Release 03 UAP Video — DOD_111764796 (AARO, June 2026)

Thank you for the scientific help on Apollo 16. I personally think that you all did a very credible job in helping the science support room and pre-flighting to get all the experiments ready to prepare the crew and the flight for Apollo 16. I think that looking back at it now we can say we had a very successful mission that we attained a tremendous amount of information from the flight. I know that the rock boxes back there at the curatorial facility are bursting at their seams and the jealousers are going to have a lot to do. I think also that because of the problems that arose and the necessity to change the flight plan that you responded quite well to get the maximum science out of the time that we had available. I realize that in all of our flights there hasn't been one flight yet that ran according to schedule. And I am very sure that Apollo 17 will be in the same boat that we will have to change things real time to get the maximum science out of the mission. And I think the response on this flight was superb. Now today the briefing here is in two parts and four two purposes. First of all I like each principal investigator to briefly describe the results so far obtained from his work. This is to sort of educate the crew on what we obtained so far from Apollo 16 so that they might have information along that line. Also I like to have him describe any anomalies that might have occurred that we do not know about now. And second then we like to have the PI with the crew working with them to answer, have the crew answer any questions that might still be puzzling him so that he might further his analysis of the data. We have a lot of people to go through today, a lot of science to cover. So we like to keep each briefing short and we don't want to cover things that are pretty well that are general knowledge as of today. And we can start right out. First one is Palmer Dial, Lunar Service Manitometer. After each experimenter describes this experiment we'll have questions Palmer so we can ask the crew any questions after your particular talk. There's a mic right over there. You may set, stand, anything you want to do. I guess the main functions of both instruments went normally. I'd like to cover both the portable and the surface if that's acceptable. The all-sep instrument, the surface magnetometer that you deployed first looked like it went according to plan. a mic right over there. You may set, stand, anything you want to do. I guess the main functions of both instruments went normally. I'd like to cover both the portable and the surface if that's acceptable. The all-sep instrument, the surface magnetometer that you deployed first looked like it went according to plan. The field that we measured as soon as it was turned on, I think it was turned on about 15 minutes or so after you deployed it, was 230 gamma in a downward direction. At that particular time that was the highest field that we'd ever measured on the lunar surface. The calibration of the instrument went straight forward. We did do a gradient determination of the field at the site. At that site survey as we call it, function normally. Thermal control subsystem is the best that we've put on the moon so far. We have a delta T from lunar day to lunar night of 51 degrees centigrade, which is a factor of two better than our Apollo 12 thermal subsystem. The leveling of the device was, I noticed in the photograph yesterday, that the bubble level was right in the center of rain. The level sensors that we have are accurate to a quarter of a degree and they show that the instrument is level to one degree accuracy right now. The instrument has new sensors in it. These are more stable and it's really the first chance we have of doing network type measurements of the fields on the moon. We do see whole moon, we have seen simultaneous data now from 15 and 16. We see the magnetic fields due to any currents that are driven in the entire lunar sphere. For the first time experimentally, we have always made that assumption that we've got an instrument that's setting on a one point on the sphere and that we're looking at the properties of a whole sphere. We had some experimental evidence that that were the case. Now we have unambiguously shown with this second instrument that is indeed the case and that the assumption is correct that we are looking at a whole spherical response of the moon. You mean you're seeing 80 currents all the way through the moon? We're seeing any currents that go around the whole sphere but with these new sensors now and with long-term data, what we're going to try and do is look as you say right at the center of the moon as they go all the way through. cal response of the moon. You mean you're seeing 80 currents all the way through the moon? We're seeing any currents that go around the whole sphere but with these new sensors now and with long-term data, what we're going to try and do is look as you say right at the center of the moon as they go all the way through. Now that's what we're waiting for during the lunar night is a nice step function and a long term both before and after so we can see these currents diffuse right through the center of the moon. The other thing that I think that is unique about this instrument that now we have a chance to look at the as-muteal variations in conductivity. We can not only look at radial dependence of the electrical conductivity and calculated temperature but now we can look at the as-muteal or angular variations between Apollo 15 and Apollo 16 site. And that spread is foreign now so that we ought to be able to extrapolate those measurements to a great circle around the whole moon as-muteal dependence. The portable magnetometer was really exciting. First of all, the first field I think you measured was 180 gamut down and in the Kaley it looked like that all the fields were in essence pointed in a downward direction and at the Alsap site it was 230 gamut up near Spook it was 180 gamut and then on the other side of the limb where you parked the rover at the last station it was 120 gamut. And at that station you put a rock on it and it looks like we measure about 4.7 gamut from that rock. So the rock was large enough and it hasn't large enough at the moment that it looks like we did see a difference. And these measurements do have an air bar on them that is like plus or minus as much now as 5 to 10 gamut because the solar wind and all the other inductive fields that are around that have to be subtracted out of the measurements from our magnetic from the tape and data reduction. The measurements at station 5 were pointed upward and the measurements up near North Ray Crater were pointed downward at 300 and 14 gamut. mut because the solar wind and all the other inductive fields that are around that have to be subtracted out of the measurements from our magnetic from the tape and data reduction. The measurements at station 5 were pointed upward and the measurements up near North Ray Crater were pointed downward at 300 and 14 gamut. I think that there are some things that we could probably say making a lot of assumptions but it looks like if this highly material is older than the other it looks like that we have at least a chance of looking at the paleo magnetic history of the lunar crust from these measurements. The high fields indicate that either the perming source the source of this field was if it remains stable over the time period that the mario was cooling then the highly material would indicate this high field would indicate that it indeed had a time variation in its magnitude or that the mario the flooding of the mario basins or whatever caused the mario basins to be as they are today demagnetized the material that had been there originally. In other words the mario material is less magnetic it seems than this material. The interesting thing too is that the samples as you know are from the regolith and they've really physically been modified over the years. I think that the measurements that we've obtained over scale sizes in the order of 10 kilometers indicate that we're looking at a depth well below the regolith and that this is indicative of fields that were at the moon during a time period before in the order of three to four billion years ago. The direction and the other thing that we can say now from the measurements of the solar wind simultaneous measurements of solar wind and magnetic fields at the Apollo 12 and 15 site we can say that these high fields that you measured at the Apollo 16 site modifies drastically the direction and interaction of the solar wind with the moon at these places. It should channel the charged particles and either different locations asymmetrically on the lunar surface in these areas and in some cases that one could now state that the scale size of the field are large enough so that you could form a shock and actually stand off the solar wind over a small region to the moon. Yes that's covers both of them. Do you have any questions you want to ask to crew concerning anything about the deployment or any of the experiment that you know about. Parallel let me ask you what is the effect of that rock after by the big LSM did that hurt it much? f the solar wind over a small region to the moon. Yes that's covers both of them. Do you have any questions you want to ask to crew concerning anything about the deployment or any of the experiment that you know about. Parallel let me ask you what is the effect of that rock after by the big LSM did that hurt it much? No first where you were you parked the rover the first time in the TV camera we were extremely disturbed because the angle was such it looked like that rock was as big as the electronics box. It looks like that the PRAs were oriented so it was shining right into them and all the IR radiation would really heat us up during the daytime but then the other view showed that the rock was relatively small compared to the dimensions of the box and didn't affect the thermal. Subsystem at all and magnetically it didn't they really contain that much oriented field for doing that. I guess one of the things I'd like to say is this what we intended to do was we intended to drive a hundred yards away from the out in front of the lunar module with the rover and do it sort of a north-south traverse looking for the best place to deploy the LSM to get away from all these things. We ran into problems with the UV and that it took longer to do that last measurements and anticipated and we couldn't do that. And I'm sure that somebody looking at the photos can find a better place out in front of the lunar module to put the total package but I like to say that package is so big. And that surface was so blocky and so full of craters that under a circumstances almost blew we had to take what we got. I hate to say that but then man I just wouldn't believe that that surface was as rough and it's covered with blocks as it turned out to be. I think I could have still been walking up there with that package if I'd have been looking for a level spot. I got up on top of the ridge and I looked all and said well that's a good place over there and I ran over there and it didn't look any better in the place I just been and well that's a good place over there and I ran over there and finally after back to third time I said well look I'm just going to put this thing down here at best we got but it's really blocky and a lot of fresh craters there. Secondary. and I ran over there and it didn't look any better in the place I just been and well that's a good place over there and I ran over there and finally after back to third time I said well look I'm just going to put this thing down here at best we got but it's really blocky and a lot of fresh craters there. Secondary. Well I think that if you look at at least the magnetometers I looked at each of the photos that I could find where you take in a picture of both the l-ceph magnetometer and the portable you picked you didn't put the thing next to rocks or craters on the scale size it was big enough to affect the instrument and I think that's the main criteria which was observed during that. John and you know the rationale for doing that unplanned portable magnetometer reading? No but it doesn't make any difference I mean we did it. You can't explain it in real time that's alright. One on a hardware the Sunsheel on the LSM the latch didn't come loose and I kept pulling the arms up to try to get that latch loose and I finally had to hold the arm down and get the latch loose with the other hand and then as I tried to lock the thing the latch didn't fall off it tangled up into that little wire that locks into the little ball and that was a almost lusted like that without locking it. In fact Houston said go ahead and leave it but one more little effort the thing finally dropped off and I thought I was going to disturb the level but if you seem like you're satisfied with the level. The only thing I worry about there is that we've got a level sensor in the thing and if you just stare at that you can sort of see that go but the the the azimuth you know when you read that shot a graph off that's the only measurement we get in azimuth ever. And so as long as you could you didn't disturb the twisting of it then it's fine. Okay thank you Paul. Next experimenter will be Dr. Gary Latham passing size of it experiment. Yes yes go ahead. I was going to ask one question based on the few regions of the chemical contact, the gradients from which is passed out there. Oh we don't have the because they got the fluctuations from salt and winter and the other is using policy. I'm talking about the patient. Sorry man. ze of it experiment. Yes yes go ahead. I was going to ask one question based on the few regions of the chemical contact, the gradients from which is passed out there. Oh we don't have the because they got the fluctuations from salt and winter and the other is using policy. I'm talking about the patient. Sorry man. Actually you took the other side was taking on after you had the point of such a right. The three footer I think was that's correct is. And we didn't touch it after that. If there are any questions before any time after the discussion feel free to raise your hand. Our fun began as you know with the S4B impact on this mission. We also know we lost tracking on it prematurely which meant that we were not able to get the coordinates and time of the impact independent of our own measurements. Nevertheless we could locate it fairly well from the two near stations 12 and 14 which made it a useful impact at the greater range of the station 15. And we are looking at those signals now. I think we can say that this peculiarly high velocity mantle as we call it that we had found in the 12 and 14 region can't be a global feature unless it is exceedingly thin thin slab of this high velocity stop signals we got. And I must say that there is always the uncertainty that we really didn't see the first arrival up there because it was at 1100 kilometers. And the first signal you see is quite weak as always the uncertainty is to whether or not it is the first the fastest traveling wave in the moment and not something else. But if it is then this very high velocity material that we called mantle is not global or exceedingly thin layer. And of course though we get velocities approaching 8 kilometers per second at depths of the moon of the order of 100 kilometers, not 9 kilometers per second as we had in the 12 and 14 region. There is also very weak evidence from that signal and I haven't convinced my colleagues of this yet know myself really but possibly of a reflection from a very deep interface. Perhaps 550 kilometers deep is there and we are looking for ways to see whether or not that can be verified. In other words a primitive co-op perhaps some other reflector at very great depth. So this impact will I think provide very useful data despite the loss of tracking. f a reflection from a very deep interface. Perhaps 550 kilometers deep is there and we are looking for ways to see whether or not that can be verified. In other words a primitive co-op perhaps some other reflector at very great depth. So this impact will I think provide very useful data despite the loss of tracking. We would have been of course much better off if we have been able to photograph that impact area and I understand that could tell time and orbit or concluded that we did not photograph it and that is for being. The deployment was good I think the pictures tell the story as far as I'm concerned the instrument does get hot during the lunar day as the other instruments had. This has been the case in every one. I think it's a matter of just it's just not possible to keep dust off of that shroud. I think when you have to work that close to it and that that degrades the thermal control. It does not degrade the seismic data. It simply means that the controllers have more work to do trying to maintain the thermal stability and it's a problem we faced in every one of the missions. So it's not. In fact I thought the deployment the configuration of the shroud that I saw and so on look very very good. There's one little place where it's raised up is where the keyboard comes out underneath. It's turned on its edge a little bit and that of course is something of a heat loss but it's not serious at all. So we we padded at rascal down because of the 15 problems but maybe it's before a guy leaves at Alsette site if he's got a problem like it maybe it is Alsette on 17 probably it's not. Alsette is on the seismic. The seismic. Those rascally things assume some different kind of orientation than they did before we left before we left and maybe ought to go back one more time and make sure those things are haven't changed. Don't ask me. I think maybe the outgast a little and then take up a different shape. Well it's not only it's not only your your near activities I think when we saw that that TV picture degrade on Lemassent it's obviously a lot of debris is being thrown around and you just can't avoid a good dusting down from that source. 't ask me. I think maybe the outgast a little and then take up a different shape. Well it's not only it's not only your your near activities I think when we saw that that TV picture degrade on Lemassent it's obviously a lot of debris is being thrown around and you just can't avoid a good dusting down from that source. So our our carefully prepared thermal services act more like black bodies than anybody figured on as a result of all this. And we saw your rover signals which this time provided very very interesting data in that they showed another abrupt changes in signal level as you moved around. We're not sure yet what to make of that we're going to work with Bill Mulberger and his crew carefully on the traverse to see whether or not we can identify specific provinces in which the signal level is quite a bit higher. I guess I would like to ask your impression as you were rolling along and given along the given EVAs that you you felt at given times the rover was bouncing noticeably more than other times that might have generated higher signal levels. Sometimes she was off the ground there's no doubt about that to the south EVA 2 that area was a lot rougher than the traverse route to North Raider. I impression North Raider traverse once we passed Palmetto it was really bolder free area very subdued old craters than the rover just spent along much like West Texas type terrain. Whereas to the south it was really rough particularly on survey ridge when we were traversing that area with all the secondaries and blocks we managed to be up in here quite a bit simply because there were so many secondaries and blocks we had hit some small ones to avoid the big ones. The subjective opinion of mine also is that around at least it stopped 13 where we actually got off the rover the regular did not seem as loosely compacted as to the south. In fact in North Raider at station 11 and 12 it was no more than a couple inches deep because we couldn't get the right end without bending the times of the rate. So the regulates up there was very thin and I don't know where that means there's a very cobbly the discley compacted blocks under there from that were thrown out or that are now that much covered or whether we just pick some bad size but we tried to write twice in both times. nd without bending the times of the rate. So the regulates up there was very thin and I don't know where that means there's a very cobbly the discley compacted blocks under there from that were thrown out or that are now that much covered or whether we just pick some bad size but we tried to write twice in both times. The only luck we had was kicking stuff into the rake we couldn't pull the rake through the regular. And you couldn't stick the tongs in either? And the tongs wouldn't go in and every other place you could take the tongs and stick in the ground they'd stand up for you. So in general this area from the general character of our signals gives the appearance of being the thickest pile of what we can quite loosely call regolith of any of the sites. And I guess Bob Covech will talk on his results on that and of course we await his mortar firing to give us a little more information on that. We're looking at these rover signals and see if we can somehow pin them down to roughness of terrain or just what from the pictures that you took along the way. We now have the quiet nighttime period and we're waiting for the first moonquake of this session which ought to be well I was hoping it would be in the last 24 hours it wasn't. But should be before May 12 so in the next few days and of course with this last station we now have completed a very nice triangular array. The other three gave us a very narrow base thing. Now we have a thing with a thousand kilometer base line which if it lasts for as long as they appear to be lasting will give us the tools to really do the job over the next couple of years. And of course we'll be using that in the S4B impact from the next mission. I'd like to turn to one observation reported from orbit that has interested us to great deal on that was the flash that was reported. I haven't seen I understand the transcript is now hasn't yet been tight. I haven't seen it yet so that's my only hope for pinning down the time. If you can get about five minutes with everything if you can help us pin down the time and roughly the location and we'll certainly look at our records and that would be an important piece of data if we recorded that. I would like to ask was this a colored flash or white flash white. y hope for pinning down the time. If you can get about five minutes with everything if you can help us pin down the time and roughly the location and we'll certainly look at our records and that would be an important piece of data if we recorded that. I would like to ask was this a colored flash or white flash white. What was your how does it differ from the kind of thing you get with a cosmic ray impact on your brain. I didn't see any of those. He didn't see those. I see. You're here. Do you want a question? Well we're very much excited by that as far as I know it's the first report of a transient event of some nature that's been seen from orbit. I just have to wait for the I should have written it down and it just didn't occur to me to write it down. Do we get a time on it and all that again? It's on the DSE. If I ever get that all. Then I would correlate any information we get to the size of the faces. How about its persistence? It was just a flash. The way I had noticed it, I was looking at a horizon that was showing up from solar corona or zidiacolite, whatever you want to call it in that region. It was very shortly after we lost the signal from Earth. I was watching stars pop up over the horizon and got this flash which was in the sky. The size was about, I didn't know what it looked directly at it at the time it happened and it happened down in the side of my vision. But it was brighter than the brightest star that I had in the field of view at the time. I had the feeling that it was in physical or angular size. It was equivalent to the size of the larger stars in my perceived vision. It was just an instantaneous flash. It took us a couple of seconds for it to soak into me. It wasn't just a star popping up over the horizon but rather it had been distinctly below the horizon. Is there a way for me to get that transcript? I don't know if I would normally get it. I'm glad you asked. Oh, that's it. I forgot to mention this in the opening remarks but we have about 50 copies of this technical air to ground voice transfer. over the horizon but rather it had been distinctly below the horizon. Is there a way for me to get that transcript? I don't know if I would normally get it. I'm glad you asked. Oh, that's it. I forgot to mention this in the opening remarks but we have about 50 copies of this technical air to ground voice transfer. Right back there and for the PIs and the collies and there's a copy for you to get it back. That's not what you're asking. It's not on the map. It's on the DSE. And that hasn't been completed as far as I know. One of the things that I'd like to mention is from orbit it appeared to me that there was a distinctly different unit up around North Ray in an area that a probably, I'd say a third or a half of the traverse to North Ray went across. That may or may not fit in with your seismic delta. That at some point between North Ray and the Lemley they would cross a contact with some kind. Yes. Well, except to add my thanks for a very fine deployment that's all I have. Any questions from the floor? I'll understand this flash will not be sent out. That's what we did back then. Well, I don't know whether the S4B hit but this is on the backside of the Lem so I would assume that the S4B didn't hit there. And as well after that. Like a couple of days. Lunar days. Where did the S4B impact go? Oh, it did about 150 kilometers north of station. Well. Where did the S4B come from? When did you mention the intersting of the Dard here? When did you do that thing, turn it to the outlaw? The time I was doing this I was looking out the window and I had darkened the cockpit in preparation for one of the low light level photographic exercises. And that's how I happened to be noticing that there was this distinct horizon which surprised me. And I just happened to be kind of puzzling over that at the time. Oh, dear. Yeah, I'm sorry for you seeing the shows. No. Now when your visors down? I never looked. What do I suppose to do that? ographic exercises. And that's how I happened to be noticing that there was this distinct horizon which surprised me. And I just happened to be kind of puzzling over that at the time. Oh, dear. Yeah, I'm sorry for you seeing the shows. No. Now when your visors down? I never looked. What do I suppose to do that? I suspect from what we saw on EVA on the way home that the inner visor alone has sufficient attenuation to block out stars. But you could see them through the AOT and the lunar module and of course that has a light shield around it. And on our last alignment even with a crescent earth and the AOT we could see arc in our real, really, so good that we didn't have to roll up the window shades in the cockpit. So with the proper, if you look through a tube, I'm sure you could see every star up there. The only thing we saw on the lunar surface was the earth and it was directly overhead. That was the only thing I saw in the sky. John, you're going through the sight on the camera. Would you see anything that's light here? You see your helmet reflected. That's what you see. You have to raise your visor. Get a light. So you can get rid of all those reflections. Okay. Next one is Active Size McExperiment. Dr. Covatch. Well, we had several objectives on this experiment. I'd like to summarize these basic questions like how thick is the seismic reguleth would be one question. What were the in situ physical properties of the lunar near surface material? Thirdly, are there any distinct seismic horizons? And how do they correlate with our estimates to geological horizons? And finally, were there any regional differences in seismic velocities? I.e. something characteristicly different between the marae and the islands? Well, the deployment and the execution of the Thulper experiment was outstanding. I mean, the records are clearer. And the background noise was sufficiently low. I mean, got clean first breaks completely down the geophone line. I'm sorry about that first one. I, uh, a Thulper really happy when that rascal worked that I stopped walking. I started walking to the next one. Well, the record shows that for some reason you inadvertently didn't hold it in a charge position sufficiently long enough. first breaks completely down the geophone line. I'm sorry about that first one. I, uh, a Thulper really happy when that rascal worked that I stopped walking. I started walking to the next one. Well, the record shows that for some reason you inadvertently didn't hold it in a charge position sufficiently long enough. That's the reason when you did it the second time, right? No, I thought I started walking too soon after the first one went off. The one that failed, yeah, that was my pure procedure there. Well, if you walk too soon, it didn't hurt us any, so. Didn't body, okay? The, uh, the data needs yet to be corrected for topographic effects. There's some se