Talk:Apollo 6

message: What about the frequently shown footage apparently showing the complete S-IVB  /Apollo spacecraft firing up and heading away from the camera? Does this come from other recovered cine footage or is it from a TV transmission?
Here is a NASA film clip (2m 19s - 25MB mpeg) showing the three distinct separations:
"Apollo-Saturn S1-C Staging"
"Apollo-Saturn S-II Interstage Staging"
"Apollo-Saturn S-IV-B Staging"
http://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/video/staging.mpg
From the foregoing discussion it would appear that all three come from the Apollo 4 launch (Star Trek footage?) - as the point of view is below the main engines on the S-II. It appears they have two cameras at least - one forward point the other backward pointing. Maybe the 'forward pointing' footage from Apollo 6 is the lost footage?
Any thoughts?
:The S-IV-B staging footage is "other recovered cine footage" from Apollo 5, an unmanned Saturn IB test of the LM.  Maybe someone should add a Cameras section there, though this footage is somewhat less famous than the interstage footage.  Jaydro 18:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This can't be right. The forward looking footage shows the S-IVB was connect to a truncated conical adapter like that in the Saturn V, but the S-IB first stage was the same diameter as the S-IVB and so wouldn't have a conical adapter. So the S-IVB staging footage almost certainly must have come from Apollo 4 or Apollo 6. Karn (talk) 06:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Forgive the lateness of the reply, but a NASA documentary from the late '60s identified the footage as coming from the unmanned AS-202 mission (as is actually mentioned in the link provided above to the Apollo Flight Journal). From what I understand, the fact that you can see three ullage motors firing and not four helps to distinguish this mission from later ones.172.190.112.218 (talk) 03:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The source of other footage? 

message: The NASA report on the flight, http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19900066484_1990066484.pdf, says it was engine 2 that cutout due to the ASI fuel line failure and that engine 3 was shutdown due to the wiring crossover. This entry has it the other way round.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laryb1492 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  S-II Engine Cutoff Sequence

message: After watching the film Marooned it would appear that the footage used for the opening sequence showing the launch of Ironman One comes from the Apollo 6 launch footage. It would also explain why the Service Module in the film was painted white. Graham1973 (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apollo 6 & the film Marooned

message: @76.118.198.18: keeps adding "partial failure" or "mission failure" to the Mission duration field in the infobox. Please stop doing this.
* We have a policy against edit warring.
* The Template:Infobox spaceflight has not been designed to designate mission success or failure. If you feel this needs to be changed, please discuss the issue on the template's Talk page. If you don't know how to edit templates, someone more experienced can do it (after consensus is reached.) Just shoe-horning it into that field isn't appropriate.
* NASA did not designate the mission a complete failure. The spacecraft was inserted into a usable orbit (our consensus definition of "partial failure", see Template:Infobox rocket), and the objective of doing a high-speed re-entry was able to be done using the spacecraft engine (similar to Apollo 4). Restart of the S-IVB had been successfully demonstrated on Apollo 4. They identified fixes to the cause of the engine failures, and met the objective of man-rating the Saturn V.
* Is it necessary to highlight the failure in this page's infobox? The partial failure is tabulated on the Saturn V page. JustinTime55 (talk) 14:01, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mission failure" in infobox