lineApollo 11

- Courtesy NASA -

The Eagle (LM-5) Lunar Module on the Moon (Apollo 11, 1969). Here is the link with the list of all Lunar Modules produced:


You will find that the LM-15, the Phoenix spacecraft according to William Rutledge, has never flown and was scrapped. W. Rutledge knows this detail of official space history, and has pointed it out in the interview (see answer nr.13).

AS17-145-22163 image taken with a 70mm Hasselblad; mission:
Apollo 17; Mission Activity: EVA 2;
Lens Focal Length: 60 mm

- Courtesy NASA/LPI -


AS17-134-20437 image taken with a 70mm Hasselblad; mission: Apollo 17; Mission Activity: EVA 1;
Lens Focal Length: 60 mm;

TheCity-2   TheCity-3

Frames from the footage entitled <<APOLLO 20 legacy part 1 The CITY>>, added on YouTube by "retiredafb" on April 1, 2007:
it is a shot of a composition of images taken by Apollo 17 crew.

The Apollo 1 crew; from the left, Edward Higgins White II (1930-1967), 
Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom (1926-1967)
Roger Chaffee (1935-1967).

- Courtesy NASA -


Frame from the footage
<<APOLLO 20 Legacy liftoff of Apollo 20 saturne 5>>
, added on YouTube by "retiredafb" on
April 9, 2007.
Was it launched from Vandenberg AFB,
on August 16, 1976?

Detail of the AS15-M-1579  High Resolution Image, taken on Apollo 15; camera altitude: 116 km; revolution: 38; Sun Elevation: 24; Lens Focal Length: 3 inch

- Courtesy NASA/LPI -

Detail of the AS15-M-1333, rotated to the left - The crater visible in the picture is almost for sure "Izsak D", which is close to the larger Izsak crater (not visible here)

- Courtesy NASA/LPI -

Frame from the
<<APOLLO 20 TEST Snyder Ingress>>

Video added by "retiredafb"
(William Rutledge)
on YouTube on June 18, 2007; you can see the North American Rockwell Corp. logo
on the technicians' overalls;
the video was removed by "retiredafb" himself



by Luca Scantamburlo


Beginning in May 2007, I had many private contacts with a presumed William Rutledge (YouTube username, "retiredafb") who claims to have been a volunteer for MOL-Gemini project (he was not chosen, according to what he wrote me) and a former civilian test pilot on various aircrafts.  Up to now my last contact with him, having always taken place by the YouTube General/Messages, was on July 20, 2007, at 01:39 pm: a message of just three lines.

  Is he honest? Is he an agent of discredit? Is he a debunker? Who is behind him? Was he really a former test pilot who now is telling us the truth? Or just kernels of truth?

  Rutledge could have been a former civilian test pilot on various aircrafts, born in Belgium in 1930 and employed in the last century with Avro, Chance Vought and USAF. According to his testimony granted to me in an interview, his last job before retiring was working on the KH-11 project.

  Since April 2007 W. Rutledge posted on YouTube several video footages and images which could have come from the documentation material of a classified mission that took place in August 1976: Apollo 20.
  He added 13 different videos; later he removed 4 of them. The main point of his presumed testimony was the probable space investigation of a mysterious cigar-shaped object, visible on official NASA photos taken by Apollo 15 and Apollo 17. The presence of the huge and mysterious object is a reality, based on fact, pointed out by Rutledge himself.

   Under Natural Law and Natural Reason, mankind had the duty, as a categorical imperative, to go there and investigate the mysterious object. You can be sure that it did happen. If it was not Apollo 20, it was some other secret space mission. And if somebody is skeptical about it, I invite him/her to read the Brookings' report, prepared in November 1960 by the Brookings Institution Washington, D.C.:  <<Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Activities for Human Affairs>>, The report, prepared for NASA, was introduced to the Committe on Science and Astronautics by the House of Representatives of U.S.A. In the documents we can read:

  << [?] Historical and empirical studies of the behavior of peoples and their leaders when confronted with dramatic and unfamiliar events or social pressures. Such studies might help to provide programs for meeting and adjusting to the implications of such a discovery. Questions one might wish to answer by such studies would include: How might such information, under what cirucumstances, be presented or withheld from the public for what ends? What might be the role of the discovering scientists and other decisionmakers regarding release of the fact of discovery?>>

from pag. 216, ibidem

  So it is likely that in the past somebody recommended and encouraged the adoption of several policies and procedures to follow should the discovery of extraterrestrial artifacts in our Solar System become a reality; chief among them: withholding or delaying disclosure of the discovery of such extraterrestrial "artifacts" from the public.



  On July 01, 2007, at 01:33 PM, my YouTube account received a message from Rutledge. In his message the presumed William Rutledge answered my previous request for clarification. I was very upset because as time passed, many controversial aspects were coming out. I have already discussed them. Most of them are audio contaminations with radio dialogues from former Apollo missions (Apollo 11 and Apollo 15). Finally somebody (a very clever YouTube user), discovered that the video of the presumed "City" (named "Station 1" in the interview) is a fake: if you examine images AS17-134-20437 and AS17-145-22163, found in the Apollo Image Atlas located at the Lunar and Planetary Institute website, you can see for yourself that the matrix of the lunar landscape (visible in the lower part of the screen) is a composition of images taken during the Apollo 17 mission.

  Even if the lunar features visible in those images could be signs of artificial structures, they do not refer to the Izsak's neighbourhood. They are images taken by the Apollo 17 crew, who landed on December 11, 1972,  on Taurus-Littrow region (coordinates: 209'55" N and 3045'57" E).

  But there is the slight possibility that the fake was fabricated on purpose to provide us with a clue in investigating a lunar anomaly: is it possible that the main "rocks" in the image (i.e., rocks having 90-degree angles) are remains of some artifacts? Could the lunar hills in the background be pyramid-like structures, with steps going up the side, like in Mexico City, but partially obfuscated by a thich layer of dust? The site is obviously very old.

  However I am aware that now the contradictions of the Apollo 20 case are too many to be simple mistakes made by inexperienced helpers who would live in Rwanda (the country that Rutledge has been claiming as his place of residence).



  In my quest for answers, I had previously posed the above question mentioned in the title of the paragraph even before to know the truth about the "City" footage spread by "retiredafb" (I received the initial signaling in August, through a gentleman in Portugal). In my question I used the nasty word "impostor", as a possibility for explaining this controversial case, which however gave us the opportunity to discuss the presence of an unknown object on the far side of the Moon. I had asked him to provide me more technical and heretofore unknown historical details that could prove his identity of being a former test pilot and Apollo pilot above all to face the suspicion which was growing in my mind: the idea that maybe he were an impostor.

  In his answer "retiredafb" mentioned two NASA employees who, according to him, replied to an e-mail sent them. In this article I am not going to name them. But they are NASA employees indeed. I have checked their names; nevertheless, I decided to omit them (see the dots in brackets) due to the contradictory aspects of the case and the fact that I have not received enough evidence of the alleged e-mail exchange yet, and not to mention respect for the privacy rights of persons in question here. Moreover, the presumed William Rutledge has never used his e-mail address with me. He contacted me only through my YouTube Account /General Messages. So that you might thoroughly examine the issue and draw your own conclusions, I am incorporating the following excerpt from the original message (without any kind of correction of possible mistakes) "retiredafb" sent to my YouTube account:

  << Only [...] and [...] wrote me. About details confirming the story, i could give you some things unknown on internet or in books, details that nasa could confirm, if they still have some people active and with a good knowledge of apollo program. - The american flag used during apollo 17 , was the backup flag of the apollo 11 crew. Aldrin and Amstrong used it on the ground, in the KSC building during EVA training. This same flag is now on the ground of the moon, stucked near the steno crater. This old apollo 11 flag is in Taurus Littrow site, Gene Cernan or Harrisson Schmitt can confirm that, or Nasa maybe, but it is a detail omitted in space history. -During Apollo 20, during the REFSMMAT procedure, we used stars for aligning the LM. Three of them were named REGOR NAVI and DNOCES. These names are not recognizable on any sky chart, they were the nicknames of the three astronauts dead during Apollo 1, but spelled backwards. REGOR was ROGER, "roger Chafee" NAVI was IGOR "Virgil IVAN Grissom", and DNOCES meaned SECOND for Edward Higgins White the second. I dont remember what was the number corresponding during REFSMMAT. >>

from the retiredafb's message to Luca Scantamburlo, July 01, 2007, at 01:33 PM - Scantamburlo's account /General Messages, YouTube



  I did not know what the REFSMMAT acronym meant. So I checked on some encyclopaedias and I have found they are initials indicating the procedure used by guidance, navigation, and control system flight controllers during the Apollo program. The term stands for: "Reference to Stable Member Matrix".  More information is available on a NASA website:<<[...] a reference orientation which can be well defined and used by the crew in their platform alignments.>>


  On the link you find the "Star Reference ListNumber" and the Star name which Rutledge is reffering to in his message. Rutledge does not remember the numbers (of course if he is honest at least on this issue); they are the following: 03 for "Navi", 17 for "Regor" and 20 for "Dnoces".

  The point is: again we have some very interesting technical details (not well-known among the general public) provided by William Rutledge, and again we have a statement by Rutledge which is not without contradictions: his historical recollection is true, but is reported by some websites; for example in the following:

  On another one we can read: <<[...] the first Apollo crew used their own names spelled backwards Navi = Ivan Grissom, Dnoces = Edward White II, and Regor = Roger Chaffee. When they died in the fire, their unofficial names became used in many different ways. The October 1994 Sky and Telescope magazine apparently has an article on this subject.>>

source: <<Are there stars called Novi, Regor and Dnoces?>>

 The Apollo 1 crew died in a tragic accident on January 27, 1967, during a launch pad test of the Apollo/Saturn spacecraft being prepared for the first piloted flight: the AS-204 mission. Subsequently the AS-204 mission was redesignated Apollo 1 to remember the lost space crew.
 The three crew members were: Lt. Col. Edward Higgins White II (1930-1967),  Lt. Col. Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom (1926-1967) and Lieutenant Commander Roger Chaffee (1935-1967).

  About the American flag used during Apollo 17, I could not find anything to corroborate or to controvert the information given me by "retiredafb" (William Rutledge). So I think it is necessary to investigate the presumed historical details provided by William Rutledge. This is the main goal of One of its team members found out an interesting public document.



  The document mentioned above is a .ppt presentation prepared by Dr. Ron Sega, Under Secretary of the U.S. Air Force. The date of the document is April 19, 2006, and the title is: <<Air Force energy Strategy>>. On Page 16 you have the Energy and Space Assets prospect: the Saturn V rocket is mentioned, and there is also the comparison with dates: the year 1970 and the year 2006. The fact that the Apollo 20 would have been launched from Vandenberg AFB, according to Rutledge's testimony, is now supported by strong circumstantial evidence.

  Moreover, there are official documents (from the '60 years) which prove that the USAF officials discussed and boosted the use of the Saturn V rocket. There is a specific point where the subject is: <<Saturn V/Apollo Spacecraft Guidance Computer Developments Programs>>. Why? It is obvious that the USAF needed the Saturn V capability in case USSR began to set up bases on the Moon. This was probably the main motivation for going to the Moon, and to counter Soviet threat of going there and exploiting it militarily.



  Is it possible that behind the William Rutledge's identity there is an agent of some Secret service of an European country who is trying to push (or to drive), the US Government to reveal what it knows about the possible extraterrestrial presence in the Solar System? Or is he a person in control of some shadow Government scheme to subject the public to a psychological and sociological test in the context of the unofficial and rumoured "Public acclimation program"?
  So, if Apollo 19 and Apollo 20 missions really took place and one of the crews members is now collaborating to spread the truth, it is obvious that spreading classified material on YouTube would be a military and diplomatic problem. So the better thing to do could be, in that case, spreading true information about the secret space missions but mingled with fakes and contaminations (always using official space documentation).
  In my opinion, in spite of the contaminations and contradictions of the case, there are some important questions without a conclusive answer:

  1) How did "retiredafb" know about the huge cigar-shaped object resting on the far side of the Moon, visible on official NASA pictures (taken on Apollo 15 and Apollo 17)?

  2) How did he get secret video footage? Some of them are in the public domain and therefore are not secret (they are from former Apollo missions); but some of them, up to now, look like genuine footages never revealed to the public. I am talking about the APOLLO 20 TEST Snyder Ingress (added and later removed by "retiredafb") and the first part of the presumed LM-15 flyover (ALIEN SPACESHIP ON THE MOON flyover bef. landing APOLLO 20).  Of course in the future new elements could come out and change my prospect;

  3) How did he know about "Section 508", an official NASA section in charge of providing information <>?

  4) How could a simple joker know so many technical aspects of space history and space flight? I believe that in such a case it would be necessary to have a strong support from someone.

  So the presumed Apollo 20 disclosure could very well be only a step of the so-called "strategy of confusion": a strategy which could avoid panic and uncomfortable questions for the Authorities. In my opinion with this sort of Trojan horse (the Apollo 20 case), it would be possible to diffuse a secret truth crucial to the future existence of the mankind while, at the same time, satysfying public curiosity in the far side of the Moon and its mysteries without concern or worry about the eruption of diplomatic intrigue should the real truth be disclosed.

L. Scantamburlo
August 22, 2007

Reproduction is allowed on the Web if accompanied by the statement
  L. Scantamburlo -
Reproduced by permission.

This Website contains cookies analytics and can contain cookies of third parts! The visitor is informed and allows the use of the cookies, otherwise, please abandon the Website or discharging this function of allocation of cookies, acting on the configuration and preferences of the browser navigation. For more information, please go to the link privacy.