# Space 1999 - bad science? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 26, 2009, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209 "2009-10-26T19:20:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/41 "2009-10-27T16:53:35Z")
I remember the episode [“Earthbound”](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0706324/) was good. It had Christopher Lee, it used some back-story from previous episodes, and it had a good twist ending that was well set-up from the story. ---
**Author:** ![Harmonious\_Discord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/74df32/32.png) [@Harmonious\_Discord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonious_Discord)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/42 "2009-10-27T17:08:10Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > Ummmm …is this directed at me? If so, I don’t get it. > If not, never mind, move along. Nothing to see here. No. It’s just a general statement indicating how silly the science of the series was. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/43 "2009-10-27T17:31:51Z")
> [@](#): > > I remember the episode “Earthbound” was good. It had Christopher Lee, it used some back-story from previous episodes, and it had a good twist ending that was well set-up from the story. That ending still creeps me out, I even felt sorry for the Commissioner. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/44 "2009-10-27T18:39:39Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > That ending still creeps me out, I even felt sorry for the Commissioner. Wiki has no description. Put it in a spoiler box for me, please? ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/45 "2009-10-27T19:05:40Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > I mean, I couldn’t take a motorcycle helmet, bash it against one of the ports on the Great Tank at the Boston aquarium and have a reasonable hope of breaking the glass. Cite? With all the discussion this comment evoked, I think we’re going to need someone to do a bit of experimentation. Please take video. I was _five_ when the show came out, and man did it scare the crap out of me. Wasn’t there some episode with the ? monster ? that sucked people into it. It had one big eye. I think it spit them out in cardboard boxes or something like that (beats me what my five-year-old imagination interpreted them as). Yeah, a lot of the science escaped me at the time, I’m not sure I want to go back and re-watch. I think I’ll just wait for the results of the experiment. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/46 "2009-10-27T19:10:36Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > This “Helmet Bashing the Window In” scene, I want to point out, was in the _Pilot Episode_ – the one where you set up not only the basic situation and introduce your characters, but also where you set the basic tone for the series. You pull out all the stops, pay extra for special effects, and take care to set the mood and feel in the pilot. To have this idiocy in the pilot was what really annoyed me. Bah… The first episode of TNG was craptacular. They couldnt afford decent writers or come up with just ONE wow idea for at least the first episode to reboot/continue the Star Trek franchise…the most successful thing in all of Sci fi ? Star Trek Voyagers first episode was also craptacular IMO. Farscape. Living ships that are "warp’ drive capable ? Pulleeze… Bablylon 5. A UN in space? That doestnt go anywhere ? Don’t make me gag. Battle Star Galactica. Didnt they do this before ? Lex…just weird as shit from the get go. IMO, they all are worth watching if you don’t look or think too hard. How many tv series are there that have folks traveling in space? A handful or two ? Its not like you have many options here. Space 1999 is worth it IMO if for no other reason than it has a different “feel” to it than most other space stuff . Stark. Depressing. Sterile. Its the Das Boot of space exploration. Yeah, the science sucks IIRC. Heck, the plots probably suck too, as I really can’t recall much in terms of specific episodes these days. But, if you like space exploration Sci fi, IMO you need to watch it if for no other reason than to get a different spin on the genre. Your light year may vary drastically of course. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/47 "2009-10-27T19:14:54Z")
Bah, yourself. I’ve spent a lifetime of watching science fiction films and series, good and bad. Mostly bad. If one telegraphs how awful it’s going to be that soon, I don’t have to watch it. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/48 "2009-10-27T20:07:22Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > Bah, yourself. I’ve spent a lifetime of watching science fiction films and series, good and bad. Mostly bad. If one telegraphs how awful it’s going to be that soon, I don’t have to watch it. I’m sorry **Cal** , but you do. It’s the LAW. Or maybe not ;). But _Space 1999_, as silly as it frequently was, nonetheless had some redeeming elements, at least in the first season. Most of which, admittedly, was atmosphere as **billfish** pointed out. Just as an example, as a result of co-producing with ITT they were contractually obligated to use at least six Italian actors in episodes in the first season. The result was to give the first season an unusually international feel, at a point in time when such was rare on television. _Space 1999_ was in many ways very good at creating mood, usually a foreboding one. Hence the enduring appeal ( well to a tiny cult ). It just wasn’t so hot at a lot of other things. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/49 "2009-10-27T20:10:19Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Your window has got to be tough enough to withstand bullets or it’s a deathtrap. If I lived in a world where nuclear waste dumps had a proclivity to spontaneously combust, I might have a somewhat cavalier attitude to space safety. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/50 "2009-10-27T20:14:17Z")
The science was bad; the producers acknowledged such. I remember Isaac Asimov was particularly peeved by the science goofs. Space 1999 was more like a live action cartoon. In fact it was a live action version of _Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons_, and _Fireball XL5_, much like \*UFO \*was. In fact, many of the scenes were created from the left over \*UFO \*props. But the plots were interesting and music was superb, as well as the special effects and the acting competent. If I remember correctly, it went down hill when the Andersons divorced. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/51 "2009-10-27T20:43:46Z")
> [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](#): > > If I lived in a world where nuclear waste dumps had a proclivity to spontaneously combust, I might have a somewhat cavalier attitude to space safety. 😉 Spontaneous NUCLEAR combustion ! 🙂 take THAT X-files. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/52 "2009-10-27T21:01:26Z")
Quoth **The Hamster King** : > [@](#): > > But remember, all you have to work with is one massive impulse. Can a single explosion shift the Moon’s orbit below the Earth’s Roche limit without fragmenting it in the process? Yes, my calculations were assuming a single impulse, anyway. It’s more efficient that way. You do have to blow a chunk of Moon material off the surface as reaction mass, but it’s a very small chunk relative to the entire mass of the Moon, so I don’t count it as “fragmenting”. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/53 "2009-10-27T21:06:03Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Quoth **The Hamster King** :Yes, my calculations were assuming a single impulse, anyway. It’s more efficient that way. You do have to blow a chunk of Moon material off the surface as reaction mass, but it’s a very small chunk relative to the entire mass of the Moon, so I don’t count it as “fragmenting”. Cool. So the blast flings a chunk of the moon off at high velocity, slowing its orbital velocity so it spirals in until tidal forces rip it apart, right? Do you remember how big the blast had to be? ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/54 "2009-10-27T21:26:46Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > Cool. So the blast flings a chunk of the moon off at high velocity, slowing its orbital velocity so it spirals in until tidal forces rip it apart, right? > > Do you remember how big the blast had to be? Not slowing, speeding. Slowing will raise your orbit. Speeding up will lower your orbit. Everything’s backwards in orbital mechanics. And there’s no such thing as a spiral orbit! Every orbit is a conic section. An orbit is circular, elliptical, parabolic, or hyperbolic. Nothing else. Who came up with the idea of a spiral orbit, and why can’t I kick him in the nuts? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/55 "2009-10-27T22:05:08Z")
> [@](#): > > Not slowing, speeding. Slowing will raise your orbit. Speeding up will lower your orbit. Everything’s backwards in orbital mechanics. No, slowing will lower you. The backwards part is that lowering speeds you, so that after slowing down you end up going faster than you were. > [@](#): > > Cool. So the blast flings a chunk of the moon off at high velocity, slowing its orbital velocity so it spirals in until tidal forces rip it apart, right? > > Do you remember how big the blast had to be? [url=“[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=1920297&postcount=64](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=1920297&postcount=64)”]Just found the calculations (and yes, of course I did it for a thread on this board!)-- You’d need about 10[sup]7[/sup] megatons. Of course, that’s if you calibrated it all exactly right: An accidental blast would presumably need to be much larger. ---
**Author:** ![runcible\_spoon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9fc29f/32.png) [@runcible\_spoon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/runcible_spoon)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/56 "2009-10-27T22:14:12Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > And there’s no such thing as a spiral orbit! Every orbit is a conic section. An orbit is circular, elliptical, parabolic, or hyperbolic. Nothing else. > > Who came up with the idea of a spiral orbit, and why can’t I kick him in the nuts? Wouldn’t you get some kind of spiral once atmosphere came into play? Not that it necessarily would with the moon, but it was my understanding that low enough satellite would basically do a spiral (or maybe a spirograph?) until it went ker-blooie. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/57 "2009-10-27T22:30:46Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > No, slowing will lower you. The backwards part is that lowering speeds you, so that after slowing down you end up going faster than you were. Yeah, that sounds right–slowing down speeds you up in a lower orbit. Speeding up slows you down in a higher orbit. I should have kept my mouth shut. All I know is that our everyday notions about how things move are all wrong when things are orbiting around other things. We’ve had dozens of threads where people think it’s easy to throw trash into the sun. Just go into earth orbit, open the window, and toss. Hey, the sun has a lot of gravity, so it’ll just fall straight into the sun! ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/58 "2009-10-27T22:41:30Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > ??? It could fly millions miles away and back no problem. The relative speed is about the same so what would be the problem? No problem at all - unless they wanted to land on a planet. Then, big problem. Spider Robinson had a hilarious review of this show in Galaxy, which is not on the web as far as I can tell. I’ll post some of it tonight. It came with a cartoon of 3 ships sailing on the moon, and two captions: “Aye carumba, Columbus, I smell nuclear radiation!” “Then we are sitting on the biggest bomb in history!” I managed to watch the first season, hoping I would see some acting from Landau and Bain. (Hoping in vain.) I gave up for the second. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/59 "2009-10-27T23:20:06Z")
> [@Elendil's Heir](#): > > Wiki has no description. Put it in a spoiler box for me, please? OK [spoiler]After forcing the aliens to take the commissioner aboard their ship for the 76 year trip back to Earth he makes them enter at gunpoint their suspended animation cubicles where they soon go to sleep. When he is sure they are all unconscious he enters his box like cubicle and falls asleep as well. The commissioner awakes only a few minutes later and believes he is approaching Earth 76 years later, the suspended animation does not work for him. The commissioner then takes out his comlock and begins trying to contact Earth but no one responds, although Alpha picks up his signal. The Commissioner begins to know something is wrong and flashes the time on his comlock and finally realizes only small amount of time has gone by and frantically calls out to the asleep aliens for help then he starts to beg and plead Alpha to come and get him. Koening and the others know the ship is too far away to rescue him and sates there is nothing they can do all the while the commissioner screams and tries to break out of his cubicle. The ending is effective because The Commissioner has been nothing but a dick the entire episode and he sabotages Alpha to force the aliens to take him instead of a random drawing of names. To see him trapped in a little box to suffocate while he pleads for help makes you fell sorry for him even though he deserves his fate.[/spoiler] ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/60 "2009-10-27T23:50:07Z")
As I recall, Icerigger another member of the Alpha crew had been chosen to return and the aliens had calibrated the chamber to that person. The Commissioner’s self-centeredness prevented him from listening to any argument that the sleeperbox would not work for him as it was set. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209.md?page=4)