397 ft/sec (11,093.8 m/sec). Records change on a daily basis and are not immediately published online. For a full list of record titles, please use our Record Application Search. (You will need to register / login for access) Comments below may relate to previous holders of this record.

Apollo 10: Fastest recorded speed, why? - collectSPACE: Messages Space News space history and artifacts articles Messages space history discussion forums Sightings worldwide astronaut appearances Resources selected space history documents Apollo 10: Fastest recorded speed, why? profile | register | preferences | faq | search next newest topic | next oldest topic Author Topic: Apollo 10: Fastest recorded speed, why? Rick Teklits Member Posts: 21 From: Yardville, NJ USA Registered: Dec 2010 posted 02-18-2011 05:43 PM Does anyone know why Apollo 10 recorded the fastest speed? Was there a longer burn out of lunar orbit? If so, why? Just curious. Blackarrow Member Posts: 3160 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002 posted 02-18-2011 08:20 PM Nine Apollo spacecraft returned from the Moon (eight if you exclude the special case of Apollo 13). One of them obviously had to be fastest. It was Apollo 10. Starfighter1 Member Posts: 97 From: Registered: Feb 2007 posted 02-18-2011 08:27 PM What was the exact speed in mph? Where can we find the reference or link? Aztecdoug Member Posts: 1405 From: Huntington Beach Registered: Feb 2000 posted 02-18-2011 08:48 PM I personally asked this very question of John Young once at a public event a few years back in Newport Beach CA. He really didn't have an answer. SpaceAholic Member Posts: 4494 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999 posted 02-18-2011 09:13 PM quote: Originally posted by Rick Teklits: Does anyone know why Apollo...

Fifty years ago and a quarter of a million miles away, three astronauts carried out the dress rehearsal for one of the greatest events in human history. On May 18, 1969, Half a century on, the Apollo 10 mission seems like an oddity – a kind of half step bookmarked by the historic firsts of Though Apollo 8 had already orbited the Moon and NASA For one thing, the Lunar Module had never flown in lunar gravity, nor had it been tested in actual descent or ascent trajectories. In fact, up to that time, only two Lunar Modules had ever flown and only one of these was manned. NASA engineers were still uncertain as to how the navigation and guidance systems would react to lunar gravity. Would the descent engine fire properly? What about the risky abort procedure? Then there was the new deep space communications network. Was it up to the task? What about tracking? The latter was especially important after Apollo 8 discovered how irregular the Moon's gravitational field was. If mission trajectories were to be properly plotted and executed, then these anomalies had to be better understood. And last, but by no means least, more detailed photos had to be taken of prospective landing sites to choose the best one for Apollo 11 and later missions. Lift off NASA May 18, 1969 was an overcast day at what was then called Cape Kennedy and has now reverted to its original name of Cape Canaveral. It was 80° F (27° C), relative humidity was 75 percent, the barometer held steady at 30.09 in, and the...

• Afrikaans • العربية • Aragonés • Asturianu • Azərbaycanca • تۆرکجه • বাংলা • Беларуская (тарашкевіца) • Български • Català • Čeština • Cymraeg • Dansk • Eesti • Ελληνικά • Español • Euskara • فارسی • Français • Galego • 한국어 • हिन्दी • Hrvatski • Bahasa Indonesia • Italiano • עברית • ქართული • Lietuvių • Magyar • Malagasy • മലയാളം • Bahasa Melayu • မြန်မာဘာသာ • Nederlands • 日本語 • Norsk bokmål • Norsk nynorsk • Occitan • Polski • Português • Română • Русский • Simple English • Slovenčina • Slovenščina • Српски / srpski • Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски • Suomi • Svenska • தமிழ் • Türkçe • Українська • Tiếng Việt • 吴语 • 粵語 • 中文 • • • Country of origin United States Project cost $6.417 billion in 1964–1973 dollars Cost per launch $185 million in 1969–1971 dollars Size Height 363.0ft (110.6m) Diameter 33.0ft (10.1m) Mass 6,221,000lb (2,822,000kg) to 6,537,000lb (2,965,000kg) Stages 3 Capacity Payload to Altitude 90nmi (170km) Orbital inclination 30° Mass 311,152lb (141,136kg) Payload to Mass 52,759kg (116,314lb) Associated rockets Family Derivative work Comparable Stage info First stage – Height 138.0ft (42.1m) Diameter 33.0ft (10.1m) Empty mass 303,000lb (137,000kg) Gross mass 4,881,000lb (2,214,000kg) Powered by 5 Maximum thrust 7,750,000lbf (34,500kN) sea level 263 seconds (2.58km/s) sea level Burn time 168 seconds Propellant Second stage – Height 81.5ft (24.8m) Diameter 33.0ft (10.1m) Empty mass 88,400lb (40,100kg) Gross mass 1,093,900lb (496,200kg) Powered by 5 Maximum t...

The fastest speed at which humans have travelled is 39,937.7 km/h (24,816.1 mph). The command module of Apollo 10, carrying Col. (later Lieut Gen.) Thomas Patten Stafford, USAF (b. 17 Sep 1930), Cdr (later Capt.) Eugene Andrew Cernan (1934–2017) and Cdr (later Capt.) John Watts Young, USN (1930–2018), reached this maximum value at the 121.9-km (75.7-mile) altitude interface on its trans-Earth return flight on 26 May 1969, when travelling at 36,397 ft/sec (11,093.8 m/sec). Records change on a daily basis and are not immediately published online. For a full list of record titles, please use our Record Application Search. (You will need to register / login for access) Comments below may relate to previous holders of this record.

Fifty years ago and a quarter of a million miles away, three astronauts carried out the dress rehearsal for one of the greatest events in human history. On May 18, 1969, Half a century on, the Apollo 10 mission seems like an oddity – a kind of half step bookmarked by the historic firsts of Though Apollo 8 had already orbited the Moon and NASA For one thing, the Lunar Module had never flown in lunar gravity, nor had it been tested in actual descent or ascent trajectories. In fact, up to that time, only two Lunar Modules had ever flown and only one of these was manned. NASA engineers were still uncertain as to how the navigation and guidance systems would react to lunar gravity. Would the descent engine fire properly? What about the risky abort procedure? Then there was the new deep space communications network. Was it up to the task? What about tracking? The latter was especially important after Apollo 8 discovered how irregular the Moon's gravitational field was. If mission trajectories were to be properly plotted and executed, then these anomalies had to be better understood. And last, but by no means least, more detailed photos had to be taken of prospective landing sites to choose the best one for Apollo 11 and later missions. Lift off NASA May 18, 1969 was an overcast day at what was then called Cape Kennedy and has now reverted to its original name of Cape Canaveral. It was 80° F (27° C), relative humidity was 75 percent, the barometer held steady at 30.09 in, and the...

Apollo 10: Fastest recorded speed, why? - collectSPACE: Messages Space News space history and artifacts articles Messages space history discussion forums Sightings worldwide astronaut appearances Resources selected space history documents Apollo 10: Fastest recorded speed, why? profile | register | preferences | faq | search next newest topic | next oldest topic Author Topic: Apollo 10: Fastest recorded speed, why? Rick Teklits Member Posts: 21 From: Yardville, NJ USA Registered: Dec 2010 posted 02-18-2011 05:43 PM Does anyone know why Apollo 10 recorded the fastest speed? Was there a longer burn out of lunar orbit? If so, why? Just curious. Blackarrow Member Posts: 3160 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002 posted 02-18-2011 08:20 PM Nine Apollo spacecraft returned from the Moon (eight if you exclude the special case of Apollo 13). One of them obviously had to be fastest. It was Apollo 10. Starfighter1 Member Posts: 97 From: Registered: Feb 2007 posted 02-18-2011 08:27 PM What was the exact speed in mph? Where can we find the reference or link? Aztecdoug Member Posts: 1405 From: Huntington Beach Registered: Feb 2000 posted 02-18-2011 08:48 PM I personally asked this very question of John Young once at a public event a few years back in Newport Beach CA. He really didn't have an answer. SpaceAholic Member Posts: 4494 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999 posted 02-18-2011 09:13 PM quote: Originally posted by Rick Teklits: Does anyone know why Apollo...

This is quite possibly the most sought for question by non believers. It is easily solved for and Avg. rate of speed. the moon is an avg of 238,855 miles from earth...mind you I typed "avg." Now if you take the time from when they stopped their exploration on the moon at 12:14 am on July 21, 1969 to the time they splashed into the pacific at 11:50 am on July 24, 1969 that is roughly 84 hours. Some say that the actual lift off time is later and I would agree that the astronauts would not just hop in the lander and leave. So some say 59 hours. either way its easy math. Just take the distance 238,855 and divide it by either 84 or 59 whichever you like. The speed comes out to some where between 1500-2000mph. This is the travel back of course the shuttle was going much faster when leaving to compensate for the gravity of Earth. So there you have it. It only took a couple of days to come back.